Search

Research is typically taught to undergraduates as an analytic activity with a focus on engaging with externalized data. Rarely are undergraduates taught to inquire into settings and situations where they are close to the data and implicated in the setting. "Exploring Organizational Experiences" is a final-year undergraduate business course that provides an alternative research paradigm that focuses on developing insider inquiry skills. Participants inquire critically into organizational dynamics from the perspective of being an insider-participant and practice a general empirical method that enables them to learn critical insider research skills.

The act of theorising turns the attention from the outcome of theory generation to the act of theory generation itself. Revans' systems "alpha," "beta" and "gamma" provide a foundational action theory that grounds the theorising process in action learning. This is the core of theorising in the praxeology of action learning as creating practical theory or actionable knowledge that makes Accounts of Practice more than merely interesting stories. This article explores how the process of writing an Account of Practice can also be seen as a process of theorising, articulating the kind of knowledge created from what is learned in and through action.

This article explores how P (programmed learning) in Revans' formula L=P + Q accumulates from one action learning research initiative to another. Drawing on three inter-organizational action learning research initiatives, it shows how the L (learning) from conducting action learning in an initiative in one network built new P on network action learning research which was applied in two subsequent initiatives. The article contributes an understanding of how P accumulates from learning initiative to learning initiative and how its application contributes to the L of actionable knowledge.

This paper, delivered as a provocative keynote address to the Collaborative Action Research Network (CARN) conference in Manchester on 28th October 2023, explores the question if action research might have a sweet spot. A sweet spot is defined as an ideal location, area or combination of factors for a particular activity or purpose. It draws on the work of Edgar Schein who has argued that the essence of understanding and working with human systems is to focus on the process of how we relate rather than the structure of the relationship. Schein distinguished different levels of relationship and his framing of humble inquiry as a disposition and a skill – a disposition of accessing one's ignorance in a given setting and a skill of collaborative conversation. The paper proposes that how collaborative relationships that are built, developed and sustained in action research through humble inquiry constitute its sweet spot. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a series on influential books, the author reflects on how Edgar H. Schein’s Process Consultation changed his life. It introduced him to the notion of process and a collaborative way of inquiring into experience, understanding, decisions and actions. It opened up a perspective of working with people on task-focused issues in a manner that allowed them to develop their own understanding what was going on and actions to deal with them. The author notes how the influence of the book is located within a community of scholarship and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we pose two questions. What is the process of valuing in the structure of human knowing? And, how might individual values become collective values in the context of educational action research? For our answer we explore how first-, second- and third-person practices form the foundation in values-based ethics in action research. The first-person action research component involves the articulation of a personal set of values that inform practice through a structured ethical reflection process. Second-person practice builds upon this process to create a shared set of values and to align them to specific points in a collaborative research process. Finally, as a third-person process, the combination of first- and second-person practices contributes a framework for developing a common understanding and public dialogue regarding values-based ethics for action research.

It has been written that Lewin generated and demonstrated a radically new kind of science and created a revolution in the very meaning of social science. Edgar Schein pointed to Lewin's work as the tap root of OD and he grounded Lewin's work as being rooted in the practical social science that Lewin practiced. This article explores Lewin's practical social science and suggests that the work of Edgar Schein exemplifies the practice of Lewinian social science in the field of OD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores how Revan's praxeology and learning formula act as the foundation for the authors' enactment of the scholarship of their teaching practice. Linking to accreditation requirement of assurance of learning the authors describe two undergraduate courses that they teach and reflect on how Revan's praxeology of systems "alpha", "beta" and "gamma" and his learning formula, "L = P + Q" provide a framework for understanding and enacting their scholarship of teaching. They offer their experience and reflection for other academics to engage with the scholarship of their respective practice.

Case studies are a useful means of capturing and sharing experiential knowledge by allowing researchers to explore the social, organisational and political contexts of a specific case. Although accounts of action learning are often reported using a case study approach, it is not common to see individual case studies being used as a learning practice "within" action learning sets. Drawing on a network action learning (NAL) project, this paper explores how the process of coaching, articulating, authoring, sharing and editing case studies provided a vehicle for learning and research within a NAL set. The intended contribution of this paper to the theory of action learning is to extend the range of learning practices to include the case study within the NAL set. It discusses how case studies act as boundary objects, which are artefacts that can be used to cross boundaries between groups in order to facilitate learning that might not otherwise occur.

This article describes how, the authors, as members of an action research writing group, responded to a comment about feeling vulnerable in risking bringing their work-in-progress to the group and in giving feedback to colleagues by adopting a cooperative inquiry approach to explore vulnerability and risk in the group. In cooperative inquiry group members act as both co-researcher and co-subject in the inquiry and action. The article describes the evolution of the group and how the topic of exploring risk and vulnerability emerged. The group's exploration is grounded in the theory and practice of cooperative inquiry that gives voice to the group members questioning and reflecting. The article concludes by offering three propositions to enhance the work of writing groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal of Action Research is the property of Verlag Barbara Budrich GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)