Abstract
For novice action researchers, issues of roles, politics and ethics are critical, particularly in design. The field of organization development (OD) provides many useful considerations of roles, politics and ethics. This article proposes a systemic design-based framework of the action research process that includes context, inquiry mechanisms, inquiry cycle and outcomes. Such perspective brings to the forefront the issues of context, roles, politics dynamics and ethics that are embedded in the action research process and influence its emergent process, quality and outcomes. A set of propositions for further explorations is advanced and briefly discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adler, N., Shani, A. B. (Rami), and Styhre, A. (2004). Collaborative Research in Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Argyris, C. (2003). Actionable knowledge. In Tsoukas, T., and Knudsen, C. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 423–452.
Argyris, C., Putnam, R., and Smith, D. (1985). Action Science, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Bate, P. (2000). Changing the culture of a hospital: From hierarchy to networked community. Public Admin. 78, 485–512.
Bell, C. (1998). Self-reflection and vulnerability in action research: Bringing forth new worlds in our learning. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 11(2), 179–191.
Benne, K. D. (1959). Some ethical problems in group and organizational consultation. J. Soc. Issues 15(2), 60–67.
Bentz, V., and Shapiro, J. (1998). Mindful Inquiry in Social Science, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Breu, K., and Hemingway, C. (2003). It works in practice, but will it work in theory? Paper presented at 19th EGOS Colloquium, Copenhagen.
Buchanan, D., and Badham, R. (1999). Power, Politics and Organizational Change: Winning the Turf Game, Sage, London.
Buchanan, D., and Boddy, R. (1992). The Expertise of the Change Agent, Prentice-Hall, London.
Coghlan, D., and Brannick, T. (2005). Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization, 2nd edn. Sage, London.
Coghlan, D., Coughlan, P., and Brennan, L. (2004) Organizing for research and action: Implementing action research networks. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 17(1), 37–49.
Cooke, B., and Wolfram Cox, J. (2005). Fundamentals of Action Research, 4 volumes, Sage, London.
Detardo-Bora, K. (2004). Action research in a world of positivist-oriented review boards. Action Res. 2(3), 237–253.
Gellerman, W., Frankel, M., and Ladenson, R. (1990). Values and Ethics in Organization and Human System Development, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Greenwood, D., and Levin, M. (1998). Introduction to Action Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Greiner, L. E., and Schein, V. E. (1988). Power and Organization Development, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Gummesson, E. (2000). Qualitative Methods in Management Research, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Kakabadse, A. (1991). Politics and ethics in action research. In Craig Smith, N., and Dainty, P. (eds.), The Management Research Handbook. Routledge, London, pp. 289–299.
Katz, D., and Kahn, R. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations, Wiley, New York.
Kelman, H. C. (1965). Manipulation of human behavior: An ethical dilemma for the social scientist. J. Soc. Issues 21(2), 31–46.
Lincoln, Y. (2001). Engaging sympathies: Relationships between action research and social constructivism. In Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (eds.), Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London, pp. 124–132.
Lippitt, G., and Lippitt, R. (1986). The Consulting Process in Action, 2nd edn. Pfeiffer, San Diego.
Lippitt, R. (1961). Value-judgment problems of the social scientist in action research. In Bennis, W., Benne, K., and Chin, R. (eds.), The Planning of Change, 1st edn., Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 689–694.
Morton, A. (1999). Ethics in action research. Syst.Pract. Action Res. 12(2), 219–222.
Pettigrew, P. (2003). Power, conflicts and resolutions: A change agent's perspective on conducting action research within a multi-organizational partnership. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 16(6), 375–391.
Punch, M. (1994). Politics and ethics in qualitative research. In Denzin, N., and Lincoln, Y. (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 83–97.
Reason, P., and Bradbury, H. (eds.) (2001). Handbook of Action Research, Sage, London.
Rowan, J. (2000). Research ethics. Int. J. Psychother. 5(2), 103–110.
Rusaw, A. C. (2001). Ethical dilemmas of action research: A typological analysis. In Rahim, M. A., Golembiewski, R. T., and MacKenzie, K. D. (eds.), Current Topics in Management, Vol. 6, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 51–66.
Schein, E. H. (1987). The Clinical Perspective in Fieldwork, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Schein, E. H. (1995). Process consultation, action research and clinical inquiry: Are they the same? J. Manage. Psychol. 10(6), 14–19.
Schein, E. H. (1999). Process Consultation Revisited: Building the Helping Relationship. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Shani, A. B., and Pasmore, W. A. (1985). Organization inquiry: Towards a new model of the action research process. In Warrick, D. D. (ed.), Contemporary Organization Development: Current Thinking and Applications, Scott, Foresman, Glenview, IL., pp. 438–448.
Shani, A. B. (Rami), and Docherty, P. (2003). Learning by Design. Blackwells, Oxford.
Stringer, E. (1999). Action Research, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Walker, B., and Haslett, T. (2002). Action research in management—Ethical dilemmas. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 15(6), 523–533.
White, L. P., and Wooten, K. C. (1986). Professional Ethics and Practice in Organization Development, Praeger, New York.
Williamson, G. R., and Prosser, S. (2002). Action research: Politics, ethics and participation. J. Adv. Nurs. 40(5), 587–593.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Coghlan, D., Shani, A.B.R. Roles, Politics, and Ethics in Action Research Design. Syst Pract Act Res 18, 533–546 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-005-9465-3
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-005-9465-3