There is nothing so theoretical as good action research

Abstract

The goal of this article is try to retrieve the idea of `good theory' that provides accessible and useful tools for practitioners, academics, and other participants in action research. In doing so, we advocate the importance of explicit theory building and testing as an integral part of action research practice. The association of theory with positivist research methodologies has resulted in the rejection of theory by many action researchers, who are fundamentally interested in interpretation and change and correctly see positivist theorizing as antagonistic to these aims. Drawing on the example of Chris Argyris and Donald Schön's `theory of action' approach, we identify six qualities of a non-positivist `good theory'. Broadly, these suggest that theory needs to be both sensitive to the meanings participants give to their situation, yet go beyond these to explore unseen causal dimensions of their behavior and the environment, and the interaction of the two. A case study based on our own practice illustrates these points. We conclude that empowering clients to make practical and sustainable changes means co-creating a shared knowledge of the causal conditions of their social world and its attendant difficulties, and that this knowledge is theoretical.

When Arts Enter Organizational Spaces: Implications for Organizational Learning

“…Such research might also throw light on resistance to efforts at demystifying the way art works by measuring it with profane management indicators noted in my second puzzle. (Argyris & Schön, 1978;Friedman & Rogers, 2009;Reason & Bradbury, 2008). This research will need to be flanked by other research methods, including more "classical" case studies and surveys 18 methods cannot be set, as is traditionally the case, just by academics and managers.…”

Action Research Conceptualization - a paradigm for open innovation implementation and research during its occurrence

“…Just some of them are: (i) participatory AR, which is the combination of the central principle of 'participatory' research -the notion that some members of the organization being studied should actively participate in the research process [Eden & Huxham, 1996], (ii) action science has been cited as the most popular action technologies, where Friedman refers to Argyris et aI. [1985] as it being an inquiry into social practice, and it is interested in producing knowledge in the service of practice [Friedman & Rogers, 2009], (iii) community AR represents an approach to collaborative knowledge creation [Senge & Scharmer, 2006] which confronts the challenges of producing practical knowledge that is useful to people in the everyday conduct of their lives [Reason & Bradbury, 2006] emphasising on building cross-organizational learning communities.…”

Action Research’s Potential to Foster Institutional Change for Urban Water Management

“…Traditionally, action researchers, however, reject theories associated with positivist research methodologies [56]. Instead, they are fundamentally interested in the interpretation of a process and of the resulting change and, thus, see positivist theorizing as antagonistic to these aims [56].…”

“…Instead, they are fundamentally interested in the interpretation of a process and of the resulting change and, thus, see positivist theorizing as antagonistic to these aims [56]. Broadly speaking, these characteristic of AR suggest that theory needs to be both sensitive to the meanings participants give to their situation (and as such, cannot be decided before the involvement of the researcher), yet go beyond these to explore unseen causal dimensions of actors' behavior and the environment and the interactions between the social and ecological system.…”