action research model problems

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

Published on January 27, 2023 by Tegan George . Revised on January 12, 2024.

Table of contents

Types of action research, action research models, examples of action research, action research vs. traditional research, advantages and disadvantages of action research, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about action research.

There are 2 common types of action research: participatory action research and practical action research.

• Participatory action research emphasizes that participants should be members of the community being studied, empowering those directly affected by outcomes of said research. In this method, participants are effectively co-researchers, with their lived experiences considered formative to the research process.
• Practical action research focuses more on how research is conducted and is designed to address and solve specific issues.

Both types of action research are more focused on increasing the capacity and ability of future practitioners than contributing to a theoretical body of knowledge.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Action research is often reflected in 3 action research models: operational (sometimes called technical), collaboration, and critical reflection.

• Operational (or technical) action research is usually visualized like a spiral following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”
• Collaboration action research is more community-based, focused on building a network of similar individuals (e.g., college professors in a given geographic area) and compiling learnings from iterated feedback cycles.
• Critical reflection action research serves to contextualize systemic processes that are already ongoing (e.g., working retroactively to analyze existing school systems by questioning why certain practices were put into place and developed the way they did).

Action research is often used in fields like education because of its iterative and flexible style.

After the information was collected, the students were asked where they thought ramps or other accessibility measures would be best utilized, and the suggestions were sent to school administrators. Example: Practical action research Science teachers at your city’s high school have been witnessing a year-over-year decline in standardized test scores in chemistry. In seeking the source of this issue, they studied how concepts are taught in depth, focusing on the methods, tools, and approaches used by each teacher.

Action research differs sharply from other types of research in that it seeks to produce actionable processes over the course of the research rather than contributing to existing knowledge or drawing conclusions from datasets. In this way, action research is formative , not summative , and is conducted in an ongoing, iterative way.

As such, action research is different in purpose, context, and significance and is a good fit for those seeking to implement systemic change.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Action research comes with advantages and disadvantages.

• Action research is highly adaptable , allowing researchers to mold their analysis to their individual needs and implement practical individual-level changes.
• Action research provides an immediate and actionable path forward for solving entrenched issues, rather than suggesting complicated, longer-term solutions rooted in complex data.
• Done correctly, action research can be very empowering , informing social change and allowing participants to effect that change in ways meaningful to their communities.

Disadvantages

• Due to their flexibility, action research studies are plagued by very limited generalizability  and are very difficult to replicate . They are often not considered theoretically rigorous due to the power the researcher holds in drawing conclusions.
• Action research can be complicated to structure in an ethical manner . Participants may feel pressured to participate or to participate in a certain way.
• Action research is at high risk for research biases such as selection bias , social desirability bias , or other types of cognitive biases .

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Action research is conducted in order to solve a particular issue immediately, while case studies are often conducted over a longer period of time and focus more on observing and analyzing a particular ongoing phenomenon.

Action research is focused on solving a problem or informing individual and community-based knowledge in a way that impacts teaching, learning, and other related processes. It is less focused on contributing theoretical input, instead producing actionable input.

Action research is particularly popular with educators as a form of systematic inquiry because it prioritizes reflection and bridges the gap between theory and practice. Educators are able to simultaneously investigate an issue as they solve it, and the method is very iterative and flexible.

A cycle of inquiry is another name for action research . It is usually visualized in a spiral shape following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”

Sources in this article

We strongly encourage students to use sources in their work. You can cite our article (APA Style) or take a deep dive into the articles below.

George, T. (2024, January 12). What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 27, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/action-research/

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th edition). Routledge.

Naughton, G. M. (2001).  Action research (1st edition). Routledge.

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, what is an observational study | guide & examples, primary research | definition, types, & examples, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case AskWhy Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research Research Tools and Apps

Action Research: What it is, Stages & Examples

The best way to get things accomplished is to do it yourself. This statement is utilized in corporations, community projects, and national governments. These organizations are relying on action research to cope with their continuously changing and unstable environments as they function in a more interdependent world.

In practical educational contexts, this involves using systematic inquiry and reflective practice to address real-world challenges, improve teaching and learning, enhance student engagement, and drive positive changes within the educational system.

This post outlines the definition of action research, its stages, and some examples.

Content Index

What is action research?

Stages of action research, the steps to conducting action research, examples of action research, advantages and disadvantages of action research.

Action research is a strategy that tries to find realistic solutions to organizations’ difficulties and issues. It is similar to applied research.

Action research refers basically learning by doing. First, a problem is identified, then some actions are taken to address it, then how well the efforts worked are measured, and if the results are not satisfactory, the steps are applied again.

It can be put into three different groups:

• Positivist: This type of research is also called “classical action research.” It considers research a social experiment. This research is used to test theories in the actual world.
• Interpretive: This kind of research is called “contemporary action research.” It thinks that business reality is socially made, and when doing this research, it focuses on the details of local and organizational factors.
• Critical: This action research cycle takes a critical reflection approach to corporate systems and tries to enhance them.

All research is about learning new things. Collaborative action research contributes knowledge based on investigations in particular and frequently useful circumstances. It starts with identifying a problem. After that, the research process is followed by the below stages:

Stage 1: Plan

For an action research project to go well, the researcher needs to plan it well. After coming up with an educational research topic or question after a research study, the first step is to develop an action plan to guide the research process. The research design aims to address the study’s question. The research strategy outlines what to undertake, when, and how.

Stage 2: Act

The next step is implementing the plan and gathering data. At this point, the researcher must select how to collect and organize research data . The researcher also needs to examine all tools and equipment before collecting data to ensure they are relevant, valid, and comprehensive.

Stage 3: Observe

Data observation is vital to any investigation. The action researcher needs to review the project’s goals and expectations before data observation. This is the final step before drawing conclusions and taking action.

Different kinds of graphs, charts, and networks can be used to represent the data. It assists in making judgments or progressing to the next stage of observing.

Stage 4: Reflect

This step involves applying a prospective solution and observing the results. It’s essential to see if the possible solution found through research can really solve the problem being studied.

The researcher must explore alternative ideas when the action research project’s solutions fail to solve the problem.

Action research is a systematic approach researchers, educators, and practitioners use to identify and address problems or challenges within a specific context. It involves a cyclical process of planning, implementing, reflecting, and adjusting actions based on the data collected. Here are the general steps involved in conducting an action research process:

Identify the action research question or problem

Clearly define the issue or problem you want to address through your research. It should be specific, actionable, and relevant to your working context.

Review existing knowledge

Conduct a literature review to understand what research has already been done on the topic. This will help you gain insights, identify gaps, and inform your research design.

Plan the research

Develop a research plan outlining your study’s objectives, methods, data collection tools, and timeline. Determine the scope of your research and the participants or stakeholders involved.

Collect data

Implement your research plan by collecting relevant data. This can involve various methods such as surveys, interviews, observations, document analysis, or focus groups. Ensure that your data collection methods align with your research objectives and allow you to gather the necessary information.

Analyze the data

Once you have collected the data, analyze it using appropriate qualitative or quantitative techniques. Look for patterns, themes, or trends in the data that can help you understand the problem better.

Reflect on the findings

Reflect on the analyzed data and interpret the results in the context of your research question. Consider the implications and possible solutions that emerge from the data analysis. This reflection phase is crucial for generating insights and understanding the underlying factors contributing to the problem.

Develop an action plan

Based on your analysis and reflection, develop an action plan that outlines the steps you will take to address the identified problem. The plan should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART goals). Consider involving relevant stakeholders in planning to ensure their buy-in and support.

Implement the action plan

Put your action plan into practice by implementing the identified strategies or interventions. This may involve making changes to existing practices, introducing new approaches, or testing alternative solutions. Document the implementation process and any modifications made along the way.

Evaluate and monitor progress

Continuously monitor and evaluate the impact of your actions. Collect additional data, assess the effectiveness of the interventions, and measure progress towards your goals. This evaluation will help you determine if your actions have the desired effects and inform any necessary adjustments.

Reflect and iterate

Reflect on the outcomes of your actions and the evaluation results. Consider what worked well, what did not, and why. Use this information to refine your approach, make necessary adjustments, and plan for the next cycle of action research if needed.

Remember that participatory action research is an iterative process, and multiple cycles may be required to achieve significant improvements or solutions to the identified problem. Each cycle builds on the insights gained from the previous one, fostering continuous learning and improvement.

Explore Insightfully Contextual Inquiry in Qualitative Research

Here are two real-life examples of action research.

Action research initiatives are frequently situation-specific. Still, other researchers can adapt the techniques. The example is from a researcher’s (Franklin, 1994) report about a project encouraging nature tourism in the Caribbean.

In 1991, this was launched to study how nature tourism may be implemented on the four Windward Islands in the Caribbean: St. Lucia, Grenada, Dominica, and St. Vincent.

For environmental protection, a government-led action study determined that the consultation process needs to involve numerous stakeholders, including commercial enterprises.

First, two researchers undertook the study and held search conferences on each island. The search conferences resulted in suggestions and action plans for local community nature tourism sub-projects.

Several islands formed advisory groups and launched national awareness and community projects. Regional project meetings were held to discuss experiences, self-evaluations, and strategies. Creating a documentary about a local initiative helped build community. And the study was a success, leading to a number of changes in the area.

Lau and Hayward (1997) employed action research to analyze Internet-based collaborative work groups.

Over two years, the researchers facilitated three action research problem -solving cycles with 15 teachers, project personnel, and 25 health practitioners from diverse areas. The goal was to see how Internet-based communications might affect their virtual workgroup.

First, expectations were defined, technology was provided, and a bespoke workgroup system was developed. Participants suggested shorter, more dispersed training sessions with project-specific instructions.

The second phase saw the system’s complete deployment. The final cycle witnessed system stability and virtual group formation. The key lesson was that the learning curve was poorly misjudged, with frustrations only marginally met by phone-based technical help. According to the researchers, the absence of high-quality online material about community healthcare was harmful.

Role clarity, connection building, knowledge sharing, resource assistance, and experiential learning are vital for virtual group growth. More study is required on how group support systems might assist groups in engaging with their external environment and boost group members’ learning. 

Action research has both good and bad points.

• It is very flexible, so researchers can change their analyses to fit their needs and make individual changes.
• It offers a quick and easy way to solve problems that have been going on for a long time instead of complicated, long-term solutions based on complex facts.
• If It is done right, it can be very powerful because it can lead to social change and give people the tools to make that change in ways that are important to their communities.

Disadvantages

• These studies have a hard time being generalized and are hard to repeat because they are so flexible. Because the researcher has the power to draw conclusions, they are often not thought to be theoretically sound.
• Setting up an action study in an ethical way can be hard. People may feel like they have to take part or take part in a certain way.
• It is prone to research errors like selection bias , social desirability bias, and other cognitive biases.

LEARN ABOUT: Self-Selection Bias

This post discusses how action research generates knowledge, its steps, and real-life examples. It is very applicable to the field of research and has a high level of relevance. We can only state that the purpose of this research is to comprehend an issue and find a solution to it.

At QuestionPro, we give researchers tools for collecting data, like our survey software, and a library of insights for any long-term study. Go to the Insight Hub if you want to see a demo or learn more about it.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ’s)

Action research is a systematic approach to inquiry that involves identifying a problem or challenge in a practical context, implementing interventions or changes, collecting and analyzing data, and using the findings to inform decision-making and drive positive change.

Action research can be conducted by various individuals or groups, including teachers, administrators, researchers, and educational practitioners. It is often carried out by those directly involved in the educational setting where the research takes place.

The steps of action research typically include identifying a problem, reviewing relevant literature, designing interventions or changes, collecting and analyzing data, reflecting on findings, and implementing improvements based on the results.

MORE LIKE THIS

Cross-Cultural Research: Methods, Challenges, & Key Findings

Aug 27, 2024

Qualtrics vs Microsoft Forms: Platform Comparison 2024

Are We Asking the Right Things at the Right Time in the Right Way? — Tuesday CX Thoughts

Jotform vs Microsoft Forms: Which Should You Choose?

Aug 26, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Tuesday CX Thoughts (TCXT)
• Uncategorized
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Action Research: Steps, Benefits, and Tips

Introduction

History of action research, what is the definition of action research, types of action research, conducting action research.

Action research is an approach to qualitative inquiry in social science research that involves the search for practical solutions to everyday issues. Rooted in real-world problems, it seeks not just to understand but also to act, bringing about positive change in specific contexts. Often distinguished by its collaborative nature, the action research process goes beyond traditional research paradigms by emphasizing the involvement of those being studied in resolving social conflicts and effecting positive change.

The value of action research lies not just in its outcomes, but also in the process itself, where stakeholders become active participants rather than mere subjects. In this article, we'll examine action research in depth, shedding light on its history, principles, and types of action research.

Tracing its roots back to the mid-20th century, Kurt Lewin developed classical action research as a response to traditional research methods in the social sciences that often sidelined the very communities they studied. Proponents of action research championed the idea that research should not just be an observational exercise but an actionable one that involves devising practical solutions. Advocates believed in the idea of research leading to immediate social action, emphasizing the importance of involving the community in the process.

Applications for action research

Over the years, action research has evolved and diversified. From its early applications in social psychology and organizational development, it has branched out into various fields such as education, healthcare, and community development, informing questions around improving schools, minority problems, and more. This growth wasn't just in application, but also in its methodologies.

How is action research different?

Like all research methodologies, effective action research generates knowledge. However, action research stands apart in its commitment to instigate tangible change. Traditional research often places emphasis on passive observation , employing data collection methods primarily to contribute to broader theoretical frameworks . In contrast, action research is inherently proactive, intertwining the acts of observing and acting.

The primary goal isn't just to understand a problem but to solve or alleviate it. Action researchers partner closely with communities, ensuring that the research process directly benefits those involved. This collaboration often leads to immediate interventions, tweaks, or solutions applied in real-time, marking a departure from other forms of research that might wait until the end of a study to make recommendations.

This proactive, change-driven nature makes action research particularly impactful in settings where immediate change is not just beneficial but essential.

Action research is best understood as a systematic approach to cooperative inquiry. Unlike traditional research methodologies that might primarily focus on generating knowledge, action research emphasizes producing actionable solutions for pressing real-world challenges.

This form of research undertakes a cyclic and reflective journey, typically cycling through stages of planning , acting, observing, and reflecting. A defining characteristic of action research is the collaborative spirit it embodies, often dissolving the rigid distinction between the researcher and the researched, leading to mutual learning and shared outcomes.

Advantages of action research

One of the foremost benefits of action research is the immediacy of its application. Since the research is embedded within real-world issues, any findings or solutions derived can often be integrated straightaway, catalyzing prompt improvements within the concerned community or organization. This immediacy is coupled with the empowering nature of the methodology. Participants aren't mere subjects; they actively shape the research process, giving them a tangible sense of ownership over both the research journey and its eventual outcomes.

Moreover, the inherent adaptability of action research allows researchers to tweak their approaches responsively based on live feedback. This ensures the research remains rooted in the evolving context, capturing the nuances of the situation and making any necessary adjustments. Lastly, this form of research tends to offer a comprehensive understanding of the issue at hand, harmonizing socially constructed theoretical knowledge with hands-on insights, leading to a richer, more textured understanding.

Disadvantages of action research

Like any methodology, action research isn't devoid of challenges. Its iterative nature, while beneficial, can extend timelines. Researchers might find themselves engaged in multiple cycles of observation, reflection, and action before arriving at a satisfactory conclusion. The intimate involvement of the researcher with the research participants , although crucial for collaboration, opens doors to potential conflicts. Through collaborative problem solving, disagreements can lead to richer and more nuanced solutions, but it can take considerable time and effort.

Another limitation stems from its focus on a specific context: results derived from a particular action research project might not always resonate or be applicable in a different context or with a different group. Lastly, the depth of collaboration this methodology demands means all stakeholders need to be deeply invested, and such a level of commitment might not always be feasible.

Examples of action research

To illustrate, let's consider a few scenarios. Imagine a classroom where a teacher observes dwindling student participation. Instead of sticking to conventional methods, the teacher experiments with introducing group-based activities. As the outcomes unfold, the teacher continually refines the approach based on student feedback, eventually leading to a teaching strategy that rejuvenates student engagement.

In a healthcare context, hospital staff who recognize growing patient anxiety related to certain procedures might innovate by introducing a new patient-informing protocol. As they study the effects of this change, they could, through iterations, sculpt a procedure that diminishes patient anxiety.

Similarly, in the realm of community development, a community grappling with the absence of child-friendly public spaces might collaborate with local authorities to conceptualize a park. As they monitor its utilization and societal impact, continual feedback could refine the park's infrastructure and design.

Contemporary action research, while grounded in the core principles of collaboration, reflection, and change, has seen various adaptations tailored to the specific needs of different contexts and fields. These adaptations have led to the emergence of distinct types of action research, each with its unique emphasis and approach.

Collaborative action research

Collaborative action research emphasizes the joint efforts of professionals, often from the same field, working together to address common concerns or challenges. In this approach, there's a strong emphasis on shared responsibility, mutual respect, and co-learning. For example, a group of classroom teachers might collaboratively investigate methods to improve student literacy, pooling their expertise and resources to devise, implement, and refine strategies for improving teaching.

Participatory action research

Participatory action research (PAR) goes a step further in dissolving the barriers between the researcher and the researched. It actively involves community members or stakeholders not just as participants, but as equal partners in the entire research process. PAR is deeply democratic and seeks to empower participants, fostering a sense of agency and ownership. For instance, a participatory research project might involve local residents in studying and addressing community health concerns, ensuring that the research process and outcomes are both informed by and beneficial to the community itself.

Educational action research

Educational action research is tailored specifically to practical educational contexts. Here, educators take on the dual role of teacher and researcher, seeking to improve teaching practices, curricula, classroom dynamics, or educational evaluation. This type of research is cyclical, with educators implementing changes, observing outcomes, and reflecting on results to continually enhance the educational experience. An example might be a teacher studying the impact of technology integration in her classroom, adjusting strategies based on student feedback and learning outcomes.

Community-based action research

Another noteworthy type is community-based action research, which focuses primarily on community development and well-being. Rooted in the principles of social justice, this approach emphasizes the collective power of community members to identify, study, and address their challenges. It's particularly powerful in grassroots movements and local development projects where community insights and collaboration drive meaningful, sustainable change.

Key insights and critical reflection through research with ATLAS.ti

Organize all your data analysis and insights with our powerful interface. Download a free trial today.

Engaging in action research is both an enlightening and transformative journey, rooted in practicality yet deeply connected to theory. For those embarking on this path, understanding the essentials of an action research study and the significance of a research cycle is paramount.

Understanding the action research cycle

At the heart of action research is its cycle, a structured yet adaptable framework guiding the research. This cycle embodies the iterative nature of action research, emphasizing that learning and change evolve through repetition and reflection.

The typical stages include:

• Identifying a problem : This is the starting point where the action researcher pinpoints a pressing issue or challenge that demands attention.
• Planning : Here, the researcher devises an action research strategy aimed at addressing the identified problem. In action research, network resources, participant consultation, and the literature review are core components in planning.
• Action : The planned strategies are then implemented in this stage. This 'action' phase is where theoretical knowledge meets practical application.
• Observation : Post-implementation, the researcher observes the outcomes and effects of the action. This stage ensures that the research remains grounded in the real-world context.
• Critical reflection : This part of the cycle involves analyzing the observed results to draw conclusions about their effectiveness and identify areas for improvement.
• Revision : Based on the insights from reflection, the initial plan is revised, marking the beginning of another cycle.

Rigorous research and iteration

It's essential to understand that while action research is deeply practical, it doesn't sacrifice rigor . The cyclical process ensures that the research remains thorough and robust. Each iteration of the cycle in an action research project refines the approach, drawing it closer to an effective solution.

The role of the action researcher

The action researcher stands at the nexus of theory and practice. Not just an observer, the researcher actively engages with the study's participants, collaboratively navigating through the research cycle by conducting interviews, participant observations, and member checking . This close involvement ensures that the study remains relevant, timely, and responsive.

Drawing conclusions and informing theory

As the research progresses through multiple iterations of data collection and data analysis , drawing conclusions becomes an integral aspect. These conclusions, while immediately beneficial in addressing the practical issue at hand, also serve a broader purpose. They inform theory, enriching the academic discourse and providing valuable insights for future research.

Identifying actionable insights

Keep in mind that action research should facilitate implications for professional practice as well as space for systematic inquiry. As you draw conclusions about the knowledge generated from action research, consider how this knowledge can create new forms of solutions to the pressing concern you set out to address.

Collecting data and analyzing data starts with ATLAS.ti

Download a free trial of our intuitive software to make the most of your research.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

The Action Research Process

Module 1: Action Research

There are various models of the action research process. Some models are simple in their design while others appear relatively complex. Essentially, most of the models share similar elements with small variations.

Action research models begin with the central problem or topic. They involve some observation or monitoring of current practice, followed by the collection and synthesis of information and data. Finally, some sort of action is taken, which then serves as a basis for the next stage of action research (Mills 2011).

• Central Problem / Topic
• Observation / Monitoring
• Collection of Data
• Action Taken

In this course, we will define the action research process as composed of four stages and nine steps:

Image Hotspots

Action Research Process

Click each + icon to expand the steps of the stage:

It is important to note that action research is a flexible, iterative process of continuous improvement, emphasizing adaptability and responsiveness to findings at each cycle.

Kurt Lewin’s approach to action research involves a cyclical, spiral process consisting of several stages, each comprising planning, action, and reviewing the results of the action. This method is aligned with Dewey’s concept of experiential learning and is particularly suited to solving problems in social and organizational contexts.

Action Research Handbook Copyright © by Dr. Zabedia Nazim and Dr. Sowmya Venkat-Kishore is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Memberships

Action Research model (Lewin)

Action Research model: this article explains the concept of Action Research (AR) , developed by Kurt Lewin in a practical way. It covers what AR is, what steps should be taken, based on the model and example and what conditions should be met. After reading you will understand the basics of this research method. Enjoy reading!

Background of Action Research theory

The German-American professor Kurt Lewin was mainly concerned with child psychology.

He became known for his contributions to “ Gestalt psychology ” and in 1951 he carried out ground breaking research into the way in which human behaviour could be changed towards democratic values and leadership. This is why he is considered to be the founder of Action Research .

What is the Action Research model? The theory

Kurt Lewin ’s approach of Action Research is a research method in which the researcher intervenes in and during the research. This serves two purposes: firstly, according to Kurt Lewin , it will bring about positive change and secondly, knowledge and theory will be generated.

It is important that the researcher acts as a social change expert who helps and encourages employees to change their behaviour towards democratic values and leadership. A cooperation between fundamental and applied research is essential in this.

According to Lewin scientific research is best achieved through cooperation between the researcher (academic) and the people in the work field (practitioners).

The definition of Action Research

The term was first suggested by Kurt Lewin . He described the practice as ‘a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action’ that uses ‘a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action and fact-finding about the result of the action’ .

Participatory action research in education

AR is also called Participatory Action Research (PAR). This concerns an individual method of this research method. Other working methods are community-based participatory research and school-wide action research.

Other names for the methodology are action cycle or research cycle . In education, action research refers to various evaluative, investigative, and analytical research methods, which are especially designed to study organizational, academic or educational problems or deficiencies.

In addition, these methods help teachers to develop practical solutions to address the aforementioned problems.

Action Research model and steps, an example of education

It is referred to as a cycle because the method usually consists of a predefined process that is repeated over time. Below is an action research example of what the cycle might look like. The model is aimed at education.

Figure 1 – the steps of action research example in education

1. Selecting focus

The AR-process starts with a reflective action aimed at discerning one or more topics worthy of the teacher’s or researcher’s time. Since different actions and teachers in the classroom are in high demand, all activities should be worthwhile for the researcher.

Therefore, focus selection is considered the first step in the action research process. Focus selection begins with the researcher or team asking questions about which elements of the research benefit practice or learning.

2. Clarifying and establishing theory

The next stage in the AR process is to identify and discern the values, beliefs and theoretical perspectives the researchers have about the focus they have chosen in the first step.

When researchers or teachers are concerned about a particular development in the classroom, it is helpful to first clarify which approach or method would work best. For example, should the teacher set up a reward system? Or should the students experience the consequences of their behavior in a natural way?

3. Identifying research questions

Now that the selection of focus areas has been completed and the perspectives of the researchers or lecturers have been clarified, the next step is to generate research questions that are intended to shape the research.

4. Collecting data

Accurate data and information is important because everyone bases decisions on it. This is also the case for researchers or teachers. Action researchers ensure that the data used to base decisions on is reliable and valid at the same time. Valid in this context means that the information accurately represents and conveys the researchers’ message.

Typically, researchers ensure that they get their information from multiple data sources. Many of them use triangulation. This is a process to increase the reliability and validity of data.

Triangulation is explained as studying or observing an object or information by looking at it from multiple perspectives. This helps a researcher to compare things and look at a topic from multiple angles.

Data collection is one of the trickiest parts of the action research process.

5. Analyzing data

Data analysis usually refers to complex statistical calculations and relationships. However, this is not always the case for teachers and researchers. There are easy-to-use procedures and best practices that help the user identify patterns and trends in the data.

6. Reporting

Although it may sound contradictory, many teachers consider their profession to be lonely. Many teachers spend every day teaching others, designing lessons and doing this on their own. Reporting action research is therefore very important. This usually takes place in an informal setting, unlike the formal setting where scientific research is shared.

7. Action planning

Action planning is also referred to as informed action. This is the final step in the research method process. When a teacher or researcher writes a plan or develops a program, he or she is usually also involved in the planning process. Action planning is more of an approach than a method.

It is a statement of what someone wants to achieve in a certain period of time. Drawing up and executing an action plan is an effective way to achieve goals.

Examples of AR

Different tools are used to support AR, depending on the working method and the problem to be studied. Examples of these methods are:

• Observation of groups or individuals;
• By means of audio and video recordings;
• Through interviews;
• Monitoring and taking notes;
• By means of photos or questionnaires.

Action Research and Intervention

Besides the research of social systems, Action Research is all about solving problems in order to bring about social change. During the research method, the researcher does not merely observe and interpret information but he is also an active participant in the process.

This allows him to intervene faster and better and bring about change. One major advantage is that he will have a better understanding of the problems. Close cooperation with the field will increase the perceptions of the researcher and the practitioners. During research method the focus can be centred on the activities or the research itself.

Conditions for Action Research

For this research method to be successful, Kurt Lewin established a number of conditions must meet:

• the research must be problem-oriented
• the employee (client) must be at the centre
• the current situation (status quo) must be included in the discussion
• the research must produce empirically demonstrable propositions (direct and indirect observations)
• propositions and findings must systematically fit into a useful theory.

Cyclical approach

Changes in accordance with the Action Research approach have the nature of an exception, in which stability (Freeze) is the standard, change the deviation from that standard and behaviour modification (Unfreezing) a response.

This research method is a cyclical process of change and is connected in his change model . During the Unfreezing stage a period of problem awareness takes places (Planning), during the change stage new forms of behaviour are tested (Action) and during the refreezing stage this new behaviour is reinforced and will become a habit over time (Results).

Action Research in practice

Action Research is a form of collective self-reflective enquiry, undertaken by participants in social situations such as employees within an organization.

Because of the research they are able to analyze and improve their own social and/ or educational skills. Research that produces nothing but books will not suffice according to Kurt Lewin .

It’s Your Turn

What do you think? Do you conduct Action research? If so, what are your experiences? If not, which new insights did you get by reading this post? What are in your opinion success factors for conducting Action research?

Share your experience and knowledge in the comments box below.

More information

• Coghlan, D. &amo; Brannick, T. (2014). Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization . Sage Publications Ltd.
• Dickens, L., & Watkins, K. (1999). Action research: rethinking Lewin. Management Learning , 30(2), 127-140.
• Lewin, K. , & Gold, M. E. (1999). Group decision and social change .
• Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems , in: G.W. Lewin (Ed) (1948) Resolving Social conflict. Harper & Row.

How to cite this article: Van Vliet, V. (2021). Action Research model (Lewin) . Retrieved [insert date] from Toolshero: https://www.toolshero.com/change-management/action-research/

Original publication date: 03/14/2021 | Last update: 08/21/2023

Add a link to this page on your website: <a href=”https://www.toolshero.com/change-management/action-research/”>Toolshero: Action Research model (Lewin)</a>

Did you find this article interesting?

Your rating is more than welcome or share this article via Social media!

Average rating 4.6 / 5. Vote count: 13

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

Vincent van Vliet

Vincent van Vliet is co-founder and responsible for the content and release management. Together with the team Vincent sets the strategy and manages the content planning, go-to-market, customer experience and corporate development aspects of the company.

Related ARTICLES

Brookfield Model of Reflection: the basics and four lenses

Gregory Bateson biography, quotes and books

Kurt Lewin biography, change theory and books

Anita Elberse biography, quotes and publications

Burke Litwin Model of Organisational Change

Bridges Transition Model explained

Also interesting.

Change Management Plan: the Basics and Template

Kurt Lewin Change Model explained

After Action Review (AAR): Basics and Template

Leave a reply cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

BOOST YOUR SKILLS

Toolshero supports people worldwide ( 10+ million visitors from 100+ countries ) to empower themselves through an easily accessible and high-quality learning platform for personal and professional development.

By making access to scientific knowledge simple and affordable, self-development becomes attainable for everyone, including you! Join our learning platform and boost your skills with Toolshero.

POPULAR TOPICS

• Change Management
• Marketing Theories
• Problem Solving Theories
• Psychology Theories

ABOUT TOOLSHERO

• Free Toolshero e-book
• Memberships & Pricing

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples

Published on 27 January 2023 by Tegan George . Revised on 21 April 2023.

Table of contents

Types of action research, action research models, examples of action research, action research vs. traditional research, advantages and disadvantages of action research, frequently asked questions about action research.

There are 2 common types of action research: participatory action research and practical action research.

• Participatory action research emphasises that participants should be members of the community being studied, empowering those directly affected by outcomes of said research. In this method, participants are effectively co-researchers, with their lived experiences considered formative to the research process.
• Practical action research focuses more on how research is conducted and is designed to address and solve specific issues.

Both types of action research are more focused on increasing the capacity and ability of future practitioners than contributing to a theoretical body of knowledge.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Action research is often reflected in 3 action research models: operational (sometimes called technical), collaboration, and critical reflection.

• Operational (or technical) action research is usually visualised like a spiral following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”
• Collaboration action research is more community-based, focused on building a network of similar individuals (e.g., college professors in a given geographic area) and compiling learnings from iterated feedback cycles.
• Critical reflection action research serves to contextualise systemic processes that are already ongoing (e.g., working retroactively to analyse existing school systems by questioning why certain practices were put into place and developed the way they did).

Action research is often used in fields like education because of its iterative and flexible style.

After the information was collected, the students were asked where they thought ramps or other accessibility measures would be best utilised, and the suggestions were sent to school administrators. Example: Practical action research Science teachers at your city’s high school have been witnessing a year-over-year decline in standardised test scores in chemistry. In seeking the source of this issue, they studied how concepts are taught in depth, focusing on the methods, tools, and approaches used by each teacher.

Action research differs sharply from other types of research in that it seeks to produce actionable processes over the course of the research rather than contributing to existing knowledge or drawing conclusions from datasets. In this way, action research is formative , not summative , and is conducted in an ongoing, iterative way.

As such, action research is different in purpose, context, and significance and is a good fit for those seeking to implement systemic change.

Action research comes with advantages and disadvantages.

• Action research is highly adaptable , allowing researchers to mould their analysis to their individual needs and implement practical individual-level changes.
• Action research provides an immediate and actionable path forward for solving entrenched issues, rather than suggesting complicated, longer-term solutions rooted in complex data.
• Done correctly, action research can be very empowering , informing social change and allowing participants to effect that change in ways meaningful to their communities.

Disadvantages

• Due to their flexibility, action research studies are plagued by very limited generalisability  and are very difficult to replicate . They are often not considered theoretically rigorous due to the power the researcher holds in drawing conclusions.
• Action research can be complicated to structure in an ethical manner . Participants may feel pressured to participate or to participate in a certain way.
• Action research is at high risk for research biases such as selection bias , social desirability bias , or other types of cognitive biases .

Action research is conducted in order to solve a particular issue immediately, while case studies are often conducted over a longer period of time and focus more on observing and analyzing a particular ongoing phenomenon.

Action research is focused on solving a problem or informing individual and community-based knowledge in a way that impacts teaching, learning, and other related processes. It is less focused on contributing theoretical input, instead producing actionable input.

Action research is particularly popular with educators as a form of systematic inquiry because it prioritizes reflection and bridges the gap between theory and practice. Educators are able to simultaneously investigate an issue as they solve it, and the method is very iterative and flexible.

A cycle of inquiry is another name for action research . It is usually visualized in a spiral shape following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”

Sources for this article

We strongly encourage students to use sources in their work. You can cite our article (APA Style) or take a deep dive into the articles below.

George, T. (2023, April 21). What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 26 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/action-research-cycle/

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research methods in education (8th edition). Routledge.

Naughton, G. M. (2001).  Action research (1st edition). Routledge.

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, primary research | definition, types, & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, what is an observational study | guide & examples.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

1 What is Action Research for Classroom Teachers?

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS

• What is the nature of action research?
• How does action research develop in the classroom?
• What models of action research work best for your classroom?
• What are the epistemological, ontological, theoretical underpinnings of action research?

Educational research provides a vast landscape of knowledge on topics related to teaching and learning, curriculum and assessment, students’ cognitive and affective needs, cultural and socio-economic factors of schools, and many other factors considered viable to improving schools. Educational stakeholders rely on research to make informed decisions that ultimately affect the quality of schooling for their students. Accordingly, the purpose of educational research is to engage in disciplined inquiry to generate knowledge on topics significant to the students, teachers, administrators, schools, and other educational stakeholders. Just as the topics of educational research vary, so do the approaches to conducting educational research in the classroom. Your approach to research will be shaped by your context, your professional identity, and paradigm (set of beliefs and assumptions that guide your inquiry). These will all be key factors in how you generate knowledge related to your work as an educator.

Action research is an approach to educational research that is commonly used by educational practitioners and professionals to examine, and ultimately improve, their pedagogy and practice. In this way, action research represents an extension of the reflection and critical self-reflection that an educator employs on a daily basis in their classroom. When students are actively engaged in learning, the classroom can be dynamic and uncertain, demanding the constant attention of the educator. Considering these demands, educators are often only able to engage in reflection that is fleeting, and for the purpose of accommodation, modification, or formative assessment. Action research offers one path to more deliberate, substantial, and critical reflection that can be documented and analyzed to improve an educator’s practice.

Purpose of Action Research

As one of many approaches to educational research, it is important to distinguish the potential purposes of action research in the classroom. This book focuses on action research as a method to enable and support educators in pursuing effective pedagogical practices by transforming the quality of teaching decisions and actions, to subsequently enhance student engagement and learning. Being mindful of this purpose, the following aspects of action research are important to consider as you contemplate and engage with action research methodology in your classroom:

• Action research is a process for improving educational practice. Its methods involve action, evaluation, and reflection. It is a process to gather evidence to implement change in practices.
• Action research is participative and collaborative. It is undertaken by individuals with a common purpose.
• Action research is situation and context-based.
• Action research develops reflection practices based on the interpretations made by participants.
• Knowledge is created through action and application.
• Action research can be based in problem-solving, if the solution to the problem results in the improvement of practice.
• Action research is iterative; plans are created, implemented, revised, then implemented, lending itself to an ongoing process of reflection and revision.
• In action research, findings emerge as action develops and takes place; however, they are not conclusive or absolute, but ongoing (Koshy, 2010, pgs. 1-2).

In thinking about the purpose of action research, it is helpful to situate action research as a distinct paradigm of educational research. I like to think about action research as part of the larger concept of living knowledge. Living knowledge has been characterized as “a quest for life, to understand life and to create… knowledge which is valid for the people with whom I work and for myself” (Swantz, in Reason & Bradbury, 2001, pg. 1). Why should educators care about living knowledge as part of educational research? As mentioned above, action research is meant “to produce practical knowledge that is useful to people in the everyday conduct of their lives and to see that action research is about working towards practical outcomes” (Koshy, 2010, pg. 2). However, it is also about:

creating new forms of understanding, since action without reflection and understanding is blind, just as theory without action is meaningless. The participatory nature of action research makes it only possible with, for and by persons and communities, ideally involving all stakeholders both in the questioning and sense making that informs the research, and in the action, which is its focus. (Reason & Bradbury, 2001, pg. 2)

In an effort to further situate action research as living knowledge, Jean McNiff reminds us that “there is no such ‘thing’ as ‘action research’” (2013, pg. 24). In other words, action research is not static or finished, it defines itself as it proceeds. McNiff’s reminder characterizes action research as action-oriented, and a process that individuals go through to make their learning public to explain how it informs their practice. Action research does not derive its meaning from an abstract idea, or a self-contained discovery – action research’s meaning stems from the way educators negotiate the problems and successes of living and working in the classroom, school, and community.

While we can debate the idea of action research, there are people who are action researchers, and they use the idea of action research to develop principles and theories to guide their practice. Action research, then, refers to an organization of principles that guide action researchers as they act on shared beliefs, commitments, and expectations in their inquiry.

Reflection and the Process of Action Research

When an individual engages in reflection on their actions or experiences, it is typically for the purpose of better understanding those experiences, or the consequences of those actions to improve related action and experiences in the future. Reflection in this way develops knowledge around these actions and experiences to help us better regulate those actions in the future. The reflective process generates new knowledge regularly for classroom teachers and informs their classroom actions.

Unfortunately, the knowledge generated by educators through the reflective process is not always prioritized among the other sources of knowledge educators are expected to utilize in the classroom. Educators are expected to draw upon formal types of knowledge, such as textbooks, content standards, teaching standards, district curriculum and behavioral programs, etc., to gain new knowledge and make decisions in the classroom. While these forms of knowledge are important, the reflective knowledge that educators generate through their pedagogy is the amalgamation of these types of knowledge enacted in the classroom. Therefore, reflective knowledge is uniquely developed based on the action and implementation of an educator’s pedagogy in the classroom. Action research offers a way to formalize the knowledge generated by educators so that it can be utilized and disseminated throughout the teaching profession.

Research is concerned with the generation of knowledge, and typically creating knowledge related to a concept, idea, phenomenon, or topic. Action research generates knowledge around inquiry in practical educational contexts. Action research allows educators to learn through their actions with the purpose of developing personally or professionally. Due to its participatory nature, the process of action research is also distinct in educational research. There are many models for how the action research process takes shape. I will share a few of those here. Each model utilizes the following processes to some extent:

• Plan a change;
• Take action to enact the change;
• Observe the process and consequences of the change;
• Reflect on the process and consequences;
• Act, observe, & reflect again and so on.

Figure 1.1 Basic action research cycle

There are many other models that supplement the basic process of action research with other aspects of the research process to consider. For example, figure 1.2 illustrates a spiral model of action research proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart (2004). The spiral model emphasizes the cyclical process that moves beyond the initial plan for change. The spiral model also emphasizes revisiting the initial plan and revising based on the initial cycle of research:

Figure 1.2 Interpretation of action research spiral, Kemmis and McTaggart (2004, p. 595)

Other models of action research reorganize the process to emphasize the distinct ways knowledge takes shape in the reflection process. O’Leary’s (2004, p. 141) model, for example, recognizes that the research may take shape in the classroom as knowledge emerges from the teacher’s observations. O’Leary highlights the need for action research to be focused on situational understanding and implementation of action, initiated organically from real-time issues:

Figure 1.3 Interpretation of O’Leary’s cycles of research, O’Leary (2000, p. 141)

Lastly, Macintyre’s (2000, p. 1) model, offers a different characterization of the action research process. Macintyre emphasizes a messier process of research with the initial reflections and conclusions as the benchmarks for guiding the research process. Macintyre emphasizes the flexibility in planning, acting, and observing stages to allow the process to be naturalistic. Our interpretation of Macintyre process is below:

Figure 1.4 Interpretation of the action research cycle, Macintyre (2000, p. 1)

We believe it is important to prioritize the flexibility of the process, and encourage you to only use these models as basic guides for your process. Your process may look similar, or you may diverge from these models as you better understand your students, context, and data.

Definitions of Action Research and Examples

At this point, it may be helpful for readers to have a working definition of action research and some examples to illustrate the methodology in the classroom. Bassey (1998, p. 93) offers a very practical definition and describes “action research as an inquiry which is carried out in order to understand, to evaluate and then to change, in order to improve educational practice.” Cohen and Manion (1994, p. 192) situate action research differently, and describe action research as emergent, writing:

essentially an on-the-spot procedure designed to deal with a concrete problem located in an immediate situation. This means that ideally, the step-by-step process is constantly monitored over varying periods of time and by a variety of mechanisms (questionnaires, diaries, interviews and case studies, for example) so that the ensuing feedback may be translated into modifications, adjustment, directional changes, redefinitions, as necessary, so as to bring about lasting benefit to the ongoing process itself rather than to some future occasion.

Lastly, Koshy (2010, p. 9) describes action research as:

a constructive inquiry, during which the researcher constructs his or her knowledge of specific issues through planning, acting, evaluating, refining and learning from the experience. It is a continuous learning process in which the researcher learns and also shares the newly generated knowledge with those who may benefit from it.

These definitions highlight the distinct features of action research and emphasize the purposeful intent of action researchers to improve, refine, reform, and problem-solve issues in their educational context. To better understand the distinctness of action research, these are some examples of action research topics:

Examples of Action Research Topics

• Flexible seating in 4th grade classroom to increase effective collaborative learning.
• Structured homework protocols for increasing student achievement.
• Developing a system of formative feedback for 8th grade writing.
• Using music to stimulate creative writing.
• Weekly brown bag lunch sessions to improve responses to PD from staff.
• Using exercise balls as chairs for better classroom management.

Action Research in Theory

Action research-based inquiry in educational contexts and classrooms involves distinct participants – students, teachers, and other educational stakeholders within the system. All of these participants are engaged in activities to benefit the students, and subsequently society as a whole. Action research contributes to these activities and potentially enhances the participants’ roles in the education system. Participants’ roles are enhanced based on two underlying principles:

• communities, schools, and classrooms are sites of socially mediated actions, and action research provides a greater understanding of self and new knowledge of how to negotiate these socially mediated environments;
• communities, schools, and classrooms are part of social systems in which humans interact with many cultural tools, and action research provides a basis to construct and analyze these interactions.

In our quest for knowledge and understanding, we have consistently analyzed human experience over time and have distinguished between types of reality. Humans have constantly sought “facts” and “truth” about reality that can be empirically demonstrated or observed.

Social systems are based on beliefs, and generally, beliefs about what will benefit the greatest amount of people in that society. Beliefs, and more specifically the rationale or support for beliefs, are not always easy to demonstrate or observe as part of our reality. Take the example of an English Language Arts teacher who prioritizes argumentative writing in her class. She believes that argumentative writing demonstrates the mechanics of writing best among types of writing, while also providing students a skill they will need as citizens and professionals. While we can observe the students writing, and we can assess their ability to develop a written argument, it is difficult to observe the students’ understanding of argumentative writing and its purpose in their future. This relates to the teacher’s beliefs about argumentative writing; we cannot observe the real value of the teaching of argumentative writing. The teacher’s rationale and beliefs about teaching argumentative writing are bound to the social system and the skills their students will need to be active parts of that system. Therefore, our goal through action research is to demonstrate the best ways to teach argumentative writing to help all participants understand its value as part of a social system.

The knowledge that is conveyed in a classroom is bound to, and justified by, a social system. A postmodernist approach to understanding our world seeks knowledge within a social system, which is directly opposed to the empirical or positivist approach which demands evidence based on logic or science as rationale for beliefs. Action research does not rely on a positivist viewpoint to develop evidence and conclusions as part of the research process. Action research offers a postmodernist stance to epistemology (theory of knowledge) and supports developing questions and new inquiries during the research process. In this way action research is an emergent process that allows beliefs and decisions to be negotiated as reality and meaning are being constructed in the socially mediated space of the classroom.

Theorizing Action Research for the Classroom

All research, at its core, is for the purpose of generating new knowledge and contributing to the knowledge base of educational research. Action researchers in the classroom want to explore methods of improving their pedagogy and practice. The starting place of their inquiry stems from their pedagogy and practice, so by nature the knowledge created from their inquiry is often contextually specific to their classroom, school, or community. Therefore, we should examine the theoretical underpinnings of action research for the classroom. It is important to connect action research conceptually to experience; for example, Levin and Greenwood (2001, p. 105) make these connections:

• Action research is context bound and addresses real life problems.
• Action research is inquiry where participants and researchers cogenerate knowledge through collaborative communicative processes in which all participants’ contributions are taken seriously.
• The meanings constructed in the inquiry process lead to social action or these reflections and action lead to the construction of new meanings.
• The credibility/validity of action research knowledge is measured according to whether the actions that arise from it solve problems (workability) and increase participants’ control over their own situation.

Educators who engage in action research will generate new knowledge and beliefs based on their experiences in the classroom. Let us emphasize that these are all important to you and your work, as both an educator and researcher. It is these experiences, beliefs, and theories that are often discounted when more official forms of knowledge (e.g., textbooks, curriculum standards, districts standards) are prioritized. These beliefs and theories based on experiences should be valued and explored further, and this is one of the primary purposes of action research in the classroom. These beliefs and theories should be valued because they were meaningful aspects of knowledge constructed from teachers’ experiences. Developing meaning and knowledge in this way forms the basis of constructivist ideology, just as teachers often try to get their students to construct their own meanings and understandings when experiencing new ideas.  

Classroom Teachers Constructing their Own Knowledge

Most of you are probably at least minimally familiar with constructivism, or the process of constructing knowledge. However, what is constructivism precisely, for the purposes of action research? Many scholars have theorized constructivism and have identified two key attributes (Koshy, 2010; von Glasersfeld, 1987):

• Knowledge is not passively received, but actively developed through an individual’s cognition;
• Human cognition is adaptive and finds purpose in organizing the new experiences of the world, instead of settling for absolute or objective truth.

Considering these two attributes, constructivism is distinct from conventional knowledge formation because people can develop a theory of knowledge that orders and organizes the world based on their experiences, instead of an objective or neutral reality. When individuals construct knowledge, there are interactions between an individual and their environment where communication, negotiation and meaning-making are collectively developing knowledge. For most educators, constructivism may be a natural inclination of their pedagogy. Action researchers have a similar relationship to constructivism because they are actively engaged in a process of constructing knowledge. However, their constructions may be more formal and based on the data they collect in the research process. Action researchers also are engaged in the meaning making process, making interpretations from their data. These aspects of the action research process situate them in the constructivist ideology. Just like constructivist educators, action researchers’ constructions of knowledge will be affected by their individual and professional ideas and values, as well as the ecological context in which they work (Biesta & Tedder, 2006). The relations between constructivist inquiry and action research is important, as Lincoln (2001, p. 130) states:

much of the epistemological, ontological, and axiological belief systems are the same or similar, and methodologically, constructivists and action researchers work in similar ways, relying on qualitative methods in face-to-face work, while buttressing information, data and background with quantitative method work when necessary or useful.

While there are many links between action research and educators in the classroom, constructivism offers the most familiar and practical threads to bind the beliefs of educators and action researchers.  

Epistemology, Ontology, and Action Research

It is also important for educators to consider the philosophical stances related to action research to better situate it with their beliefs and reality. When researchers make decisions about the methodology they intend to use, they will consider their ontological and epistemological stances. It is vital that researchers clearly distinguish their philosophical stances and understand the implications of their stance in the research process, especially when collecting and analyzing their data. In what follows, we will discuss ontological and epistemological stances in relation to action research methodology.

Ontology, or the theory of being, is concerned with the claims or assumptions we make about ourselves within our social reality – what do we think exists, what does it look like, what entities are involved and how do these entities interact with each other (Blaikie, 2007). In relation to the discussion of constructivism, generally action researchers would consider their educational reality as socially constructed. Social construction of reality happens when individuals interact in a social system. Meaningful construction of concepts and representations of reality develop through an individual’s interpretations of others’ actions. These interpretations become agreed upon by members of a social system and become part of social fabric, reproduced as knowledge and beliefs to develop assumptions about reality. Researchers develop meaningful constructions based on their experiences and through communication. Educators as action researchers will be examining the socially constructed reality of schools. In the United States, many of our concepts, knowledge, and beliefs about schooling have been socially constructed over the last hundred years. For example, a group of teachers may look at why fewer female students enroll in upper-level science courses at their school. This question deals directly with the social construction of gender and specifically what careers females have been conditioned to pursue. We know this is a social construction in some school social systems because in other parts of the world, or even the United States, there are schools that have more females enrolled in upper level science courses than male students. Therefore, the educators conducting the research have to recognize the socially constructed reality of their school and consider this reality throughout the research process. Action researchers will use methods of data collection that support their ontological stance and clarify their theoretical stance throughout the research process.

Koshy (2010, p. 23-24) offers another example of addressing the ontological challenges in the classroom:

A teacher who was concerned with increasing her pupils’ motivation and enthusiasm for learning decided to introduce learning diaries which the children could take home. They were invited to record their reactions to the day’s lessons and what they had learnt. The teacher reported in her field diary that the learning diaries stimulated the children’s interest in her lessons, increased their capacity to learn, and generally improved their level of participation in lessons. The challenge for the teacher here is in the analysis and interpretation of the multiplicity of factors accompanying the use of diaries. The diaries were taken home so the entries may have been influenced by discussions with parents. Another possibility is that children felt the need to please their teacher. Another possible influence was that their increased motivation was as a result of the difference in style of teaching which included more discussions in the classroom based on the entries in the dairies.

Here you can see the challenge for the action researcher is working in a social context with multiple factors, values, and experiences that were outside of the teacher’s control. The teacher was only responsible for introducing the diaries as a new style of learning. The students’ engagement and interactions with this new style of learning were all based upon their socially constructed notions of learning inside and outside of the classroom. A researcher with a positivist ontological stance would not consider these factors, and instead might simply conclude that the dairies increased motivation and interest in the topic, as a result of introducing the diaries as a learning strategy.

Epistemology, or the theory of knowledge, signifies a philosophical view of what counts as knowledge – it justifies what is possible to be known and what criteria distinguishes knowledge from beliefs (Blaikie, 1993). Positivist researchers, for example, consider knowledge to be certain and discovered through scientific processes. Action researchers collect data that is more subjective and examine personal experience, insights, and beliefs.

Action researchers utilize interpretation as a means for knowledge creation. Action researchers have many epistemologies to choose from as means of situating the types of knowledge they will generate by interpreting the data from their research. For example, Koro-Ljungberg et al., (2009) identified several common epistemologies in their article that examined epistemological awareness in qualitative educational research, such as: objectivism, subjectivism, constructionism, contextualism, social epistemology, feminist epistemology, idealism, naturalized epistemology, externalism, relativism, skepticism, and pluralism. All of these epistemological stances have implications for the research process, especially data collection and analysis. Please see the table on pages 689-90, linked below for a sketch of these potential implications:

Again, Koshy (2010, p. 24) provides an excellent example to illustrate the epistemological challenges within action research:

A teacher of 11-year-old children decided to carry out an action research project which involved a change in style in teaching mathematics. Instead of giving children mathematical tasks displaying the subject as abstract principles, she made links with other subjects which she believed would encourage children to see mathematics as a discipline that could improve their understanding of the environment and historic events. At the conclusion of the project, the teacher reported that applicable mathematics generated greater enthusiasm and understanding of the subject.

The educator/researcher engaged in action research-based inquiry to improve an aspect of her pedagogy. She generated knowledge that indicated she had improved her students’ understanding of mathematics by integrating it with other subjects – specifically in the social and ecological context of her classroom, school, and community. She valued constructivism and students generating their own understanding of mathematics based on related topics in other subjects. Action researchers working in a social context do not generate certain knowledge, but knowledge that emerges and can be observed and researched again, building upon their knowledge each time.

Researcher Positionality in Action Research

In this first chapter, we have discussed a lot about the role of experiences in sparking the research process in the classroom. Your experiences as an educator will shape how you approach action research in your classroom. Your experiences as a person in general will also shape how you create knowledge from your research process. In particular, your experiences will shape how you make meaning from your findings. It is important to be clear about your experiences when developing your methodology too. This is referred to as researcher positionality. Maher and Tetreault (1993, p. 118) define positionality as:

Gender, race, class, and other aspects of our identities are markers of relational positions rather than essential qualities. Knowledge is valid when it includes an acknowledgment of the knower’s specific position in any context, because changing contextual and relational factors are crucial for defining identities and our knowledge in any given situation.

By presenting your positionality in the research process, you are signifying the type of socially constructed, and other types of, knowledge you will be using to make sense of the data. As Maher and Tetreault explain, this increases the trustworthiness of your conclusions about the data. This would not be possible with a positivist ontology. We will discuss positionality more in chapter 6, but we wanted to connect it to the overall theoretical underpinnings of action research.

Advantages of Engaging in Action Research in the Classroom

In the following chapters, we will discuss how action research takes shape in your classroom, and we wanted to briefly summarize the key advantages to action research methodology over other types of research methodology. As Koshy (2010, p. 25) notes, action research provides useful methodology for school and classroom research because:

Advantages of Action Research for the Classroom

• research can be set within a specific context or situation;
• researchers can be participants – they don’t have to be distant and detached from the situation;
• it involves continuous evaluation and modifications can be made easily as the project progresses;
• there are opportunities for theory to emerge from the research rather than always follow a previously formulated theory;
• the study can lead to open-ended outcomes;
• through action research, a researcher can bring a story to life.

Action Research Copyright © by J. Spencer Clark; Suzanne Porath; Julie Thiele; and Morgan Jobe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Using action research for change in organizations: processes, reflections and outcomes

Journal of Work-Applied Management

ISSN : 2205-2062

Article publication date: 18 June 2018

Issue publication date: 17 July 2018

The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary and recommendations on systemic approaches to designing and implementing change in organisations.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper is a viewpoint on successful change management techniques using action research based on experience in the use of systemic thinking and systems practices.

The use of a systems approach to change using relevant systems practices enables more successful change outcomes.

Practical implications

Change management practitioners should utilise systemic approaches to enable more successful change implementation.

Originality/value

The paper provides valuable advice for practitioners and researchers in change management through the author’s unique experience in systemic change processes.

• Systems thinking

Action research

• Soft systems methodology

Molineux, J. (2018), "Using action research for change in organizations: processes, reflections and outcomes", Journal of Work-Applied Management , Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 19-34. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-03-2017-0007

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2018, John Molineux

Published in the Journal of Work-Applied Management . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

The purpose of this viewpoint is to encourage readers to think more broadly about organisational interventions, and the thought processes involved in bringing about change, by providing a range of techniques that have helped me implement successful organisational change programs over the last twenty years. I give brief descriptions of a range of techniques and their application in change programs, but first I explore why success in change programs is often difficult to achieve.

Understanding change

What does successful transformational organisational change look like and how do you implement it so that it can be sustained over time? Many organisations have tried it, but according to Smith (2003) only 19 per cent of organisations were successful at it, in his review of four studies and a total of 284 cases. A McKinsey study reported by Isern and Pung (2007) reported that in a survey of 1,536 executives that only 38 per cent of transformational change initiatives were successful. In reflecting on this problem, the purpose of this paper is to explain how transformational change can be successful with a viewpoint from my experience and understanding of change, using examples from several projects.

In undertaking major change programs, organisations often utilise consultants who may recommend or use eight-step or ten-step programs which are largely “off-the-shelf” and may not be contextually relevant for the organisation. Many organisational managers may find it difficult to fit a step-by-step process and apply it in the real world, as we work in complex organisations consisting of people with lots of different views, values, behaviours and interactions. Consenz and Noto (2016) note that traditional strategic management approaches fail because they do not consider systemic properties related to delays, non-linearity, intangible factors and unintended consequences associated with human behaviour and mechanistic approaches. Complex systems in the real world possess nonlinear feedback which allows for emergent behaviour, adaptation, learning and self-organisation ( Richardson, 2008 ). Flood (1999) indicates that changes that emerge from these interactions and behaviours are often unpredictable, and even unknowable.

So how does an organisation enable transformational change in complex organisational contexts? A linear or step-by-step change process is often not appropriate and largely inadequate for complex organisational systems, so Benn and Baker (2009) suggest a whole of systems (or systemic) action research approach as an alternative. Such a systemic action research (SAR) approach ( Coghlan, 2002 ; Burns, 2007 ; Flood, 2010 ) may be used in complex pluralist contexts, due to its focus on the dynamics of whole systems and the adaptive cycles of reflection and rethinking that action research brings. A systems approach brings an understanding of the whole systems involved – internal and external influences, leadership, stakeholders, resources issues, people issues, leverage points and consequences.

My contention here is that a systemic approach to change using action research is more likely to be successful than other approaches.

As a human resources (HRs) practitioner, I noted from experience many years ago that there was a difficulty in achieving sustained organisational change by implementing single HR interventions in isolation from a whole-of-system understanding. For example, a previous organisation I worked for implemented an intervention aimed at improving attendance of staff members. This intervention had some immediate short-term impact, however in the following years, organisational indicators of unplanned leave had returned to previous levels. After discovering the work of Senge (1990) in the early 1990s, I came to realise that these type of interventions were “quick fixes” that dealt largely with surface behaviour and did not reach the underlying systemic structures driving behaviour.

From the mid-1990s I became determined to use systemic thinking in change processes and was involved in the design of several innovative change projects. However, I also found that an important factor in understanding change is the readiness of the organisation to undertake the change ( Armenakis et al. , 1993 ). This “readiness” may involve several considerations, and Rafferty et al. (2013) developed a framework of antecedents of readiness for change that incorporate both individual and collective factors, such as external pressures, internal enablers and personal characteristics, that lead to cognitive and affective change readiness. Another aspect of change was described by Tushman and Romanelli (1985) , who noted that inertia was a force that built resistance to change during periods of equilibrium, and that transformational change often required a contextual crisis and/or a change of top leadership, otherwise it may not work. As illustrated by Sastry (1997) , the ability to change is inversely related to inertia. So, I learned that readiness for transformational change must come from the top of the organisation, and that leadership was essential in driving the change. Although leaders in an organisation can be enthused by innovative ideas and designs, unless they are willing to drive and support the change, the organisation will not be ready for the change.

Is your organisation ready for change?

Are the leaders committed to the change?

Who are the other key stakeholders that need to be involved?

Who or what could derail the change?

What processes are you going to use to work with others in the design and implementation of change?

What are the important systems and processes involved?

What is the likelihood of resistance and inertia?

A detailed examination of the answers would reveal an initial readiness for change and some of the factors that would need to be considered in depth in designing a change implementation strategy. The next sections will give examples of the methods and use of systems tools that can be used in designing and implementing change programs. The methodology used in these projects was action research ( Greenwood and Levin, 1998 ; Reason and Bradbury, 2001 ; Zuber-Skerritt, 2001 ) which enables the researcher to work directly with a particular community in solving a real-world problem. The case studies described here are illustrative examples, and as McManners (2016 , p. 204) notes, combined problem solving with research that was appropriate to each of the cases to “provide both academic rigour and practical relevance”.

Action research is an “orientation to inquiry”, rather than a method, accordingly to Bradbury (2013 , p. 3). Characteristics of action research that are essential include a foundation of research, direct participation in some form by problem owners (often described as co-researchers), and cycles of action, reflection, learning and planning ( McNiff, 1988 ; Dick, 2002 ). Action research is often grounded in strong ethics, such as emancipatory values and an inclusive and dynamic worldview ( Wood and Govender, 2013 ). This ensures authentic collaboration ( Piggot-Irvine, 2012 ) and an up-front identification of intentions ( Whitehead, 2008 ). In doing so, action research contributes to the improvement of social situations while generating knowledge ( Zuber-Skerritt, 2012 ).

The methodology of action research includes a broad range of possible options, and the case illustrations shown in this paper, insider action research was used ( Coghlan, 2001 ). Insider action research can be defined here as action research carried out by member(s) of an organisation on a project within or for that organisation. According to Coghlan et al. (2016 , p. 84) insider action research “offers a unique perspective on the dynamics and issues within the organisation, precisely because it is from the inside of a living system”. It involves managing three interlocking challenges of: pre-understanding of the context situation; organisational politics; and the balance between internal career success and the quality of the action research ( Coghlan and Brannick, 2014 ). As a result of these challenges, insider action researchers need to deal with emergent processes on an ongoing basis.

A sub-set of action research incorporates a systems approach which is titled “SAR” ( Burns, 2007, 2014 ). This form of action research focusses on system wide learning and systemic inter-relationships, and was created in response to intractable problem situations that involve multi-directional causality, vicious cycles or non-linear change. The SAR approach involves larger forms of engagement, where actions are focussed on changing the dynamics of systems to bring about sustainable change ( Burns, 2014 ). The “people strategy” case that I use as an illustration later in the paper is a form of SAR, although pre-dates the conceptualisation of SAR.

Systems practice

A range of systems practices that I have used in organisational change projects are described in this section. Systems practices involve an understanding of systemic thinking, which Espejo (1994 , p. 210) defines as “an understanding of how the parts relate to each other and constitute large wholes, that is, of self-organising processes”. Within this systemic concept of the world, “phenomena are understood to be an emergent property of an interrelated whole” ( Flood, 2010 , p. 269). Systemic thinking helps people gain meaningful insights into events, behaviour, and structure ( Flood, 1999 ). In my opinion, the complexity of an organisation’s environmental context, business strategy, culture and operations and their impacts on one another, can only be properly understood through systemic thinking. This understanding is confirmed through the concept of SAR ( Burns, 2007 ).

Systemic thinking is where the underlying structural solution to the change problem can be developed. As Senge (1990 , p. 53) notes, the structural solution “is the least common and most powerful” as it focusses on the causality of the patterns of behaviour. This is important because only the structural solution addresses the underlying causes of behaviour at a level that patterns of behaviour can be changed ( Burns, 2014 ). As structure induces behaviour, so changing underlying structures can produce different patterns of behaviour ( Senge, 1990 ). Thus, the dynamic nature of the context for change requires systemic understanding of all of the factors to understand the relationship between organisational and contextual factors influencing proposed change ( Burns, 2014 ).

Mapping the system(s)

The first suggested systems practice is to map the system or systems that are the subject of change. To understand the change to be implemented, there is a need to understand the systems that are involved. Mapping the system(s) will help discover key leverage points and uncover potential blockages. The use of diagrams as representations of reality perceived by system owners and stakeholders are a significant aid to thinking about the system ( Lane, 2013 ). This mapping process can be done by using thinking and design tools and in working with and involving key stakeholders and groups as co-researchers and participants.

In developing a good understanding of the system and problems within it, many people only do this superficially. However, the best approach recommended by Senge (1990) is to discover the causality of the issue. One useful technique here is causal loop diagramming (CLD) ( Lane, 2008 ) in order to understand influences and key leverage points. For example, Figure 1 shows a simple CLD relating to population. An explanation of this diagram is that the total population in the centre of this diagram is a stock, which is increased by a flow of births and reduced by a flow of deaths. Births flow into the stock of population and increases the stock in a reinforcing loop – the more population, the more births. However, deaths reduce the stock of population, which occurs in a balancing loop (see Coyle, 1998, 2000 for further examples). These diagrams can become quite complex when there are a lot of variables that interact, so drawing a number of these diagrams as sub-systems is another option. CLDs were used in the People Strategy design (described in a later section) process to understand sub-system causality and to assess potential leverage points for change.

To understand the human influence in a hierarchy of causality, Figure 2 shows a pyramid model ( Senge, 1990 ). Based on an earlier example of absenteeism, this thinking model could be explained in terms of the thinking that is driving the system. For example, if the CEO of an organisation has a worldview that employees are not to be trusted, then the CEO will initiate systems that reflect that worldview. These systems would likely be based on strict rules, checking, assurance, providing proof, etc., so as to control behaviour as much as possible. So employees experiencing such a system have no flexibility and treat leave as an entitlement, often maximising potential absenteeism. Alternatively, if the CEO does trust employees to do good work, the organisation will likely have a policy that is more flexible, that allows some freedom for employees to take leave when it is needed. With this worldview, most employees who are trusted are likely to take less leave. So in this way, the systemic structure drives behaviour. All of the projects discussed in this paper used the hierarchy to modify systems and influence behaviour.

Thinking models

A couple of useful thinking models are derived from Tony Golsby-Smith (not dated) of Second Road. One of these models is called the ABCD model, which is outlined in Figure 3 . The questions from the model focus system designers on thinking about the current state, developing an image of the future changed state, and then working out what to do to bring about the change, and how to implement it.

The second model is called the Thinking Wave, which is shown in Figure 4 . This model shows a design process over a period of time where convergent thinking occurs in an iterative process between an executive team and a design team. The top line in the model represents the executive and the bottom line represents the designers. The middle line shows the variation in thinking between the two, which gradually converge to a common view. For example, the executive may come up with an intent, and the design team may respond with an initial conceptual design. However, there may be unforeseen issues with the design, which causes further feedback. Over time, the issues are resolved and the design converges. Both Figures 3 and 4 models were used in the design phase of the people strategy project, as further described in a later section.

User-based design

When designing new systems, it is important to involve end-users. A design method titled “User-based design” (see Molineux, 2014 ) is aligned to Romme’s (2003) seven values and ideas on design. It is most useful in bringing the views of end-users to the design table, so that the new system can be designed in a way that meets the needs of the end-users of the system. Table I shows a comparison of user-based design with the seven values and ideas of Romme (2003) . An important aspect of user-based design is the three “voices” of design: The voice of intent, the voice of experience and the voice of design. It is recommended that an information designer take on the role of the voice of design, with the project manager the voice of intent. All other stakeholder groups are represented through the voice of experience, which may consist of several stakeholder groups, both separately convened and integrated. It is critical in the method that all stakeholder groups (end-users) are represented and involved in the process. I used this process of design as project manager (and voice of intent) in a project to successfully re-design a health and safety system ( Molineux, 2014 ).

Some aspects of design are discovered through the action of designing and creating, when the interaction of elements may lead to new insights or unexpected outcomes ( Jelinek et al. , 2008 ). It is often the internal components, such as relationships between people with each other and with elements of systems, combined with interaction from the environment outside the organisation that may lead to unexpected consequences or insights. Systems theory helps illuminate this interaction and explains that it leads to emergent properties of these systems and that small changes in the system can lead to large changes in outcomes ( Senge, 1990 ). So design is about creating contexts and meanings that enable the effective interaction of these systems elements to produce intended outcomes ( Jelinek et al. , 2008 ), with the integration of design and practice ( Sarasvathy et al. , 2008 ).

In Table I , the elements of Romme’s (2003) ideal design process are listed, and this includes three values and four ideas that define the content dimension of design inquiry. The values are: each situation is unique; focus on purposes and ideal solutions; and apply systems thinking. The first value is important in relation to situational context, the second focusses on the future ideal design, and the third “helps designers to understand that every unique problem is embedded in a larger system of problems” ( Romme, 2003 , p. 563). The four other ideas that define the values and ideas regarding the process of design are: first, limited information; second, participation and involvement in decision making and implementation; third, discourse as medium for intervention; and fourth pragmatic experimentation ( Romme, 2003 ). The first of these, limited information, guards against excessive data gathering and helps in focussing on the future rather than the past. The second and third, participation and discourse are crucial involvement of stakeholders in assessing solutions. The fourth, pragmatic experimentation is essential for trialling new ideas.

Soft systems methodology (SSM)

A key approach I have used to design new systems was running two- or one-day workshops using SSM. SSM is about applying systems principles to structure thinking about things that happen in the world ( Rose and Haynes, 1999 ). Figure 5 displays the structure of SSM. An example of a project using SSM was in re-designing the performance system in a large Australian government agency. SSM is an approach that allows creativity, understanding, dialogue and participation.

a perceived real-world problem situation;

a process for tackling that situation in order to bring about some kind of improvement;

a group of people involved in this process; and

the combination of these three (intervention in the problem situation) as a whole with emergent properties.

Checkland and Holwell (1998 , p. 164) claim that SSM can be used as “a sense-making device” and additionally, that the methodology itself is inherently creative and flexible. They note that SSM’s principles allow for creativity, with a strong focus on the context of a particular situation. Other researchers have found that SSM allows for the suggestion of new ideas and changing perceptions ( Attwater, 1999 ); enables individuals to be more open to new ideas ( Clarke, 2000 ); and when a process is consciously structured by the use of SSM, it is “more capable of generating insights and producing commitments” ( Checkland, 2000b , p. 823).

In organisations, creativity is important for innovation as well as for the development of new products and processes, and in many organisations, the creative thinking process is enabled through some form of intervention. Amabile et al. (1996 , p. 1155) believe that “creativity by individuals and teams is a starting point for innovation” and that creativity is “a necessary but not sufficient condition” for innovation. However, there are other factors, such as management priorities, production practicalities, organisational culture and politics, which will impact on creative ideas becoming innovative products. To enable innovation, organisations may need to actively intervene in design and development activities. This is where SSM can be used as an enabler for the generation of creative ideas.

One of the most creative elements in SSM is the use of rich pictures, which Checkland (2000a , p. S22) states “are a better medium than linear prose for expressing relationships” and that “pictures can be taken in as a whole and help to encourage holistic rather than reductionist thinking about a situation”. Such rich pictures engage the mind creatively and bring about a form of expression and creativity that is often latent in people.

The generation of learning is central to the use of SSM and the methodology’s ability to facilitate learning is an important aspect of its usefulness in generating creative ideas. Checkland (1981 , p. 213) notes that the outcome of an intervention is “never an optimal solution to a problem, it is rather a learning which leads to a decision to take certain action”.

In the performance system re-design process with the agency, the process consisted of four two-day workshops held in different cities, and based around an SSM Mode 1 design (slightly modified), with the addition of an analysis from SSM Mode 2 of systemic viability, cultural feasibility, and political acceptability; and a self-evaluation adapted from Checkland and Tsouvalis (1997) .

The outcomes from the workshops were that 11 sub-systems were created or redesigned and a total of 73 system changes suggested. Participants also reported a very high level of engagement in the workshops and satisfaction with the outcomes. The context and process of the SSM workshops in this study closely matched the work conditions that enhance creativity, mentioned above. For example, the workshops encouraged freedom of exploration and play. Play is a fairly natural part of SSM, as noted by Clarke (2000 , p. 804), who states that in experiencing SSM, individuals enjoy “rediscovering the fun of work”.

Positive group mood is also correlated to creative performance ( Fredrickson, 2001 ). The mood created in the workshops was noted as being positive, and the methodology lends itself as a process that results in accommodations between conflicting viewpoints leading to real action to improve the situation ( Checkland, 2000b ). In Clarke’s (2000 , p. 804) view, “it allows people to be heard explicitly and encourages the reduction of fear and anger that can sometimes accompany the discussion of ideas”. The SSM process, if facilitated properly, creates an environment that reduces conflict and enhances focus on the issue, accommodating various viewpoints.

Cultural change model

The largest and most significant change project I undertook was the people strategy project, also in a large Australian public sector agency ( Molineux, 2013 ). The transformational change required by the agency involved cultural change, in shifting the organisation’s culture from an “entitlement culture” towards a “performance culture”. However, as Schein (1999) observed, shifting culture in an organisation is an extraordinarily difficult task. In a report of a detailed case study of change in seven hospitals, Huq and Martin (2000) demonstrated that implementing large-scale whole of system change was very difficult, with only one of seven hospitals categorised as highly successful. The poor success rate in organisational cultural change seems to be partly due to organisational change agents’ lack of systemic thinking and understanding of the causal structure and leverage possibilities for sustained change within the organisation’s context.

The model in Figure 6 was developed as a result of the action research process used in people strategy project. It involved major change to HRs and leadership systems and was implemented through 12 organisation-wide sub-projects linked to a common philosophy and set of principles. The design team of four included myself. We were all familiar with Senge’s (1990) and Senge et al. ’s (1994) work and believed that the cultural change would be able to be achieved by changing the systemic structures that caused or enabled certain behaviours to occur within the agency and that all parts of the system needed to be aligned to the new approach, otherwise these components could be working in opposition to each other. Therefore, the change strategy needed to be comprehensive enough to bring about a coordinated, systemic change in the structures that could help shape the culture.

The model at Figure 6 represents a process for integrating strategic HR management with cultural change utilising a systemic approach. The large ellipse at the top of the model is the context and systems thinking aspect of the model. It takes into account key variables such as the business direction, business/economic cycle, current environment including market, competition, etc., and the existing culture of the organisation. The central circle in the model is systems practice which involves the thinking and design models and methods used for the change, such as SSM, CLD and user-based design, described previously. These techniques could be used at any stage of the change process. The various systems techniques enable the user to design implementation processes, engage stakeholders, analyse contexts, evaluate complex dynamic information, and evaluate outcomes. Systemic thinking should avoid “quick fixes”, as the understanding of underlying structure, context and culture will enable the leaders of the organisation to develop a philosophy and design that aims to provide a fundamental solution, rather than creating a symptomatic solution ( Senge, 1990 ). The culture of the organisation could also be affected, even though this would not generally be an intention of management. Such unintended consequences of quick fix solutions will be avoided if systemic thinking is used.

The four rectangles in the model outline the change process embedded in HR systems. First by outlining a design approach, then developing the change strategy, making the changes and evaluating the changes. The outer four circles represent the leadership aspect of the model, and this is critical in providing momentum for change, enunciating new behaviours, and ensuring change is embedded in the organisation’s practices. The arrows in the model show that the elements of the model are purposefully inter-connected. The intentional design drives the leadership requirements for the change strategy. Continual feedback and evaluation in the form of an action research cycle is essential.

A summary of system changes in the cultural change project are included in “Major changes to the Agency’s HR systems”. Results from the people strategy project included sustained cultural change in the organisation, which arose from new and improved HR and leadership systems (as measured over five years following the initial implementation). Results included improved morale, engagement, job satisfaction, leadership, performance, communication, health and safety, and employee relations. Other results include higher levels of feedback and participation in decision making and a greater alignment in individual performance and organisational direction.

Major changes to the Agency’s HR systems were reported in ( Molineux, 2013 ).

stated people (HR) philosophy and principles;

strategic alignment of HR with organisational strategy;

intentional workforce design and planning for the future; strategic use of people data; and

introduction of work types with targeted and differentiated strategies in employment, development and performance.

partnership fostered and focus on commonality of interests and sharing of information; and

quarterly “dialogue days” – discussions with all organisational leaders, cascaded to all staff.

line of sight from corporate plan through to team plans and individual agreements;

widespread use of performance appraisal and feedback, including 360 degree feedback;

mandatory use of performance agreements;

behavioural statements and expectations linked to performance agreements and appraisals;

HR measures built in to overall pay outcomes; and

significant enhancement of reward and recognition programs.

differentiated conditions of employment by work type;

integrated focus on health and safety linked to well-being programme, risk management and early return to work; and

strong focus on diversity, including enhancement of family-friendly working practices.

recruitment practices streamlined and focussed on differentiation according to work type, employer of choice and branding focus; and

focus on talent management and retention.

capability framework developed with focussed learning outcomes, on-line learning system; and

integrated learning assessment.

Reflection on the use of action research and the models

The action research methodology is both participative and reflective. This is important, as in organisational design, reflective thinking is required in the generation of knowledge to be used in the design process ( Heusinkveld and Reijers, 2009 ). It is the combination of the cognitive release of knowledge and the understanding of the structural dynamics of the design situation that can enable improvement to occur ( Barbaroux, 2011 ). This reflection process could be undertaken via a number of methods, including the process of problem formulation, problem diagnosis, design and implementation, followed by evaluation in an iterative process, suggested by Hevner et al. (2004) and Heusinkveld and Reijers (2009) . However, I was more familiar with the action research reflective cycle or spiral, involving planning, acting and observing the process and consequences, reflecting on these processes and consequences, and then replanning, acting and observing, reflecting, and so on, as suggested by Kemmis and McTaggart (2000) .

On reflecting on the experiences from these change programs, there are a range of learning points arising. The first is the importance of involving people in the use of action research processes. For example, in the People Strategy project, each of the 12 sub-projects were involved in workshopping new ideas and designs with stakeholder groups ( Molineux, 2013 ). In the project that utilised user-based design, representative groups of users enabled the new system to be designed in a way that met the needs of user groups, resulting in a very high level of acceptance of the system changes ( Molineux, 2014 ). In the project that involved SSM, the participants of the workshops generated a huge range of creative ideas for implementation of a re-designed system ( Molineux and Haslett, 2007 ). Whilst this reflection is not new about action research (e.g. see Wood and Govender, 2013 ; Zuber-Skerritt, 2013 ), it is emphasised here because it is often missed in organisational change projects ( Burns, 2014 ; Zhang et al. , 2015 ).

The second point is ensuring that the organisation is ready for the change ( Armenakis et al. , 1993 ). Many years ago, I was involved in designing innovative change programs, however even though they got great feedback, they did not get implemented because the leaders in the organisation were not ready for change. The successful change projects given as examples here were all supported by senior leaders in the organisation. The concept of readiness is under-developed according to Rafferty et al. (2013) , who proffer a model that includes both cognitive and affective readiness at individual and work group/organisational levels. As mentioned before, inertia ( Sastry, 1997 ) is a major challenge to overcome and ensuring the climate in the organisation is ready for change should be a starting point. Effective participation should ensure easier and more effective implementation.

The third point is the importance of reflection. Bjørn and Boulus (2011) state that the reflective monitoring of action research processes is essential. In reflecting on the processes involved in the various change projects, it was apparent to me that utilising feedback to stimulate analysis of issues was a critical element in all of these projects. In the people strategy project there were six action research cycles over an 18 month period of implementation of the project. All project leaders and the design team were involved in these workshops, roughly every three months. These participatory evaluation workshops enabled a much more successful implementation of change ( Molineux, 2013 ). We drew on the experience of Checkland’s (1985) understanding of the organised use of rational thought called the FMA model, combined with a process that utilised Mezirow’s (1991) reflective techniques of content reflection, process reflection and premise reflection, as recommended by Sarah et al. (2002) , and included as Figure 7 . During implementation of major change, it is important to reflect on the outcomes of the implementation (A), the methods and techniques used in the change (M), and the strategic thinking and design of the project (F). Similarly, Bjørn and Boulus (2011) describe process of reflective monitoring, including dissenting thought. Such critical reflection is a key component of undertaking effective change.

The fourth point is the essential understanding of systems ( Senge, 1990 ; Burns, 2014 ). Systems practices were used in all of the projects mentioned, including systems mapping through CLD and systems design through SSM and user-based design. The systems practice tools enable the project team and stakeholder groups to obtain a systemic view of the problem context, the systems involved, the underlying systemic structure, and key leverage points in the system.

The fifth point, on reflection, is that an experienced facilitator in action research and systems design processes is essential in guiding and supporting these complex processes that can result in transformational change succeeding in organisations. This point is also made in Sarah et al. (2002) .

The five points above, combined together, result in a unique perspective of action research that is grounded in both theory and practice. As Zhang et al. (2015) state, the overall quality of results, depth of meaningful insights, and contribution to knowledge should be higher in action research projects than traditional research. From my own insights and that of systems theorists mentioned earlier, I would add that systems practice will enhance both the quality of insights and final project outcomes for an organisation using these techniques.

A range of system design processes have been showcased in this paper to provide readers with some ideas about the use of the models illustrated here for change management practice, particularly in using an action research methodology where participation is critical. I would encourage readers who are interested in any of these models to explore them in more detail by reading the source references and websites. In addition, more detailed explanation of the use of the models are included in my earlier articles ( Molineux, 2013 ; Molineux, 2014 ). I would encourage researchers to seek out their own combinations of the models represented here and other change models and thinking tools, for example the work applied learning models of Abraham (2015) , as there is no “one solution” that will work in every organisation or context. I believe there is a great need for more innovative research in change theory and implementation.

Although the practice of action research may take longer than other methodologies, a higher level of acceptance of change occurs when participation levels are also high. For sustainable change implementation, I would therefore recommend the use of action research processes, combined with appropriate systems thinking practices for systems design and change, constructed to be relevant to specific contexts in a range of organisations.

Simple population causal loop diagram

Causal pyramid

The ABCD thinking model

The convergent thinking wave model

Soft Systems Methodology Mode 1

Systemic organisational cultural change model

Reflection model using FMA

The application of Romme’s values/ideas in user-based design

Source: Molineux (2014)

Abraham , S. ( 2015 ), Work-Applied Learning for Change , GCWAL Publications , Adelaide .

Amabile , T.M. , Conti , R. , Coon , H. , Lazenby , J. and Herron , M. ( 1996 ), “ Assessing the work environment for creativity ”, Academy of Management Journal , Vol. 39 No. 5 , pp. 1154 - 1184 .

Armenakis , A.A. , Harris , S.G. and Mossholder , K.W. ( 1993 ), “ Creating readiness for organizational change ”, Human Relations , Vol. 46 No. 6 , pp. 681 - 703 .

Attwater , R. ( 1999 ), “ Pragmatist philosophy and soft systems in an upland Thai catchment ”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science , Vol. 16 No. 4 , pp. 299 - 309 .

Barbaroux , P. ( 2011 ), “ A design-oriented approach to organizational change: insights from a military case study ”, Journal of Organizational Change Management , Vol. 24 No. 5 , pp. 626 - 639 .

Benn , S. and Baker , E. ( 2009 ), “ Advancing sustainability through change and innovation: a co-evolutionary perspective ”, Journal of Change Management , Vol. 9 No. 4 , pp. 383 - 397 .

Bjørn , P. and Boulus , N. ( 2011 ), “ Dissenting in reflective conversations: critical components of doing action research ”, Action Research , Vol. 9 No. 3 , pp. 282 - 302 .

Bradbury , H. ( 2013 ), “ Action research: the journal’s purpose, vision and mission ”, Action Research , Vol. 11 No. 1 , pp. 3 - 7 .

Burns , D. ( 2007 ), Systemic Action Research: A Strategy for Whole System Change , The Policy Press , Bristol .

Burns , D. ( 2014 ), “ Systemic action research: changing system dynamics to support sustainable change ”, Action Research , Vol. 12 No. 1 , pp. 3 - 18 .

Checkland , P. and Holwell , S. ( 1998 ), Information, Systems and Information Systems , John Wiley & Sons , Chichester .

Checkland , P.B. ( 1981 ), Systems Thinking, Systems Practice , John Wiley , Chichester .

Checkland , P.B. ( 1985 ), “ From optimizing to learning: a development of systems thinking for the 1990s ”, Journal of the Operational Research Society , Vol. 36 No. 9 , pp. 757 - 767 .

Checkland , P.B. ( 2000a ), “ Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective ”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science , Vol. 17 No. S1 , pp. S11 - S58 .

Checkland , P.B. ( 2000b ), “ The emergent properties of SSM in use: a symposium by reflective practitioners ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 13 No. 6 , pp. 799 - 823 .

Checkland , P.B. and Tsouvalis , C. ( 1997 ), “ Reflecting on SSM: the link between root definitions and conceptual models ”, Systems Research and Behavioural Science , Vol. 14 No. 3 , pp. 153 - 168 .

Clarke , S. ( 2000 ), “ Features of SSM’s process. In P.B. Checkland, the emergent properties of SSM in use: a symposium by reflective practitioners ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 13 No. 6 , pp. 799 - 823 .

Coghlan , D. ( 2001 ), “ Insider action research projects ”, Management Learning , Vol. 32 No. 1 , pp. 49 - 60 .

Coghlan , D. ( 2002 ), “ Interlevel dynamics in systemic action research ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 15 No. 4 , pp. 273 - 283 .

Coghlan , D. and Brannick , D. ( 2014 ), Doing Action Research in your Own Organization , 4th ed. , Sage , London .

Coghlan , D. , Shani , A.B. and Roth , J. ( 2016 ), “ Insitutionalizing insider action research initiatives in organisations: the role of learning mechanisms ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 29 No. 1 , pp. 83 - 95 .

Consenz , F. and Noto , G. ( 2016 ), “ Applying system dynamics modelling to strategic management: a literature review ”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science , Vol. 33 No. 6 , pp. 703 - 741 .

Coyle , G. ( 1998 ), “ The practice of system dynamics: milestones, lessons and ideas from 30 years’ experience ”, System Dynamics Review , Vol. 14 No. 4 , pp. 343 - 365 .

Coyle , G. ( 2000 ), “ Qualitative and quantitative modelling in system dynamics: some research questions ”, System Dynamics Review , Vol. 16 No. 3 , pp. 225 - 244 .

Dick , B. ( 2002 ), “ Postgraduate programs using action research ”, The Learning Organization , Vol. 9 No. 4 , pp. 159 - 170 .

Espejo , R. ( 1994 ), “ What is systemic thinking? ”, System Dynamics Review , Vol. 10 Nos 2-3 , pp. 199 - 212 .

Flood , R.L. ( 1999 ), Rethinking the Fifth Discipline , Routledge , London .

Flood , R.L. ( 2010 ), “ The relationship of ‘systems thinking’ to action research ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 23 No. 4 , pp. 269 - 284 .

Fredrickson , B.L. ( 2001 ), “ The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions ”, American Psychologist , Vol. 56 No. 3 , pp. 218 - 226 .

Golsby-Smith , T. ( not dated ), available at: www.secondroad.com.au (accessed 11 May 2016 ).

Greenwood , D.J. and Levin , M. ( 1998 ), Introduction to Action Research , Sage , Thousand Oaks, CA .

Heusinkveld , S. and Reijers , H.A. ( 2009 ), “ Reflections on a reflective cycle: building legitimacy in design knowledge development ”, Organization Studies , Vol. 30 No. 8 , pp. 865 - 886 .

Hevner , A.R. , March , S.T. , Park , J. and Ram , S. ( 2004 ), “ Design science in information systems research ”, MIS Quarterly , Vol. 28 No. 1 , pp. 75 - 105 .

Huq , Z. and Martin , T.N. ( 2000 ), “ Workforce cultural factors in TQM/CQI implementation in hospitals ”, Health Care Management Review , Vol. 25 No. 3 , pp. 80 - 93 .

Isern , J. and Pung , C. ( 2007 ), “ Harnessing energy to drive organizational change ”, McKinsey Quarterly , Vol. 2007 No. 1 , pp. 16 - 19 .

Jelinek , M. , Romme , A.G.L. and Boland , R.J. ( 2008 ), “ Introduction to the special issue: organization studies as a science for design: creating collaborative artifacts and research ”, Organization Studies , Vol. 29 No. 3 , pp. 317 - 329 .

Kemmis , S. and McTaggart , R. ( 2000 ), “ Participatory action research ”, in Denzin , N.K. and Lincoln , Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research , 2nd ed. , Sage , Thousand Oaks, CA , pp. 567 - 605 .

Lane , A. ( 2013 ), “ A review of diagramming in systems practice and how technologies have supported the teaching and learning of diagramming for systems thinking practice ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 26 No. 4 , pp. 319 - 329 .

Lane , D.C. ( 2008 ), “ The emergence and use of diagramming in system dynamics: a critical account ”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science , Vol. 25 No. 1 , pp. 3 - 23 .

McManners , P. ( 2016 ), “ The action research case study approach: a methodology for complex challenges such as sustainability in aviation ”, Action Research , Vol. 14 No. 2 , pp. 201 - 216 .

McNiff , J. ( 1988 ), Action Research: Principles and Practice , Routledge , London .

Mezirow , J. ( 1991 ), Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning , Jossey-Bass , San Francisco, CA .

Molineux , J. ( 2005 ), “ Systemic strategic human resource management enables organisational cultural change: an action research study ”, unpublished PhD thesis, Monash University, Melbourne .

Molineux , J. ( 2013 ), “ Enabling organizational cultural change using systemic strategic human resource management: a longitudinal case study ”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management , Vol. 24 No. 8 , pp. 1588 - 1612 .

Molineux , J. ( 2014 ), “ Health and safety system change through user-based design ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 27 No. 3 , pp. 247 - 263 .

Molineux , J. and Haslett , T. ( 2007 ), “ The use of soft systems methodology as a tool for creativity ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 20 No. 6 , pp. 477 - 496 .

Piggot-Irvine , E. ( 2012 ), “ Creating authentic collaboration: a central feature of effectiveness ”, in Zuber-Skerritt , O. (Ed.), Action Research for Sustainable Development in a Turbulent World , Emerald Books , Bingley , pp. 89 - 106 .

Rafferty , A.E. , Jimmieson , N.L. and Armenakis , A.A. ( 2013 ), “ Change readiness: a multilevel review ”, Journal of Management , Vol. 39 No. 1 , pp. 110 - 135 .

Reason , P. and Bradbury , H. ( 2001 ), Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice , Sage , London .

Richardson , K. ( 2008 ), “ Managing complex organizations: complexity thinking and the science and art of management ”, Emergence: CO , Vol. 10 No. 2 , pp. 13 - 26 .

Romme , A.G.L. ( 2003 ), “ Organization as design ”, Organization Science , Vol. 14 No. 5 , pp. 558 - 573 .

Rose , J. and Haynes , M. ( 1999 ), “ A soft systems approach to the evaluation of complex interventions in the public sector ”, Journal of Applied Management Studies , Vol. 8 No. 2 , pp. 199 - 216 .

Sarah , R. , Haslett , T. , Molineux , J. , Olsen , J. , Stephens , J. , Tepe , S. and Walker , B. ( 2002 ), “ Business action research in practice – a strategic conversation about conducting action research in business organizations ”, Systemic Practice and Action Research , Vol. 15 No. 6 , pp. 535 - 546 .

Sarasvathy , S.D. , Dew , N. , Read , S. and Wiltbank , R. ( 2008 ), “ Designing organizations that design environments: lessons from entrepreneurial expertise ”, Organization Studies , Vol. 29 No. 3 , pp. 331 - 350 .

Sastry , M.A. ( 1997 ), “ Problems and paradoxes in a model of punctuated organizational change ”, Administrative Science Quarterly , Vol. 42 No. 2 , pp. 237 - 276 .

Schein , E.H. ( 1999 ), The Corporate Culture Survival Guide , Jossey-Bass , San Francisco, CA .

Senge , P. ( 1990 ), The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of a Learning Organization , Century , London .

Senge , P. , Kleiner , A. , Roberts , C. , Ross , R. and Smith , B. ( 1994 ), Fifth Discipline Fieldbook , Nicholas Brealey , London .

Smith , M.E. ( 2003 ), “ Changing an organisation’s culture: correlates of success and failure ”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal , Vol. 24 No. 5 , pp. 249 - 261 .

Tushman , M.L. and Romanelli , E. ( 1985 ), “ Organizational evolution: a metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation ”, in Cummings , L.L. and Staw , B.M. (Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior , Vol. 7 , JAI Press , Greenwich, CT , pp. 171 - 222 .

Whitehead , J. ( 2008 ), “ Using a living theory methodology in improving practice and generating educational knowledge in living theories ”, Educational Journal of Living Theories , Vol. 1 No. 1 , pp. 103 - 126 .

Wood , L. and Govender , B. ( 2013 ), “ ‘You learn from going through the process’: the perceptions of South African school leaders about action research ”, Action Research , Vol. 11 No. 2 , pp. 176 - 193 .

Zhang , W. , Levenson , A. and Crossley , C. ( 2015 ), “ Move your research from the ivy tower to the board room: a primer on action research for academics, consultants, and business executives ”, Human Resource Management , Vol. 54 No. 1 , pp. 151 - 174 .

Zuber-Skerritt , O. ( 2001 ), “ Action learning and action research: paradigm, praxis and programs ”, in Sankaran , S. , Dick , B. , Passfield , R. and Swepson , P. (Eds), Effective Change Management Using Research and Action Learning: Concepts, Frameworks, Processes and Applications , Southern Cross University Press , Lismore , pp. 1 - 20 .

Zuber-Skerritt , O. ( 2012 ), “ Introduction ”, in Zuber-Skerrit , O. (Ed), Action Research for Sustainable Development in a Turbulent World , Emerald Books , Bingley , pp. 3 - 27 .

Zuber-Skerritt , O. ( 2013 ), “ Transformational community development through emergent learning ”, Action Learning Action Research , Vol. 19 No. 2 , pp. 5 - 24 .

Corresponding author

Related articles, all feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

What is OD and the Action Research Model (ARM)?

• Dr. Nancy Zentis
• October 31, 2019

SHARE THIS POST

The Action Research Model (ARM) was introduced by Kurt Lewin in the late 1930’s.  As a social scientist, his approach involved the researcher as a social change expert who helps the client by supporting and conducting research to help organizations bring about positive, sustainable change. The ARM process encourages collaboration and cooperation among leaders and employees to improve their relationships and communication. According to Lewin, change is best achieved when the researcher (OD Professional) and the client (Senior Leaders) cooperate together to identify needs and implement solutions.

The Action Research Model is the gold standard for organizational change. Through Action Research, the OD Practitioner gains a deeper understanding of the system at hand, while the client group takes ownership of their living system. The OD Professional and the client join forces to achieve the goals of the change process.

Action research is problem centered, client focused, and action oriented . It involves the client system and an OD change agent in conducting a diagnostic, active-learning, problem-finding, and problem-solving process. The client and the change agent collaborate together to identify and prioritize specific problems, analyze data to find the root causes, and develop action plans for coping with problems realistically and practically.

OD change agents use scientific methodology to plan and collect data, form and test hypotheses, and measure results. Although not pursued as rigorously as in a laboratory, it is nevertheless an integral part of the process.

Action research also sets in motion a long-range, cyclical, self-correcting mechanism for maintaining and enhancing the effectiveness of the client’s system by leaving the system with practical and useful tools for self-analysis and self-renewal.  This is called the maintenance, separation, and termination phase, which involves defining a new process, implementing the change, and measuring results.

For the Action Research Model to be successful, several conditions must be established:

• The problem must be owned by two or more members of the organization and tied to organizational goals
• An internal or external change agent (OD Expert) helps lead the change
• Employees must be involved in the feedback process
• Senior leaders must be involved in leading the change and provide resources, support, and involvement

When launching a change initiative, the OD Professional relies on the scientific approach of the Action Research Model to guide them to lead the change and create a customized approach to implement the change.

The OD Professional serves as more of a “helper” role than an “expert” role, although the role can also be a blend between these two. In most cases, the OD Professional leads the client group in every aspect of the project, including:

• Establishing change priorities
• Collecting and interpreting data
• Disseminating and making sense of the results
• Creating action plans based on the results
• Implementing the action plans

The OD Professional demonstrates a wide range of competencies in order to effectively help the client through the change management process.  Some of the competencies include: Organization Systems, Human Interaction, Facilitation, Influence Skills, Planning and Organizing, Problem Solving and Decision Making, Process Improvement, Change Management, Behavioral Science, Research Methodology, Strategic Action Planning, Measurement, Communication, Business Acumen and Strategy, Designing Interventions, and Contracting.

Developing OD competencies can be learned through experience, however, learning from other OD professionals can provide you with the support, advice, guidelines, examples and tools needed to be successful.

To learn more about becoming an OD Professional and the Action Research Model, visit www.instituteod.com .

Dr. Nancy Zentis is the CEO of Institute of OD, offering online certification programs for those interested in Organization Development, Talent Management, Leadership Development and Executive Coaching, and OD Advanced Skills Workshops for ongoing learning.  She can be reached at  [email protected] .  For more information about our certification programs and professional development workshops, please visit our website www.instituteod.com .

Institute of Organization Development

IOD offers online Organization Development Certification Programs to help participants gain skills to advance in their career in the field of OD.  If you are new to OD, you will benefit from the OD Process Consulting Certification Program (ODPC).  If you have been in the field for several years but lack formal OD training, the Organization Development Certification Program (ODCP) will provide you with the tools and skills needed to advance in the field of OD.

IOD’s OD Certification Programs are offered online over 8 months, meeting 3 hours per month.  Each session is delivered through Go-to-training.  Our expert faculty provide interactive discussions, examples, tools, guidelines, and resources to enrich your learning experience.

Testimonies:

This certification program provided me with the resources and tools I needed to practice OD.  The structure and process helped me to be more confident and focus on helping the client achieve their goals.

The practical experience I learned during this program gave me the confidence to support organization change management initiatives.  I used the skills to transfer my knowledge immediately after each session.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Get updates and learn from the best, explore more articles and posts, certifications, educational resources, © 2021 institute of organization development, cancellation policy, privacy policy, diversity, equity, and inclusion (de&i) strategies.

DE&I consulting services focus on helping organizations foster a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace. Consultants assess the organization's current DE&I initiatives, develop DE&I strategies and policies, conduct training on unconscious bias and cultural competence, establish employee resource groups, and guide leaders in creating inclusive leadership practices. They work with organizations to attract and retain diverse talent, create inclusive hiring processes, and implement programs that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion at all levels. DE&I consultants aim to create an environment where all employees feel valued, respected, and have equal opportunities for growth.

Leadership Development Strategies

Leadership Development Strategies focus on cultivating effective leaders within an organization. Consultants work with organizations to assess leadership capabilities, identify leadership gaps, and design leadership development programs that enhance leadership skills, competencies, and behaviors. These strategies may include executive education, coaching and mentoring programs, leadership training workshops, and succession planning initiatives. The aim is to build a strong leadership pipeline and foster a culture of leadership excellence throughout the organization.

Mentoring Program

Mentoring Programs involve establishing formal or informal relationships between experienced employees (mentors) and less experienced employees (mentees) within an organization. Consultants assist organizations in designing and implementing mentoring programs that facilitate knowledge transfer, skill development, and career growth. They establish mentoring guidelines, match mentors and mentees based on specific criteria, provide training and resources for mentors, and monitor the progress of the mentoring relationships. Mentoring programs aim to enhance employee development, engagement, and retention by leveraging the expertise and wisdom of experienced professionals.

Talent Management Strategies

Talent Management Strategies involve designing and implementing initiatives to attract, develop, engage, and retain top talent within an organization. Consultants work with organizations to develop comprehensive talent management strategies that encompass recruitment and selection processes, onboarding programs, performance management systems, career development frameworks, succession planning, and employee retention strategies. The goal is to ensure the organization has the right people in the right roles, with opportunities for growth and development that align with their skills and aspirations.

Executive Coaching, Competency Development, 360° Feedback

Executive Coaching, Competency Development, and 360 Feedback are individual-focused strategies that aim to enhance leadership and professional effectiveness. Consultants provide executive coaching services to senior leaders, offering personalized guidance, support, and feedback to help leaders develop their strengths, address developmental areas, and enhance their leadership capabilities. Competency development involves identifying and developing specific skills and competencies required for success in particular roles or functions. 360-degree feedback involves collecting feedback from multiple sources, including peers, subordinates, and superiors, to provide a comprehensive assessment of an individual's strengths and areas for improvement.

Job Redesign/Analysis

Job Redesign/Analysis is the process of reevaluating and modifying job roles and responsibilities to optimize efficiency, productivity, and employee satisfaction. Consultants analyze existing job descriptions, tasks, and workflows to identify opportunities for improvement. They may conduct job analyses to determine essential skills, competencies, and qualifications required for each role. Based on these findings, consultants provide recommendations for job redesign, such as clarifying roles and responsibilities, redistributing tasks, and implementing automation or technology solutions to streamline processes and enhance job satisfaction.

Performance Management

Performance Management involves establishing systems and processes to monitor, assess, and improve employee performance. Consultants work with organizations to design and implement performance management frameworks that align with organizational goals and values. This includes setting clear performance expectations, defining key performance indicators (KPIs), establishing regular feedback and coaching mechanisms, conducting performance evaluations, and linking performance outcomes to rewards and recognition. Performance management systems aim to drive individual and team performance, align employee efforts with organizational objectives, and support employee development.

Career Planning/High Potentials

Career Planning/High Potentials initiatives involve designing strategies and programs to support employees in planning and advancing their careers within the organization. Consultants work with organizations to establish career development frameworks, provide guidance on career paths and progression opportunities, and assist in identifying and nurturing high-potential employees. They may offer career counseling, development planning, and training programs to enhance employees' skills, competencies, and knowledge needed for career growth. Career planning initiatives aim to engage and retain talented individuals by providing them with a clear path for advancement and professional development.

Culture Strategies

Culture Strategies focus on shaping and transforming the organizational culture to create a positive and productive work environment. Consultants assist organizations in assessing their current culture, identifying areas for improvement, and developing strategies to align the culture with the desired values, behaviors, and goals. This may involve initiatives such as defining core values, establishing cultural norms, enhancing communication and collaboration practices, promoting diversity and inclusion, and fostering a culture of continuous learning and innovation.

Team Development Strategies

Team Development Strategies focus on improving the effectiveness and performance of teams within an organization. Consultants work with teams to enhance communication, collaboration, and decision-making processes. They facilitate team-building activities, provide training on effective teamwork and conflict resolution, and help establish clear roles and responsibilities. Team development strategies may also involve conducting assessments to identify team dynamics and strengths, and designing interventions to improve team cohesion, trust, and productivity.

Organization Change (OCM) Strategy

Organization Change Management (OCM) Strategy refers to the planned approach or roadmap that an organization follows to implement and manage changes within its structure, processes, technologies, or culture. OCM strategies involve identifying the need for change, setting goals, creating a plan, and executing and evaluating the change process. Organization Change Consulting involves developing and implementing effective strategies to manage and navigate organizational change. The consultant focuses on helping organizations transition smoothly from their current state to a desired future state, considering various factors such as technology advancements, market shifts, mergers and acquisitions, or internal restructuring. Consultants specializing in OCM work closely with organizational leaders to identify OCM processes and help implement a consistent approach to change management, and train internal consultants to lead change management projects and provide support throughout the change process. Consultants may develop assessments, develop communication and training programs, and provide guidance on change implementation to ensure successful organizational transitions. OCM design typically includes steps such as stakeholder analysis, communication and training plans, risk assessment, and monitoring progress to ensure a smooth transition and successful adoption of the changes.

Human Resources Strategies

Human resources (HR) consulting services assist organizations in optimizing their HR practices and processes. Consultants work with HR departments to enhance talent acquisition and retention strategies, develop compensation and benefits programs, design performance management systems, implement employee engagement initiatives, and ensure compliance with labor laws and regulations. They may also provide guidance on organizational restructuring, workforce planning, employee relations, and HR technology implementation. HR consultants help organizations align their HR practices with business objectives and create a positive and productive work environment.

Change Management

Change management consulting services support organizations in managing and implementing significant organizational changes. Consultants help identify change management strategies and plans, assess the impact of change, and design effective communication and training programs to support employee adoption and buy-in. They work with leaders and teams to overcome resistance, address cultural and behavioral challenges, and foster a positive change culture. Change management consultants provide guidance throughout the change process, ensuring a smooth transition and successful adoption of new processes, systems, or structures.

Organizational Development Consulting

Organizational development (OD) consulting services focus on helping leaders lead change initiatives to improving organizational effectiveness and results. Consultants work closely with leaders to assess the organization's current state, identify areas for improvement, create action plans and design interventions, and implement changes to enhance employee engagement, teamwork, leadership development, and organizational culture. They facilitate strategic planning, conduct organizational assessments, and implement initiatives such as talent management, succession planning, performance management, and employee training and development programs. OD consultants aim to align people, processes, and systems to drive sustainable organizational growth and change.

Employee Engagement Strategies

Employee Engagement Strategies aim to create a work environment where employees feel motivated, committed, and connected to the organization. Consultants assist organizations in measuring employee engagement levels, identifying factors that influence engagement, and developing strategies to enhance it. These strategies may include initiatives such as fostering a positive work culture, improving communication and recognition practices, providing opportunities for growth and development, promoting work-life balance, and empowering employees to contribute their ideas and opinions. The goal is to create a work environment that fosters high employee morale, satisfaction, and productivity.

Organization Culture Change/Transformation

Organization Culture Change or Transformation involves deliberately altering the beliefs, values, behaviors, and norms that define the culture of an organization. Organization Culture Change consulting involves assisting organizations in transforming their existing culture or establishing a new desired culture within the organization. The organizational culture encompasses shared values, beliefs, behaviors, and norms that shape the way people work and interact within an organization. Culture change consultants help organizations identify their current culture, define the desired culture, and create strategies to bridge the gap between the two. They may conduct cultural assessments, facilitate workshops and training programs, develop communication strategies, and provide guidance to leaders and employees on how to align their behaviors and practices with the desired culture. This change is typically aimed at aligning the organizational culture with the company's vision, mission, and strategic objectives. Culture change initiatives often require a shift in leadership style, employee engagement, communication practices, and organizational practices to create a new cultural environment that supports desired outcomes such as increased collaboration, innovation, or adaptability.

Organization Design/Redesign

Organization Design or Redesign refers to the process of structuring an organization to align its structure, roles, processes, and systems with its strategic objectives. It involves reviewing and potentially revising elements such as reporting lines, departmental structure, job roles and responsibilities, decision-making processes, and overall organizational hierarchy to optimize efficiency, coordination, and effectiveness within the organization, ensuring that it is well-positioned to achieve its goals. Organization Systems Design or Redesign consulting focuses on designing or restructuring the systems and processes within an organization to optimize efficiency, effectiveness, and overall performance. This service involves analyzing existing organizational systems, such as workflows, communication channels, decision-making processes, and information management systems, to identify areas for improvement. Consultants work closely with organizational leaders to redesign these systems, incorporating best practices, automation, and streamlining processes to enhance productivity and achieve organizational goals. They may also provide recommendations on implementing new technologies or software to support the redesigned systems and ensure successful integration within the organization.

Systems Design

Systems Design refers to the process of creating or modifying the systems and processes within an organization to optimize efficiency, productivity, and effectiveness. It involves analyzing the existing systems, identifying areas for improvement, and designing new systems or reconfiguring existing ones to meet organizational goals. Systems design may include aspects such as technology infrastructure, software applications, data management, workflow processes, and automation to enhance operational performance and streamline organizational activities.

Strategic Planning

Strategic Planning is the process of defining an organization's direction, setting goals, and formulating action plans to achieve those goals. It involves assessing the organization's current state, identifying opportunities and challenges, and developing strategies to effectively allocate resources and achieve the desired outcomes. Strategic planning typically includes analyzing the external environment, conducting internal assessments, setting objectives, formulating strategies, and establishing a framework for monitoring and adapting to changes in the business landscape. Strategy consulting services focus on assisting organizations in formulating and implementing strategic plans to achieve their long-term objectives. Strategy consultants also help organizations align their vision, mission, values, processes, and organizational structure with the strategic goals.

Succession Planning

Succession Planning is the process of identifying and developing internal talent to fill key leadership positions within an organization when they become vacant. Consultants work with organizations to create succession planning strategies that align with the organization's long-term goals. They assess the current talent pool, identify high-potential employees, and design development programs to groom them for future leadership roles. Succession planning may involve creating development plans, providing leadership training, and implementing strategies to ensure a smooth transition when key positions need to be filled.