Abstract
This article presents a theoretical and empirical analysis of Action Engagement. This is a methodological approach implying that researchers involve themselves in the organization by working as ordinary employees. Our problem statement is this: How will Action Engagement improve the quality of action research? Given the fact that the researcher has limited time to use in the initial phase, we intend to show that Action Engagement is an effective introduction to the daily organizational life. The data is from an automotive supplier and two hospitals in Norway. The analysis contributes to the field of action research in two respects. First, it offers a detailed and varied understanding of how a broad empirical basis can be obtained in an action research (AR) project. Second, it presents an empirically grounded understanding of how this method can be used to achieve increased credibility and trust in ways that enable the researcher to bring in new and important aspects in organizational dialogues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Argyris C, Schön D (1978) Organizational learning. Jossey-Bass, Reading, MA
Argyris C, Putnam B, Smith D (1985) Action science: Concepts, methods, and skills for research and intervention. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
Elden M, Levin M (1991) Cogenerative Learning: Bringing Participation into Action Research. In Whyte WF (ed), Participatory Action Research. Sage Publ., California, pp 127–142
Fals Borda O (1970) Subversion and Development in Latin America. Foyer John Knox, Genoca
Forester J (1999) The Deliberative Practitioner. MIT Press
Freire P (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder & Herder, NY
Gustavsen B (1992) Dialogue and Development: theory of communication, action research and restructuring of working life. Van Gorcum, Assen
Gustavsen B (2001) Theory and Practice: The Mediating Discourse. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds), Handbook of Action Research. Sage.
Greenwood D, Levin M (1998) Introduction to Action Research. Sage, NY
Hall B (2001) I wish this were a Poem of Practices of Action Research. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds), Handbook of Action Research. Sage
Heron J, Reason P (2001) The practice of Co-operative Inquiry: Research “with” rather than “on” people. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds), Handbook of Action Research. Sage
Jackson M (1989) Paths toward a Clearing: Radical Empiricism and Ethnographic Inquiry. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
Kalleberg R (1996) Forskningsopplegget og samfunnsforskningens dobbeltdialog. In: i Holter, Harriet og Kalleberg, Ragnvald (red), Kvalitative metoder i samfunnsforskning. Universitetesforlaget. Oslo
Kanuha Valli Kalei (2000) “Being” native versus “Going Native”: Conducting Social Work Research as an Insider. In: Social Work. Volume 45, nr 5
Keesing R (1981) Cultural Anthropology. Rinehart and Winston Inc, Holt
Ousland J, Kolb D, Rubin (2001) Organizational Behavior. An Experiential Approach. Prentice Hall
Polyani M (1966) The tacit dimention. Doubleday, NY and Routledge & Kegan Paul, London
Reason P, Bradbury H (2001) Handbook of Action Research. Sage
Swantz ML (1986) Ritual and Symbol in Transitional Zaroma Society. Helsinki University, Helsinki
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rolfsen, M., Johnsen, A. & Knutstad, G. Action Engagement: Improving Researchers’ Involvement in Action Research Projects. Syst Pract Act Res 20, 53–63 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-006-9049-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-006-9049-x