Systemic Practice and Action Research

, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 437–448 | Cite as

Action Research: Its Role in the University/Business Relationship

  • Tim Haslett
  • John Molineux
  • Jane Olsen
  • Rod Sarah
  • John Stephens
  • Susanne Tepe
  • Beverly Walker
Article

Abstract

The Action Research (AR) PhD program at Monash University had its genesis in Systems Thinking and Organizational Learning. This paper discusses the role of the university in AR projects in business and the central role that AR projects can have in a Faculty's strategic positioning. The issues that have emerged in the project to date are discussed.

Action Research systems thinking and theory PhD supervision 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Argyris, C. (1992). Action science and intervention. In Vroom, V. H., and Deci, E. L. (eds.), Understanding Management and Motivation, 2nd edn., Penguin, London.Google Scholar
  2. Argyris, C., and Schon, D. (1978). What is an Organization That it May Learn? Applications, George Braziller, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Burnett, P. C. (1999). The supervision of doctoral dissertations using a collaborative cohort model. Counselor Education and Universities Supervision. 39, 46-52.Google Scholar
  4. Checkland, J., and Scholes, J. (1990). Soft Systems Methodology in Action, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  5. Evans, T. (1995). Postgraduate research supervision in the emerging “open.” Australian Universities Review, 38, 23-27.Google Scholar
  6. Flood, R. L. (2001). The relationship of “systems thinking” to AR. In Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London, pp. 133-144.Google Scholar
  7. Flood, R., and Jackson M. C. (1991). Creative Problem Solving, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  8. Hall, B. (2001). I wish this were a poem of the practices of AR. In Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London, pp. 171-178.Google Scholar
  9. Holland, J. (1995). Hidden Order, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
  10. Krugman, M., and Andrews, S. V. (1991). Pervasive modes of thinking that affect our conduct of teaching, supervision, and research: Are we stuck in an old paradigm? Paper presented at the Annual Lily Conference on College Teaching., Oxford, OH, Nov. 11, 1991).Google Scholar
  11. Laszlo, E. (1972a). The Systems View of the World, George Braziller, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Laszlo, E. (ed.) (1972b.) The Relevance of General Systems Theory, George Braziller, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Leder, G. C. (1995). Higher degree supervision: A question of balance. Australian Universities Review, 38, 5-8.Google Scholar
  14. Levin, M., and Greenwood, D. (2001). Pragmatic AR and the struggle to transform universities into learning communities. In Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London, pp. 103-113.Google Scholar
  15. Madsen, D. (1983). Successful Dissertations and Theses, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  16. Reason P., and Marshall, J. (2001). On working with graduate students. In Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London, pp. 413-419.Google Scholar
  17. Schon, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Aldershot, England.Google Scholar
  18. Senge, P., and Scharmer, O. (2001). Community AR: Learning as a community of practitioners, consultants, and researchers. In Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London, pp. 238-249.Google Scholar
  19. Senge, P. M. (1992). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Random House, Australia.Google Scholar
  20. Stewart, I. (1989). Does God Play Dice, the New Mathematics of Chaos, Penguin, London.Google Scholar
  21. Taylor, P. C., and Dawson, V. (1997). Critical research supervision? Deconstructing a disempowering myth! Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, Mar. 24–28, 1997.Google Scholar
  22. Yeatman, A. (1995). Making supervision relationships accountable: Graduate student logs. Australian Universities Review, 38, 9-11.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tim Haslett
    • 1
  • John Molineux
    • 1
  • Jane Olsen
    • 1
  • Rod Sarah
    • 1
  • John Stephens
    • 1
  • Susanne Tepe
    • 1
  • Beverly Walker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ManagementMonash UniversityVictoriaAustralia

Personalised recommendations