(Why) Does Ar Need to Intervene and Change Things?

Author:

Eikeland Olav

Abstract

One of the basic and for many, defining tenets of action research is contained in the “slogan” ascribed to Kurt Lewin: “In order to understand it, you have to change it”. The slogan clearly resembles what Francis Bacon claimed for experimental science, however, and also Karl Marx’ well known stance in his Feuerbach-theses. In this text I discuss this “change imperative” and relate it to its “pre-history” before action research. Most action researchers are not willing to subscribe to terms like “social engineering” but still call what they do for “interventions”. The text argues that what most people spontaneously think of as “change” may not be necessary for calling what is done for action research. Yet, the alternative is not to withdraw to a disengaged, spectator position. The change imperative raises important questions about what kind of change action research initiates, and what kind of knowledge results from different forms of change. The text challenges the “slogan” as to what kind of change is appropriate and legitimate in working with changes in individuals, culture, communities, and organisations, and suggests ways forward through developing forms of practitioner research and native or indigenous research. To illustrate, insights from Aristotle and Hegel are invoked. Action researchers are challenged to discuss and clarify answers to questions about what kind of change is produced, and what kind of knowledge is generated.

Publisher

Verlag Barbara Budrich GmbH

Subject

Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Sociology and Political Science

Reference40 articles.

1. Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.

2. Aristotle. The edition mostly used is Loeb Classical Library. Abbreviations used are borrowed from Liddel and Scott. Bekker-pagination is indicated in parentheses Analytica Posteriora (APo) (71-100) De Generatione et Corruptione (GC) (314-338) Metaphysica (Metaph) (980-1093) Ethica Nicomachea (EN) (1094-1181) Politica (Pol) (1252-1342)

3. Bacon, F. (1620). The New Organon. Indianapolis, 1960: Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publ.

4. Campbell, D. (1978). Qualitative Knowing in Action Research. pp. 184-209 in Brenner, M.; P.Marsh, and M. Brenner (ed.). The Social Contexts of Method. London: Croom Helm.

5. Dreyfus, H. & S. Dreyfus (1986). Mind over Machine. The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer. New York: Free Press.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Dissensus as part of dialogue in organizational change processes: a case study in an NGO;IJAR – International Journal of Action Research;2023-08-14

2. Learning in Finnish Social Work Practice and Research;The British Journal of Social Work;2020-08-04

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3