Roles,Politics, and Ethics in Action Research Design

For novice action researchers, issues of roles, politics and ethics are critical, particularly in design. The field of organization development (OD) provides many useful considerations of roles, politics and ethics. This article proposes a systemic design-based framework of the action research process that includes context, inquiry mechanisms, inquiry cycle and outcomes. Such perspective brings to the forefront the issues of context, roles, politics dynamics and ethics that are embedded in the action research process and influence its emergent process, quality and outcomes. A set of propositions for further explorations is advanced and briefly discussed.     

The Researcher as Change Agent

This paper examines the challenges facing researchers working on projects with industry. There has been considerable previous investigation into the need for academic research to have more impact, particularly for industry. Community action research (CAR) examines how practitioners, consultants, and researchers can work together to create new knowledge. However, research has shown that CAR is difficult due to fragmentation within the knowledge creating system. This paper examines how fragmentation can occur from the experience of a researcher working on a large-scale longitudinal change project over three and a half years. The results identify ten lessons learned and five recommendations for improving the capacity of researchers to have impact as change agents within a CAR group.     

From Researching Regions at a Distance to Participatory Network Building: Integrating Action Research and Economic Geography

This paper describes the change in a researcher's practices from one of studying regional industrial development at a distance to one of working closely with a network of agri-food managers. This is accompanied by a discussion of the methodological and theoretical possibilities for an action research inspired economic geography. Some of the core characteristics of a pragmatic conceptualization of action research are revised. It is argued that theoretical developments within economic geography make possible a dialogue between researchers and local actors and that economic geography is challenged to accept that knowledge is generated through such a dialogue. Attempts to create a dialogue between action research and economic geography in a specific Norwegian industrial and geographical context are described. These attempts indicate that the researcher's methodological approach has been transformed from a narrow one relying solely on conventional social science methods to a broader one including participatory action research.     

Action Engagement: Improving Researchers’ Involvement in Action Research Projects

This article presents a theoretical and empirical analysis of Action Engagement. This is a methodological approach implying that researchers involve themselves in the organization by working as ordinary employees. Our problem statement is this: How will Action Engagement improve the quality of action research? Given the fact that the researcher has limited time to use in the initial phase, we intend to show that Action Engagement is an effective introduction to the daily organizational life. The data is from an automotive supplier and two hospitals in Norway. The analysis contributes to the field of action research in two respects. First, it offers a detailed and varied understanding of how a broad empirical basis can be obtained in an action research (AR) project. Second, it presents an empirically grounded understanding of how this method can be used to achieve increased credibility and trust in ways that enable the researcher to bring in new and important aspects in organizational dialogues.     

Application and transformation of action research in educational research and practice

This paper examines research and theory in the area Kurt Lewin called action research. Action research is collaborative, driven by a partnership between theorist/researchers and practitioners. It focuses on both theoretical and practical implications of issues. When viewed in the context of other work by Lewin, action research is seen as focusing on the social context of behaviors and on the dynamics of situations in which behaviors occur. Action research provides a versatile, potentially powerful approach for use in applied research on groups and group settings. Principles of action research, a tracing of the development of action research, and variations of action research approaches that have emerged in education are presented. Finally, two ongoing studies that exemplify action research are described.     

Facilitating Trust Building in Networks: A Study from the Water Technology Industry

This paper analyses how action researchers can facilitate trust building processes in inter-firm networks and develops a framework for network development. A longitudinal case study of developing a regional network of water technology SMEs constitutes the empirical base. The paper argues that researchers can directly facilitate processes with a capacity to build two types of trust in different phases of network development, both characteristic-based and process-based trust. The findings indicate that processes to build characteristic-based trust can be facilitated through dialogue processes in temporary groups at network meetings. Processes to build process-based trust are stimulated by practical inter-firm teamwork. Furthermore, there seems to be a mutually reinforcing relationship between these two forms of trust formation, which can be influenced by action researchers. When the level of trust has reached a point of critical mass, new-coming firms seem to jump quickly through characteristic-based trust towards a relatively high level of process-based trust.     

质量功能配置与多目标决策分析

质量功能配置是一种描述性模型,它采用一种系统化方法将顾的呼声布署在生产计划、产品设计、制造等各个阶段的质量设计中。本文在分析质量功能配置的基础上建立基于质量功能配置的多目标决策方析框架.     

Constructive Scaffolding or a Procrustean Bed? Exploring the Influence of a Facilitated,Structured Group Process in a Climate Action Group

In this paper we present a case of a structured, facilitated group process with a climate action group engaged in a local Transition initiative. We explore how the interacting contexts between action researchers and the group acted as a constraint for the trajectory of the group process, by looking at the mismatches between the group’s and the researchers’ purposes and differences in expectations about methods of engagement. A methodological framework was used for evaluating the outcomes. The primary aim of this article was to investigate and point out dynamics that may be a hindrance to the effectiveness of a facilitated local climate initiative, with the view to inform facilitation practices and improve future action research processes.     

Quality in Action Research: Reflections for Second-Order Inquiry

One of the current debates in action research concerns the quality of these practices. Up to now, many contributions have focused on defining specific criteria based on action research epistemology. This article sustains (1) that prior to dealing with these questions, it is necessary to define for what purpose and for whom we are making the evaluation; (2) that this leads us to make a distinction between different evaluation models; and (3) that the quality strategies and criteria will be different for each model. In particular, the article confronts an academic evaluation model as a form of external control over the quality of action research and an internal, participatory evaluation model as a quality strategy aimed at establishing feedback for the process. Final considerations are given about the implications of both models for academia.     

Monitoring of Policy Implementation: Convergent Mobile and Fixed Technologies as Emergent Enablers

Based on the viable system model (VSM), a system viability refers to the capability of a system to exist and maintain its sustainability within an environment. In this framework, monitoring function supports the gathering of relevant information directly from the operating units and feeding them into the formal control function. In turn, the control function uses the information to produce reports for the higher level functions of intelligence and policymaking, which later utilise these information for their decision making. Given its role, monitoring function supports the viability of a system, especially in large-scale policy-based system. However, studies on the functions of a system monitoring are generally lacking, leading to the lack of understanding on how to conduct monitoring in a viable system implementation. The objectives of this study are a) to discuss the role of monitoring in a viable system framework, and b) to conceptualize the function of monitoring within a policy-based system that is enabled by technologies. To achieve these objectives, this study reviews the literature on monitoring (in relation to VSM framework), on research process in general, as well as on technology adoption. This conceptual exploration generates an emergent viable system model that can guide future researchers in conducting an action research of monitoring function implementation.     

Approaching Action Research from a Socioecological Perspective

The paper seeks to explicate an action research methodological framework that can provide practical guidance to those approaching action research from a socioecological perspective. It does so by revisiting the developmental foundations of the Emery and Trist socioecological paradigm, by drawing on insights left scattered throughout Emery's writings, and by drawing on the author's own experience in action research. The framework explicated seeks to provide practical guidance for (i) intervention in field settings, to coproduce open social systems–environment active adaptation, i.e., action-research guided interventions to produce sought management outcomes, and (ii) generation and formalization of theory extensions to socioecological theory concerned with intervention strategy and intervention methodologies, i.e., action-research guided generation of socioecological theory suitable for social scientific publication.     

The First-, Second- and Third-Person Dynamics of Learning History

Learning history is a well delineated action research process consisting of consecutive stages of inquiry where groups and individuals engage in learning and reflecting on their past shared, but often multiple, experiences as these are recorded in a ‘learning history’. Learning history has much in common with other forms of action research in that it configures first-, second- and third-person processes of inquiry in a particular way and enacts research qualities of rigour, relevance and reflexivity. Yet these and other links have as yet been tacit and under articulated - resulting in learning history often conceived as a distinctive linear method with the practice of learning history likewise confined. This reflective article opens out and makes explicit the inherent first- second- and third- person dynamics of learning history. These dynamics are explored from the point of view of different actors – the historian, the participant and the reader - in a learning history process and connections to a general empirical method are made. Finally questions of quality in a learning history are discussed. The aim of this article is to establish firmer methodological foundations for the learning history approach and to provide practical insight into how action researchers might engage more readily in learning history work.     

Dilemmas of Confrontation

Practicing action research in workplaces is a choice of letting oneself be closely involved in other peoples’ integrity as working men and women. The encounter between the researcher and the social group in the contract organization is the vital and sometimes only instrument for generating new learning and lasting change, thus it is critical for engaged action researchers to continuously be self-reflective on our praxis and appearance in this encounter. Within the action research literature, this encounter is discussed in relatively broad terms emphasizing preferred roles, values and strategies for organizing collaborative learning processes. Relatively little is reported, however, on the unpleasant sides of this interaction between the researcher and the collaborative group. In line with Greenwood and Levin’s (1998) argument for the action researcher as a friendly outsider who confronts in a supportive way, most researchers practicing action research have experienced how difficult it is to be as confronting as it takes if dysfunctional social routines are to be changed. In this article, I report on my own practice from an action research project, where I gradually developed my skills and confidence in acting more confronting as to bring forward new collaborating working routines among metal workers. I discuss three different forms of confrontation to be of critical necessity. By daring to act more confrontational, I also realized that it made me feel better about myself as a professional engaged researcher as I could reveal my true meanings and perspectives to the workers. I conclude by suggesting that in order for an engaged researcher to be able to develop her role as a confronting practitioner it is important to work closely in a team with fellow researchers, as well as to have the personal capacity to be self-reflexive and self-therapeutic.     

Playing Dissymmetry in Action Research: The Role of Power and Differences in Promoting Participative Knowledge and Change

This article explores the importance of power and dissymmetry in promoting participative knowledge and change in action research. Based on the analysis of two action research cases, the paper builds its argument by analyzing two key aspects: the construction of the action research setting and its maintenance during the process. It does so by highlighting the decisions assumed with respect to the relationship between researchers and participants and with respect to power issues. The findings indicate that promoting a functional dissymmetry in internal relationships allows distribution of the necessary types of power that make the participants use their authority and knowledge to invest in change. Thus, the distributed leadership is essential every time an organization needs to create a realistic and workable change of roles and responsibilities inside its boundaries. The article discusses some key factors in employing dissymmetry for sustained learning and knowledge-sharing.     

Managing Action Research: The PEArL Framework

The difficulty of managing and validating Action Research field studies has been widely discussed. Several different approaches to Action Research have emerged, and one of the most widely used models is Checkland’s FMA model, where a framework is provided to facilitate interested individuals in ‘recovering’ the route of the inquiry. In this paper, I argue that the FMA model is a valuable tool for planning the application of theoretical ideas in a practical situation, but that, as a guide to Action Research, it still fails to provide a sense of the manner in which an inquiry is undertaken. The PEArL mnemonic has been previously offered as a guide to facilitate researchers, participants, and those interested in gaining an appreciation of the manner in which an inquiry is conducted. In this paper, it is argued that applying the PEArL elements does not provide insight into the dynamic nature of collaborative inquiry. In order to gain a sense of the manner in which an inquiry was undertaken it is necessary to apply the PEArL mnemonic alongside a framework that facilitates the flow of the action research cycle. To illustrate the framework, an Action Research field study is described that was undertaken with residents and key workers in a shelter for the homeless, where the aim was to create a shared understanding of complex needs and support requirements.

The Participation Imperative in Co-operative Inquiry: Personal Reflections of an Initiating Researcher

Participation has become an imperative in international development. In particular, participatory approaches to development research are believed to support empowerment through collective development of knowledge and action. Yet there are broad interpretations of participation, ranging from passive participation and information exchange to empowered participation through self-mobilisation. As such, development researchers may claim to use a participatory approach without yielding power and agency to citizens involved in the research. This is a reflexive article about a development researcher’s experience in applying a participatory worldview through co-operative inquiry, a research approach that attempts to engage emancipatory forms of participation. The article begins with a critical analysis of literature regarding participation, the participatory paradigm and participation in the co-operative inquiry. The author then analyses her personal experiences, challenges and strategies as initiating researcher to actualise empowering forms of participation in three co-operative inquiries. The article emphasises that researchers must “let go” of their power, control and personal agenda to support empowering participation.     

Overcoming Challenges in Writing About Action Research—The Promise of the Development Story

There is great demand for articles and books describing what action researchers do but little methodological literature available explaining how researchers can go about writing such articles and books. This constitutes a serious challenge as writing high quality scientific texts is crucial for researchers to learn about and improve their practice. This paper addresses that challenge and offers a ‘recipe’ for writing, the development story, which aims to help action researchers reflect deeply on their empirical observations and convert these into concise and meaningful texts. The main purpose is to examine how using the development story as a support tool for writing impacts on engaged researchers’ field practice. We assess the value of the development story by using it to analyse and present an organizational development project in four Norwegian industrial service firms. We conclude that the development story can help instigating valuable reflection on the various roles researchers play out in the field, thereby helping them improve future practice. There is a need for more literature about analysis and writing adapted to the specific challenges of action research.     

An Action Design Research Approach within Enterprise Engineering

Enterprise engineering (EE) is emerging as a new discipline that is multi-disciplinary in nature. As highlighted by researchers within the EE discipline, the current status of EE endeavours as taken by several universities is unclear, which led to several initiatives and publications to develop a research agenda within the enterprise engineering research community. This article builds upon existing work aimed at establishing EE as a discipline, also accepting the epistemological stance of idealism, pragmatism and existential phenomenology as argued by Hoogervorst as an appropriate stance for EE research, prior to suggesting action design research (ADR) as an appropriate research method for EE research. More so, the article presents an Action Design Research within Enterprise Engineering (ADR-in-EE) approach as the main contribution to guide prospective EE researchers towards research within the EE discipline. The ADR-in-EE approach is based on ADR, but provides additional guidance by incorporating the use of an Enterprise Evolution Contextualisation Model, as well as creativity facilitation in the form of Univation’s brainstorming method. As a second contribution, we experiment with the ADR-in-EE approach and use a survey to extract feedback on the usefulness of the approach. The research findings are mostly positive, with qualitative feedback on further improving ADR-in-EE approach.     

Action Research in Inter-Organisational Networks: Impartial Studies or the Trojan Horse?

This article addresses the distinct ethical challenges of action research in inter-organisational projects. Traditionally, the literature on action research has distinguished between two researcher roles: The problem-solver and the observer. Based on an action research project in a Danish inter-organisational network, a third role as legitimiser is identified as an ethical challenge. Potentially, the legitimacy that the researchers carry as academic knowledge-generating actors may be used by a particular company to involve other companies in the network. Thus, the researchers may be perceived as bringing into the other organisations a Trojan Horse containing the interests of this particular company. Lack of clarity in defining the role of the action researcher may thus jeopardise the trustworthiness of the researchers and the action research project. On the basis of the case study analysis, the article develops a number of preliminary points of ethical consideration for future research analysis.     

Some Common Ground That Can Provide a Basis for Collaboration Between Action Researchers and Scientists: A Philosophical Case That Works in Practice

By analysing 22 case studies of good research, both action research and agricultural science, I believe I have found some criteria of good research that is common to all of them. These criteria match the philosophical pragmatists argument that the best a researcher can do is to provide a warranted assertion from a methodology which is fit for the specific research purpose and is internally consistent. They also include Popper's requirement that a methodology needs to seek disconfirming evidence and Habermas's requirement that subjective data is important in all research. These criteria have provided me with a basis for collaboration with my scientific colleagues and can provide a basis for collaboration between other researchers, whatever their methodology.