Action Research: Its Nature and Validity
01 Feb 1998-Systemic Practice and Action Research (Kluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers)-Vol. 11, Iss: 1, pp 9-21
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review the nature and validity of action research and argue 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.
Abstract: 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.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors define and explore the legitimacy of an action-oriented research approach in OM, and the particular logic and value of applying action research (AR) to the description and understanding of issues in OM.
Abstract: A fundamental methodological question guides this paper: How can operations managers and researchers learn from the applied activity that characterises the practice of OM? To address this question, defines and explores the legitimacy of an action‐oriented research approach in OM, and the particular logic and value of applying action research (AR) to the description and understanding of issues in OM. Begins with a review of the role of empirical research in OM and how AR features within the OM research literature. Introduces the theory and practice of AR and outlines the AR cycle and how AR is implemented. Finally, describes the skills required to engage in AR and explores issues in generating theory. Concludes with the assertion that AR is relevant and valid for the discipline of OM in its ability to address the operational realities experienced by practising managers while simultaneously contributing to knowledge.
1,344 citations
TL;DR: In the Society for General Systems Research (SGS) as discussed by the authors, a meta-level language and theory in which the problems of many different disciplines could be expressed and solved, and it was hoped that doing this would help to promote the unity of science.
Abstract: Although the history of thought reveals a number of holistic thinkers — Aristotle, Marx, Husserl among them— it was only in the 1950s that any version of holistic thinking became institutionalized. The kind of holistic thinking which then came to the fore, and was the concern of a newly created organization, was that which makes explicit use of the concept of ‘system’, and today it is ‘systems thinking’ in its various forms which would be taken to be the very paradigm of thinking holistically. In 1954, as recounted in Chapter 3 of Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, only one kind of systems thinking was on the table: the development of a mathematically expressed general theory of systems. It was supposed that this would provide a meta-level language and theory in which the problems of many different disciplines could be expressed and solved; and it was hoped that doing this would help to promote the unity of science. These were the aspirations of the pioneers, but looking back from 1999we can see that the project has not succeeded. The literature contains very little of the kind of outcomes anticipated by the founders of the Society for General Systems Research; and scholars in the many subject areas towhich a holistic approach is relevant have been understandably reluctant to see their pet subject as simply one more example of some broader ‘general system’!
1,133 citations
Cites background from "Action Research: Its Nature and Val..."
...Surely we can do better than that? In between the strong criterion of repeatability (of the happenings) and the weak criterion of plausibility, we argue (Checkland and Holwell 1998a) that action research should be conducted in such a way that the whole process is subsequently recoverable by anyone interested in critically scrutinizing the research....
[...]
TL;DR: The findings are that multimethod research within the information system (IS) discipline is relatively scarce, and where it occurs involves only a small set of traditional methods.
Abstract: . It has commonly been argued that the use of different research methods within the information system (IS) discipline and within individual pieces of research will produce richer and more reliable results. This paper reports on a survey of the IS literature to discover the extent of multimethod research. The findings are that such work is relatively scarce, and where it occurs involves only a small set of traditional methods. Possible reasons for this are discussed.
411 citations
Cites methods from "Action Research: Its Nature and Val..."
...Methods involving interventions Action research In action research (Checkland & Holwell, 1998a; Coughlan & Barnnick, 2001), the researcher explicitly becomes involved in intervening in the situation and attempting to bring about change....
[...]
...Particular combinations of methods occurred commonly and both SSM and cognitive mapping were regularly used....
[...]
...Specific methodologies such as soft systems methodology (SSM) (Checkland & Holwell, 1998b) and participatory action research (Fals-Borda & Rahman, 1991) are included in this category....
[...]
TL;DR: This paper demonstrates that it addition, a business model discussion should be theory based, able to handle complex systems, provide a way for risk free experiments and be practically applicable.
Abstract: The paper introduces first insights into a methodology for developing eBusiness business models, which was elaborated at evolaris and is currently validated in various business cases. This methodology relies upon a definition of the term business model, which is first examined and upon which prerequisites for such a methodology are presented. A business model is based on a mental representation of certain aspects of the real world that are relevant for the business. Supporting this change of the mental model is therefore a major prerequisite for a methodology for developing business models. This paper demonstrates that it addition, a business model discussion should be theory based, able to handle complex systems, provide a way for risk free experiments and be practically applicable. In order to fulfill the above critieria, the evolaris methodology is grounded on system theory and combines aspects of system dynamics and action research.
343 citations
TL;DR: It is learnt that the key components of a Living Lab constitutes important structures that enhance the process and as such the principles.
Abstract: In this paper, we focus on a new research area, Living Lab that introduces new ways of managing innovation processes. A Living Lab can be viewed as both an innovation milieu and an innovation approach and the aim of this paper is to clarify these two perspectives, as well as to illustrate how they can enrich each other. This is done by presenting one Living Lab milieu, Botnia Living Lab and its key components; and one Living Lab approach, FormIT and its key principles. The presentation is done on two levels, one general level and one case specific level. The case focuses on involving citizens in the design of an e-service aimed to increase their influence in a municipality and its development. Through this, we learnt that the key components of a Living Lab constitutes important structures that enhance the process and as such the principles.
297 citations
Cites background from "Action Research: Its Nature and Val..."
...This way of thinking is closely aligned with the philosophy behind SST, since it also highlights the importance of people’s thoughts about themselves and the world around them in a design situation....
[...]
...FormIT is inspired by three theoretical streams: soft systems thinking (SST), appreciative inquiry (AI) and need finding (NF)....
[...]
...FormIT’s framework of ideas strengthens this way of working – AI, through its appreciative nature; SST, through its focus on diverse perspectives as a way to challenge present frames of thought; and NF, with its focus on understanding the users and their needs....
[...]
...From the first stream, SST (Checkland, 1981; Checkland et al., 1990; Checkland and Holwell, 1998), the assumption is that changes can occur only through changes in mental models when utilised....
[...]
...Action research means that one enters a real-world situation with the aim of both improving it and creating knowledge (Baskerville and Wood-Harper, 1998; Checkland and Holwell, 1998)....
[...]
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1981
TL;DR: The Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) as discussed by the authors is an alternative approach which enables managers of all kinds and at any level to deal with the subtleties and confusions of the situations they face.
Abstract: Whether by design, accident or merely synchronicity, Checkland appears to have developed a habit of writing seminal publications near the start of each decade which establish the basis and framework for systems methodology research for that decade."" Hamish Rennie, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1992 Thirty years ago Peter Checkland set out to test whether the Systems Engineering (SE) approach, highly successful in technical problems, could be used by managers coping with the unfolding complexities of organizational life. The straightforward transfer of SE to the broader situations of management was not possible, but by insisting on a combination of systems thinking strongly linked to real-world practice Checkland and his collaborators developed an alternative approach - Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) - which enables managers of all kinds and at any level to deal with the subtleties and confusions of the situations they face. This work established the now accepted distinction between hard systems thinking, in which parts of the world are taken to be systems which can be engineered, and soft systems thinking in which the focus is on making sure the process of inquiry into real-world complexity is itself a system for learning. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice (1981) and Soft Systems Methodology in Action (1990) together with an earlier paper Towards a Systems-based Methodology for Real-World Problem Solving (1972) have long been recognized as classics in the field. Now Peter Checkland has looked back over the three decades of SSM development, brought the account of it up to date, and reflected on the whole evolutionary process which has produced a mature SSM. SSM: A 30-Year Retrospective, here included with Systems Thinking, Systems Practice closes a chapter on what is undoubtedly the most significant single research programme on the use of systems ideas in problem solving. Now retired from full-time university work, Peter Checkland continues his research as a Leverhulme Emeritus Fellow. "
7,467 citations
"Action Research: Its Nature and Val..." refers methods in this paper
...The scientific method can be expressed as being based on three fundamental principles which characterize it and give it its power: reductionism, repeatability, and refutation (Checkland, 1981, Chap....
[...]
Book•
01 Jan 1990
TL;DR: Whyte as discussed by the authors discusses the role of the social scientist in participatory action research in agricultural research and development in the context of agricultural data collection and data sharing in the field of agricultural research.
Abstract: Introduction - William Foote Whyte PAR IN INDUSTRY Participatory Action Research - William Foote Whyte, Davydd J Greenwood and Peter Lazes Through Practice to Science in Social Research Participatory Action Research - Larry A Pace and Dominick R Argona A View from Xerox Participatory Action Research - Anthony J Constanza A View from ACTWU Participatory Action Research - Jose Luis Gonzalez Santos A View from FAGOR Participatory Action Research and Action Science Compared - Chris Argyris and Donald Schon A Commentary Comparing PAR and Action Science - William Foote Whyte Research, Action and Participation - Richard E Walton and Michael Gaffney The Merchant Shipping Case Co-Generative Learning - Max Elden and Morton Levin Bringing Participation into Action Research Action Research as Method - Jan Irgen Karlsen Reflections from a Program for Developing Methods and Competence Participant Observer Research - Robert E Cole An Activist Role PAR IN AGRICULTURE Participatory Strategies in Agricultural Research and Development - William Foote Whyte A Joint Venture in Technology Transfer to Increase Adoption Rates - Ramiro Ortiz Participatory Action Research in Togo - Richard Maclure and Michael Bassey An Inquiry into Maize Storage Systems The Role of the Social Scientist in Participatory Action research - Sergio Ruano Social Scientists in International Agriculture Resarch - Douglas E Horton Ensuring Relevance and Conributing to the Knowledge Base Conclusions - William Foote Whyte
3,617 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1990TL;DR: The Emergence of Soft Systems Thinking as discussed by the authors is a seminal work in the field of soft systems thinking, and it can be found in the Soft Systems Methodology--the Parts.
Abstract: The Emergence of Soft Systems Thinking. Soft Systems Methodology--the Whole. Soft Systems Methodology--the Parts. Soft Systems Methodology--the Whole Revisited. Soft Systems Methodology--the Context. Conclusion. Appendix. Bibliography. Indexes.
3,531 citations
TL;DR: Action research can base its legitimacy as science in philosophical traditions that are different from those which legitimate positivist science as discussed by the authors, and the appropriateness of positivism is questioned as a basis for judging the scientific merits of action research.
Abstract: December 1978, volume 23 This article describes the deficiencies of positivist science for generating knowledge for use in solving problems that members of organizations face. Action research is introduced as a method for correcting these deficiencies. When action research is tested against the criteria of positivist science, action research is found not to meet its critical tests. The appropriateness of positivist science is questioned as a basis for judging the scientific merits of action research. Action research can base its legitimacy as science in philosophical traditions that are different from those which legitimate positivist science. Criteria and methods of science appropriate to action research are offered.
2,585 citations
"Action Research: Its Nature and Val..." refers methods in this paper
...An initial chronological sampling of this field is provided by Lewin (1947), Blum (1955), Foster (1972), Clark (1972), Susman and Evered (1978), Hull and Lennung (1980), Argyris et al. (1982), Susman (1983), and Dash (1997)....
[...]
...Blum (1955), Foster (1972), Clark (1972), Susman and Evered (1978) , Hull and Lennung (1980), Argyris et al. (1982), Susman (1983), and Dash (1997)....
[...]