In studying ethnic identity, researchers frequently have to choose one among the three main approaches seen as competing in social sciences and ethnicity studies, namely primordialist approach, constructivist approach, and instrumentalist approach. This article attempts to examine whether the three competing approaches should be treated as mutually exclusive or on the contrary, be jointly used to contribute to our understanding of the phenomenon of ethnic identity. By using an ethnographic method with a phenomenological style and the relevant documents, in the context of the dynamics of Makeanese ethnic identity, the three approaches were found to support each other instead of competing. In this article, the elements of ethnic identity are shown to be partly primordial or given in a socio-cultural sense while others are socially constructed in accordance with the social transformation experienced by the Makeanese. The others - although based on primordial attributes and socially constructed processes - are made politically significant by the elite in the context of political competition. The theoretical implication of this finding is that all the three approaches - primordialist, constructivist and instrumentalist - should not be seen as competing or mutually exclusive approaches. In contrast, all the three approaches can jointly contribute to uncover the complex dynamics of Makean ethnic identity. This fieldwork supports the conclusion made by Chin and Lee (2010) that various theories of race and ethnicity should be seen as complementing instead of competing or substituting one another.