Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pragmatic Dilemmas in Action Research: Doing Action Research With or Without the Approval of Top Management?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Systemic Practice and Action Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article problematizes a basic assumption that action research should be conducted in terms of acceptance by management. The importance of approval from the responsible stakeholders at the work practice, which is the subject of action research, has traditionally been emphasized in action research literature. External pressure can constrain an organisation to initiate and fulfil different types of needs for change. In this article we address the question of whether it is appropriate to accomplish action research in a way that creates pressure on an organisation to act. If the public risks suffering as a result of an organisation′s inability or unwillingness to identify and rectify serious problems, there are strong arguments to answer “yes” to this question. This answer is particularly relevant when it comes to governmental organisations. The public has a legitimate requirement that tax-financed organisations should be well-functioning. This article illustrates how action research can put pressure on a work practice, and discusses the problems and challenges of this type of research design. An important contribution to action research literature based on this article is that it shows that the dilemma in action research of balancing practice interests and those of science is not just about dealing with a dual agenda. The interest of the practice interests is multi-faceted. This article points at the relationship between action research and principles for conducting critical research in information systems. Practical implications that can be drawn based on this article are for example that it clarifies the challenge of different considerations that may be eligible in action research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aakhus M (2007) Communication as Design. Commun Monogr 74(1):112–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler P, Adler P (1987) Membership roles in field research. Sage, Newbury Park, CA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ågerfalk PJ (2010) Getting pragmatic. Eur J Inf Syst 19(3):251–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M, Deetz S (2000) Doing Critical Management Research. Sage Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M, Sköldberg K (2009) Reflexive methodology: new vistas for qualitative research, 2nd edn. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Anshu (2012) Role of balance scorecard as a communication tool. Int J Res Comput Appl Manag 2(6):167–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Apaza C, Chang Y (2011) What makes whistleblowing effective. Whistleblowing in Peru and Sotuh Korea. Public Integr 13(2):113–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avgerou C (2000) Information systems: what sort of science is it? Omega 28:567–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avison D, Lau F, Myers M, Nielsen P-A (1999) Action Research. Commun ACM 42(1):94–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville R, Myers M (2004) Special issue on action research in information systems: making IS research relevant to practice—foreword. MIS Q 28(3):329–335

    Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville R, Wood-Harper T (1996) A critical perspective on action research as a method for information system research. J Inf Technol 11:235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat I, Zmud RW (1999) Empirical research in information system research: the practice of relevance. MIS Q 23(1):3–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beynon-Davies P (2009) Business information systems. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum F (1955) Action research—a scientific approach? Philos Sci 22:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brannick T, Coghland D (2007) In defence of being native. the case of insider academic research. Organ Res Methods 10(1):59–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunsson N (1989) The organization of hypocrisy: talk, decision and action in organizations. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunsson N (1993) Ideas and actions. justification and hypocrisy as an alternative to control. accounting. Organ Soc 18(6):489–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan DA, Bryman A (2007) Contextualizing methods choice in organization research. Organ Res Methods 10(3):483–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cecez-Kecmanovic D (2011) Doing critical information systems research—arguments for a critical research methodolgy. Eur J Inf Syst 20(4):440–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiasson M, Germonprez M, Mathiassen L (2008) Pluralist action research: a review of the information system literature. Inf Syst J 19:31–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin Dwyer S, Buckle JL (2009) The space between: on being an insider-outsider in qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods 8(1):54–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison RM, Martinsons MG, Kock N (2004) Principles of canonical action research. Inf Syst J 14:65–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLuca D, Kock N (2007) Publishing information systems action research for a positivist audience. Communications of the AIS, vol 19. pp 1–38

  • DiMaggio PI (1983) State expansion and organisational fields. In: Hall RH, Ouinn RE (eds) Organisational theory and public policy. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp 147–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Elder RW, Shults RA, Sleet DA, Nichols JL, Thompson RS, Rajab W (2004) Effectiveness of mass media campaigns for reducing drinking and driving and alcohol-involved crashes. a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 27(1):57–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eliasson R (1995) Forskningsetik och perspektivval. Studentlitteratur, Lund [In Swedish]

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot B (1993) Road Safety mass media campaigns. a meta analysis. Canberra (CR 118). Federal office of road safety, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Eterno A, Silverman E (2012) The crime numbers game: management by manipulation. CRC Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ETSC (1999) Police enforcement strategies to reduce traffic causalities in Europe. European transport safety council, Bryssel

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldkuhl G (2005a) Workpractice Theory—What it is and Why we need it, In: Proceedings of the 3rd Intl conf on action in language, organisations and information systems (ALOIS), University of Limerick

  • Goldkuhl G (2012) Pragmatism vs. interpretivism in qualitative information systems research. Eur J Inf Syst 21(2):135–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goles T, Hirschheim R (2000) The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead… long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burell and Morgan. Omega 28:249–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gummesson E (2000) Qualitative methods in management research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart D, Gregor S (eds) (2010) Information systems foundations: the role of design science. Australian National University, E-Press, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner AR, March ST, Park J, Ram S (2004) Design science in information systems research. MIS Q 28(1):75–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Holgersson S (2001) IT-system och filtrering av verksamhetskunskap—kvalitetsproblem vid analyser och beslutsfattande som bygger på uppgifter hämtade från polisens IT-system. IDA, Linköpings universitet, Linköping [In Swedish]

    Google Scholar 

  • Holgersson S (2011). Appendix till rapporten:”Polisens arbete mot narkotika”. Linköping: Linköpings universitet http://www.iei.liu.se/is/holgersson-stefan/publikationer/1.301514/Narkotika-PM.pdf [In Swedish]. Accessed 24 Jan 2014

  • Holgersson S (2013) Sättet att presentera fasader inom svensk polis—En analys av presenterad bild jämfört med verkligt utfall. The process of building facades within the Swedish police—An analysis of the displayed image compared to the real outcome. Nordisk kriminalvetenskab 2013(1):112–130 In Swedish

    Google Scholar 

  • Homel R (1986) Policing the drinking driver. random breath testing and the process of deterrence. Mac Quarieuniversity, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  • Homel R (1988) Policing and punishing the drinking driver: a study of general and specific deterrence. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jos P (1991) The nature and limits of the whistleblowers′s contribution to administrative responsibility. Am Rev public Admin 21:2105–2118

    Google Scholar 

  • Keen P (1991) Relevance and Rigor in Information Systems Research: Improving Quality, Confidence, Cohesion, and Impact. In: Nissen H-E, Klein HK, Hirschheim R (eds) Information Systems Research: Contemporary approaches and Emergent Traditions. Elsevier Science Publishers BV, North-Holland, pp 27–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein HK, Myers MD (1999) A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Q 23(1):67–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knopf D, Park J, Brindis C, Mulye T-P, Irwin C (2007) What gets measured gets done: assessing data availability for adolescent populations. Matern Child Health J 11:335–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau F (1997) A review on the use of action research in information systems studies in information systems and qualitative research. In: Lee AS, Libenau J. & DeGross JI (Eds.) Information systems and qualitative research, Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 WG8.2, International conference on information systems and qualitative research, Chapman & Hall, 31–68

  • Lewin K (1946) Action research and minority problems. J Soc Issues 2:34–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky M (1980) Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the individual in public service. Russel Sage Foundation, New York

  • Luft HS, Sandra S, Hunt MPA (1986) Evaluating individual hospital quality through outcome statistics. J Am Med Assoc 255(20):2780–2784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masters J (1995). The History of Action Research in Hughes I (ed.) Action research electronic reader. Sydney: University of Sydney: www.behs.cchs.usyd.edu.au/arrow/Reader/rmasters.htm

  • Maureen G (2004) What Gets Measured Gets Done. J Quality Particip 27(4):21–27

    Google Scholar 

  • McKay J, Marshall P (2001) The dual imperatives of action research. Inf Technol People 14:46–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer J, Rowan B (1977) Institionalized organisations. Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Am J Sociol 83(2):340–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers MD (2009) Qualitative research in business & management. SAGE Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers MD, Klein HK (2011) A set of principles for conduction critical research in information systems. MIS Q 35(1):17–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Nugus P, Greenfield D, Travaglia J, Braithwaite J (2012) The politics of action research: “If you don′t like the way things are going, get off the bus”. Soc Sci Med 75:1946–1953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter T (1995) Trusting in numbers. Princeton University Press, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter LJ, Parker AJ (1993) Total quality management—the critical success factors. Total Qual Manag 4(1):13–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport R (1970) Three dilemmas of action research. Hum Relat 23:499–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuss-Ianni E (1993) Two cultures of policing. street cops and management cops. Transactions Publishers, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen B (1998) Holding government bureaucracies accountable. Praeger, Westport, Connecticut

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbloom D (2003) Adminstrative law for public managers. boulder. Westview Press, Colorado

    Google Scholar 

  • Sein MK, Henfridsson O, Purao S, Rossi M, Lindgren R (2011) Action design research. MIS Q 35(1):37–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl BC (2008) The ethical nature of critical research in information system. Inf syst J 18:137–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stehpens K, Sørnes JO, Rice R, Browning L, Sætre AS (2008) Discrete, Sequential, and Follow-Up Use of Information and Communication Technology by Experienced ICT Users. Manag Commun Q 22(2):197–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundevall D (2008) Hanteraren: uppdrag: Infiltrera svensk maffia. Alberts Bonniers förlag, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Susman G, Evered R (1978) An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Adm Sci Q 23:582–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven A (2007) Engaged scholarship: a guide for organizational and social research. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsham G (1995) Interpretative case in IS research: nature and method. Eur J Inf Syst 4(2):74–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warmington A (1980) Action research: its method and its implications. J Appl Syst Anal 7:23–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Wastell D, Kawalek P, Langmead-Jones P, Ormerod R (2004) Information systems and parnership in multiagency networks: an action research projekt in crime reduction. Inf Organ 14:189–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson D, Croxson B, Atkinson A (2006) What gets measured gets done. headteachers′ responses to english secondary school performance management system. Policy Stud 27(2):153–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woxblom C, Holgersson S, Dolmén L (2008) Polisens sätt att genomföra och redovisa LAU-tester. en explorative studie av polisens trafiksäkerhetsarbete. Polishögskolan, Solna [In Swedish]

    Google Scholar 

  • Ydén K (2008) Kriget och karriärsystemet. Försvarsmaktens organiserande i fred. Doktors-avhandling. Handelshögskolan. universitet Göteborg, Göteborgs [In Swedish]

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin RK (1994) Case study research: Design and methods, 2nd edn. Sage Publishing, Beverly Hills, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaal D (1994) Traffic law enforcement: A review of the literature. Accident Research centre, Monash University, Australia

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management and Engineering, Information Systems, Linköping University, SE-581 83, Linköping, Sweden

    Stefan Holgersson & Ulf Melin

Authors
  1. Stefan Holgersson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ulf Melin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Holgersson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Holgersson, S., Melin, U. Pragmatic Dilemmas in Action Research: Doing Action Research With or Without the Approval of Top Management?. Syst Pract Action Res 28, 1–17 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-014-9316-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-014-9316-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation