Imagining the flowers, but working the rich and heavy clay: participation and empowerment in action research for health

Jacobs, Gaby

doi:10.1080/09650790600975809

Cited by 32 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This participatory characteristic (Jacobs, 2006) requires all involved to be reflective, to be explicit about the perspective from which knowledge is created and to see democratic peer relationships as an ethical and political form of inquiry that serves the practical ethos of improvement-oriented methodologies. The ethical and empowering dimensions of PAAR affirms peoples' right and ability to have a say in decisions that affect their livelihoods and which claim to generate knowledge about them (Magnusson & Hanson, 2003).…”

Section: Working From the 'Positive Present'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory and appreciative action and reflection (PAAR) - democratizing reflective practices

Ghaye¹,

Melander‐Wikman

Kisare

et al. 2008

CREP

144

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper introduces a new approach to reflecting and acting called participatory and appreciative action and reflection (PAAR). It explores its potential to enable individuals and groups to move forward, to improve their working practices and lives in particular communities and contexts. The paper situates PAAR in the historical context of participatory and action research and reflective learning. It suggests that using PAAR requires four strategic 'turns'. By turn we mean a change in direction from one way of thinking and practising to another. The four turns are: (i) away from a preoccupation with changing behaviours in order to solve problems, with 'fixing' things and an engagement in deficit-based discourses, towards the development of appreciative insight, understanding the root causes of success and sustaining strengths-based discourses in order to amplify those things that will help build a better future from the positive present; (ii) away from self-learning (individualism and isolation) and towards collective learning through interconnectedness, appreciative knowledge sharing and the use of new forms of communications technology which enable simultaneous action in dispersed geopolitical spaces; (iii) away from one way of knowing and one perspective on truth to an acceptance of more pluralistic view of ways of knowing, of understanding human experience and putting this knowing to good use; (iv) away from reflective cycles and spirals and towards the use of a reflective learning (r-learning) framework comprising four mutually supportive processes. They are those of developing an appreciative 'gaze', of reframing lived experience, of building practical wisdom and of achieving and moving forward.

show abstract

Section: Working From the 'Positive Present'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory and appreciative action and reflection (PAAR) - democratizing reflective practices

Ghaye¹,

Melander‐Wikman

Kisare

et al. 2008

CREP

144

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the Cal Poly project, systems thinking benefited from a participatory action research orientation (Agryris & Schön, 1991;Ghaye, 2007;Heron & Reason, 2001;Jacobs, 2006;Jansson, 2007). "Action research aims to contribute both to the practical concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and to the goals of social science by joint collaboration within a mutually acceptable ethical framework" (Rapoport, 1970, 499).…”

Section: Participatory Action Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative Design

Mirijamdotter

Somerville

2009

International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the context of a three year applied research project conducted from [2003][2004][2005][2006] in a North American university library, staff were encouraged to reconsider organizational assumptions and design processes. The project involved an organizational leader and an external consultant who introduced and collaboratively applied Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) practice. Project results suggest the efficacy of using 'soft' systems thinking to guide interaction (re)design of technologyenabled environments, systems, and tools. In addition, participants attained insights into their new roles and responsibilities within a dynamically changing higher education environment. Project participants also applied SSM to redesign 'in house' information systems. The process of employing systems thinking practices to activate and advance organizational (re)learning, and initiating and elaborating user-centered interaction (re)design practices, culminated in a collaborative design (co-design) approach that readied participants for nimble responsiveness to continuous changes in the dynamic external environment.

show abstract

“…40 Although several potentially appealing aspects of participatory safety barrier analyses can be identified, the project also raises certain uncertainties regarding the long-term positive effects such analyses will introduce. First, the level of participation is functional (Jacobs 2006), implying that the actual power to make the suggested improvements remains in the hands of the management. As the study was 45 completed in December 2011, there is some uncertainty around whether the measures will be implemented.…”

Section: Triangulation Of Participatory Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When first adapted from a health-promotion context (Jacobs 2006;Pretty 1995), five different levels were identified with increased employee influence on the process and end result: (1) participation by information, where employees are informed 15 of an impending safety intervention by the employer, and can ask questions; (2) participation by consultation, where employees' opinions on an intervention are solicited, but the employer makes the final decision as to the best course of action to pursue; (3) functional participation, where employees are involved in developing the intervention, but the employer retains control over the process; (4) interactive 20 participation, where employees and employer are equal partners in defining problems and devising strategies to address them; and, (5) self-mobilization, where employees organize an intervention and employers support it if asked.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participatory safety barrier analysis: a case from the offshore maritime industry

Kongsvik

Haavik

Gjøsund

2013

Journal of Risk Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imagining the flowers, but working the rich and heavy clay: participation and empowerment in action research for health

Cited by 32 publications

References 10 publications

Participatory and appreciative action and reflection (PAAR) - democratizing reflective practices

Participatory and appreciative action and reflection (PAAR) - democratizing reflective practices

Collaborative Design

Participatory safety barrier analysis: a case from the offshore maritime industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About