Action Research: Its Nature and Validity

The process of knowledge acquisition which has the strongest truth claim is the research process of natural science, based on testing hypotheses to destruction. But the application of this process to phenomena beyond those for which it was developed, namely, the natural regularities of the physical universe, is problematical. For research into social phenomena there is increasing interest in action research in various forms. In this process the researcher enters a real-world situation and aims both to improve it and to acquire knowledge. This paper reviews the nature and validity of action research, arguing that its claim to validity requires a recoverable research process based upon a prior declaration of the epistemology in terms of which findings which count as knowledge will be expressed.     

Churchman's “anatomy of system teleology” revisited

Churchman's concept of “inquiring systems” and its underlying “anatomy of system teleology” have been a source of inspiration for the development of Peter B. Checkland's Soft Systems Methodology. The author here provides a personal account of the importance that Churchman's approach has had for him. In the spirit of Singerian inquiry, he also offers a few critical considerations with respect to the assumptions and limitations of Churchman's teleological system approach. (Editor)     

The Emergent Properties of SSM in Use: A Symposium by Reflective Practitioners

Two careers, in industry and in university teaching at postgraduate level, have led to the development of Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) in a 30-year program of action research. The most cogent comments on SSM come from reflective practitioners, and in this symposium I have asked eight such users of SSM to reflect on their experience and to address the question of what it is that happens when the approach is used in real-world problem situations. Their responses reflect their different backgrounds, experience, and ways of working, but a broad general picture emerges. This suggests that SSM (whose process does not necessarily have to be made explicit to participants in a study) can engender a process of on-going (cyclic) coherent structured learning which feels natural, and which can surface previously unexamined assumptions, thus creating an arena in which accommodations can emerge which enable and motivate "action to improve" to be taken.