Systemic Practice and Action Research

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 245–272 | Cite as

Communicative Action through Collaborative Inquiry: Journey of a Facilitating Co-Inquirer

  • Nada K. Kakabadse
  • Andrew P. Kakabadse
  • Kalu N. Kalu
Original Paper

Abstract

As complex and rapidly changing organisational contexts present a significant challenge for the management and organisational development of professionals, this paper explores a particular journey of one facilitator/co-inquirer (participant) in a collaborative inquiry (CI) intervention driving culture change within the UK's Civil Service. Through such experience it is argued that CI represents an intensive and effective inquiry based change strategy involving collaborative interaction between the co-inquiring facilitator and client. The philosophical history and richness of CI is explored as a prelude to outlining the learning and development of the co-inquirers involved in this project and the observed impact of CI on the organisation. Of note is that over an extended period of time, the facilitator assumes the two roles of inquirer and subject of inquiry, and through such a dual responsibility, gains a deeper understanding of the challenges they face and the nature of the solutions that would require further attention. It is concluded that co-inquirers effectively contribute both to scientific knowledge and the solving of real life practical problems.

Keywords

Collaborative inquiry Action inquiry Participatory philosophy Critical knowledge Emancipator change CI journey EARP group Dialogue Reflexivity 

References

  1. Addelson KP (1990) Why philosophers should become sociologists (and Vice Versa). In: Becker HS, McCall MM (eds) Symbolic interaction and cultural studies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 119–147Google Scholar
  2. Argyris C (1976) Increasing leadership effectiveness. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Argyris C, Schön DA (1974) Theory in practice: increasing professional effectiveness. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  4. Aristotle (1926) Politics (Jowett B, Trans.). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell S (1998) Self-reflection and vulnerability in action research: bringing forth new worlds in our learning. Syst Pract Action Res 11(2):179–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell S (2000) Vulnerability and the aware IS practitioner: a reflective discourse on unfinished business. In: Clarke S, Lehaney B (eds) Human centered methods in information systems: current research and practice. Idea Group Publishing, London, pp 102–117Google Scholar
  7. Berger PL, Luckmann T (1967) The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Bray JN, Lee J, Smith LL, Yorks L (2000) Collaborative inquiry in practice. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Brookfield SD (1995) Becoming a critically reflective teacher. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  10. Charaniya NK, Walsh JW (2000) Connecting trails: collaborative inquiry as a research methodology. In: Proceedings of the nineteenth annual midwest research to practice conference. Madison, WiscGoogle Scholar
  11. Checkland P (1991) From framework through experience to learning: the essential nature of action research. In: Nissen HE, Klein HK, Hirschheim R (eds) Information systems research: contemporary approaches and emergent traditions – conference proceedings. Elsevier Science Publishers, North-Holland, IFIP, pp 397–403Google Scholar
  12. Chisholm RF, Elden M (1993) Features of emerging action research. Human Relat 46(2):275–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. CMPS (Centre for Management and Policy Studies) (2002) Lord Macdonald, Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster: Navigating Change – A Practitioners Guide for Delivering change Successfully Within the Public Services, pp 1–2Google Scholar
  14. Coffey AJ, Atkinson PA (1996) Making sense of qualitative data: complimentary research strategies. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  15. Coghlan D, Brannick T (2000) Doing action research in your own organization. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Cook SDN, Brown JS (1999) Bridging epistemologies: the generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organ Sci 10(4):381–400Google Scholar
  17. Cooper JM, Hutchinson DS (1997) Plato's complete works. Hackett Publishing Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Dash DP (1998) Problems of action research—as I see it: an overview of action research. In: Reason P (ed) Human inquiry in action. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 97–104Google Scholar
  19. Dewey J (1933) How we think. DC Heath, BostonGoogle Scholar
  20. Ellis JHM, Kiely JA (2000) Action inquiry strategies: taking stock and moving forward. J Appl Manage Stud 9(1):83–94Google Scholar
  21. Feyerabend PK (1987) Farewell to reason. Verso, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Fisher D, Rooke D,Torbert B (2000) Personal and organisational transformation: through action research. Edge-Work Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  23. Ford J, Backoff R (1988) Organizational change in and out of dualities and paradox. In: Quinn RE, Cameron KS (eds) Paradox and transformation: toward a theory of change in organization and management. Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge, pp 81–121Google Scholar
  24. Ford JD, Ford LW (1995) The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. Acad Manage, Acad Manage Rev 20(3):541–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Forester J (1983) Critical theory in organizational analysis. In: Morgan G (ed) Beyond method: Strategies for social research. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 234–246Google Scholar
  26. Forester J (1989) Planning in the face of power. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  27. Foss SK, Foss KA, Trapp R (1985) Contemporary perspectives on rhetoric, 3rd ed. Waveland Press, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  28. Freud S (1953/1983) The standard edition of the complete psychological works of sigmund freud. In: Strachey J, Freud A (eds) vol 1–24. International Universities Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Gerard G, Teurfs L (1997) Dialogue and transformation. Exec Excell 14(8):16Google Scholar
  30. Goulet D (1985) The cruel choice: a new concept in the theory of development. University Press of America, Lanham, MDGoogle Scholar
  31. Grundy S (1987) Curriculum: product or praxis? The Falmer Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Guba EG, Lincoln YS (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 105–117Google Scholar
  33. Gustavsen B (1992) Dialogue and development. Van Assen, Gorcum, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  34. Gustavsen B (1996) Action research, democratic dialogue, and the issue of ‘critical mass’ in change. Qual Inquiry 2(1):90–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Habermas J (1972) Knowledge and human interests (Shaprio JJ, Trans.). Beacon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Habermas J (1975) Legitimation crisis. Beacon Press, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  37. Habermas J (1979) Communication and the evolution of society. Polity Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  38. Habermas J (1984) Theory of communicative action, vol. 1 and 2. Beacon Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  39. Hardy C, Clegg S (1997) Relativity without relativism: reflexivity in post-paradigm organizational studies. Br J Manag 8(Special Issue):S5–S17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Harvey C, Denton J (1999) To come of age: the antecedents of organizational learning. J Manag Stud 36(7):897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hearn G, Stevenson T (1998) Knowing through doing: anticipating issues for the study of human communication. Futures 30(2/3):115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hegel GWF (1806/1975) Phenomenology of mind (Phenomenologie des Geistes) (Miller AV, Trans.). Oxford University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. Hegel GWF (1968) Philosophy of right (Knox TM, Trans.). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Heron J (1981) Philosophical basis for a new paradigm. In: Reason P, Rowan J (eds) Human inquiry in action: a source book of new paradigm research. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  45. Heron J (1988) Validity in co-operative inquiry. In: Reason P (ed) Human inquiry in action: Developments and paradigm research. Sage, London, pp 19–35Google Scholar
  46. Heron J (1996) Co-operative inquiry: Research into the human condition. Sage, Thousand OakesGoogle Scholar
  47. Heron J, Reason P (1981) Co-counselling: An experimental inquiry. University of Surrey, GilfordGoogle Scholar
  48. Heron J, Reason P (1997) A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qual Inquiry 3(3):274–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hockey J (2000) Culture Change Project–Briefing, Civil Service College, Sunningdale, December 4–5Google Scholar
  50. Hockey J (2002) EARP Evaluation Report – Report, Civil Service College, Sunningdale, MarchGoogle Scholar
  51. Hockey J, Kakabadse AP, Kakabadse NK (2005) Developing a leadership cadre for the 21st century: a case study of management development in the UK's new civil service. Int Rev Admin Sci 71(1):83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Horkheimer M, Adorno TW (1976) Dialectic of enlightenment, (Cumming J, Trans.). Continuum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Horkheimer M (1974) Eclipse of reason. Continuum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  54. Issacs W (1999) Dialogue and the art of thinking together: a pioneering approach to communicating in business and in life. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  55. Kahn CH (1997) Plato and the socratic dialogue: the philosophical use of a literary form. Cambridge University Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  56. Kakabadse A (1991) The wealth creators: top people, top teams and executive best practice. Kogan Page, LondonGoogle Scholar
  57. Kakabadse A, Kakabadse N (1999) Essence of leadership. International Thomson Business Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Kakabadse A, Kakabadse N (2002) Making ‘modernising government initiatives’ work: culture change through collaborative inquiry (CI). Public Adm Dev 22(4):337–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kakabadse N, Kakabadse A (2003a) Polylogue as a platform for governance: integrating people, the planet, profit and posterity. Corp Governance: Int J Bussiness Soci 3(1):5–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kakabadse NK, Kakabadse A (2003b) Developing reflexive practitioners through collaborative inquiry: a case study of the UK civil service. Int Rev Admin Sci 69(3):365–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kant I (1929) Critique of Pure Reason (Smith NK, Trans.). MacMillan Education Ltd, HampshireGoogle Scholar
  62. Kayes CD (2002) Experiential learning and its critics: preserving the role of experience in management learning and education. Acad Manag Learn Educ 1(2):137–149Google Scholar
  63. Kegan R (1994) In over our heads: mental demands of modern life. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  64. Kolb DA (1984) Experimental learning. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  65. Lacan J (1977) Ecrits: A Selection (Sheridan A, Trans.). W.W. Norton and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  66. Lamo de Espinosa E (1990) La sociedad reflexiva (Social reflexivity). CIS-Siglo XXI, MadridGoogle Scholar
  67. Lewin K (1946) Action research and minority problems. J Soc Issues 2(4):34–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Marx K (1977) Selected works (vols. 1–3). Vantage, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  69. Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  70. Morgan G (1986) Images of organization. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  71. Neumann JE, Hirschhorn L (1999) The challenge of integrating psychodynamic and organizational theory. Hum Relat 52(6):683–695Google Scholar
  72. Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Peters M, Robinson V (1984) The Origins and Status of Action Research. J Appl Behav Sci 20(2):113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Plato (1970) The dialogues (vols. I–IV). In: Hare RM, Russell DA, Jowett B (eds and Trans.) Sphere Books Limited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  75. Polanyi ME (1966) Personal knowledge: towards a post-critical philosophy. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  76. Poole MS, DeSanctis G (1990) Understanding the use of group decision support systems: the theory of adaptive structuration. In: Fulk J, Steinfield C (eds) Organizations and communication technology. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  77. Raelin JA (2000) Work-based learning: the new frontier of management development. Prentice Hall, Upper SaddleGoogle Scholar
  78. Rapoport R (1970) Three dilemmas in action research. Hum Relat 33(4):488–543Google Scholar
  79. Reason P (1988) The Co-operative inquiry group. In: Reason P (ed) Human inquiry in action: developments in new paradigm research. Sage, London, pp 1–17Google Scholar
  80. Reason P (1994) Three approaches to participative inquiry. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, London, pp 261–291Google Scholar
  81. Reason P (1999) Integrating action and reflection through co-operative inquiry. Manag Learn 30(2):207–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Reason P (2000) Inquiry and participation in research of world worthy of human aspiration. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds) The handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  83. Reason P, Bradbury H (2001) Introduction: inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds) The handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice. Sage, London, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  84. Reason P, Marshall J (1987) Research as personal process. In: Boud D, Griffin V (eds) Appreciating adults learning: from the learners perspective. Kogan Page, LondonGoogle Scholar
  85. Revans RW (1980) Action learning: new techniques for management. Blond and Briggs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  86. Reynolds M (1999) Critical reflection and management education: rehabilitating less hierarchical approaches. J Manag Educ 23(5):537–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Schon DA (1983) The reflective practitioner. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  88. Senge PM (1990) The leader's new work: building learning organizations. Sloan Manag Rev 32(1):7–23Google Scholar
  89. Shotter J, Katz A (1996) Articulating a practice from within the practice itself: establishing formative dialogues by the use of a ‘social poetics.’ Concepts and Transformation 1(2/3):227–238Google Scholar
  90. Somekh B, Thaler M (1997) Contradictions of management theory, organizational cultures and self. Educ Action Res 5(1):17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. UK (United Kingdom, Prime Minister and Minister for the Cabinet Office) (1999) Modernising government. Stationary Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  92. UK (United Kingdom, Prime Minister's Speech) (2001) Public sector reform. Stationary Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  93. Vygotskii LS (1934/1962) Thought and Language (Hanfmann E, Vakar G, Trans.). The M.I.T. Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  94. Webb K (1995) An introduction to problems in the philosophy of social science. Pinter, LondonGoogle Scholar
  95. Wittgenstein L (1953) Philosophical investigations. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  96. Wittgenstein L (1980) Remarks on the philosophy of psychology (vols. 1 & 2). Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  97. Zeldin T (1998) Conversation: How talk can change your life. Harvill, LondonGoogle Scholar
  98. Zohar D (1997) Rewiring the corporate brain: using the new science to rethink how we structure and lead organizations. Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nada K. Kakabadse
    • 1
  • Andrew P. Kakabadse
    • 2
  • Kalu N. Kalu
    • 3
  1. 1.Management and Business Research Northampton Business SchoolThe University of NorthamptonNorthamptonUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.International Management DevelopmentCranfield School of Management CranfieldBedfordUnited Kingdom
  3. 3.Auburn University MontgomeryDepartment of Political Science & Public AdministrationMontgomeryUSA

Personalised recommendations