action research model for change

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

• 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

Elisabeth Kubler Ross biography, quotes and books

John Driscoll Model of Reflection explained

Logical Levels of Change (Bateson and Dilts)

Brookfield Model of Reflection: the basics and four lenses

Gregory Bateson biography, quotes and books

Kurt Lewin biography, change theory and books

Also interesting.

Burke Litwin Model of Organisational Change

Bridges Transition Model explained

Change Management Plan: the 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

• Organizational Behaviour
• Change Management
• Action Research for Successful Organizational Change

Action Research is a useful method for facilitating organizational change by collaborating and involving the client in the entire process of diagnostic, problem identification, experiential learning, and problem-solving process.

The entire process of action research is action oriented with the objective of making the change happen successfully. The process equally involves experimentation with the various frameworks in practical situation and application of various theories in various contexts which require change.

In other words, the process of Action Research requires three distinctive stages which are consistent with the Lewin’s Model which describes the three stages of change.

The most commonly used model of action research which is used in the contemporary scenario is Warner Burke’s 7 Step Action Research Model. These 7 steps are Stage of Entry, Contracting, Data Collection, Providing Feedback, Strategic Planning, Planning & Designing Interventions and Evaluating the success of Interventions.

Advantages of Action Research Model

They involve the top management professionals as well as the stakeholders in the process, as without their consent and involvement the objectives of change implementation cannot be achieved.

  Related Articles

• Pre-Requisites for Successful Change Management
• Overcoming Barriers to Change

View All Articles

Authorship/Referencing - About the Author(s)

The article is Written and Reviewed by Management Study Guide Content Team . MSG Content Team comprises experienced Faculty Member, Professionals and Subject Matter Experts. We are a ISO 2001:2015 Certified Education Provider . To Know more, click on About Us . The use of this material is free for learning and education purpose. Please reference authorship of content used, including link(s) to ManagementStudyGuide.com and the content page url.

• Change Management - Introduction
• The Need for Change Management
• Kinds of Change & Barriers to Change
• Senior Managers as Barriers to Change
• Reasons for Resistance to Change
• Individual and Organizational Sources of Resistance to Change
• Techniques for Overcoming Resistance to Change and Selection of Appropriate Technique
• Financial Crisis & Organizational Change
• Complexities in Driving Change
• Organizational Change and Managing Resistance to Change
• Catalysts in Organizational Change
• Creating Sustainable Change
• Top-Down versus Bottom-Up Change
• Fundamental Issues with the Top Down Approach in Change Management
• Role of HR in Change Management
• Innovation and Change Management
• Change Management Programs
• Some Ways to Actualize Change
• Importance of Middle Level Management
• Bureaucracy and Change
• Family Businesses vs Companies
• Change is the only Constant
• Different Types of Change
• What is Strategic Change ?
• Why First 100 Days Targets are a Myth ?
• The Changing Role of Management
• Exponential Change and What it means for Businesses and Workers
• Transactional vs Transformational Leadership in Change Management
• Organizational Learning and Change Management
• Organizational Vision, Mission, Strategy and Change Management
• Models/Approaches to Implement Change Management Programme
• Kurt Lewin’s Change Management Model: The Planned Approach to Organizational Change
• Kotter’s 8 step Model of Change
• Contingency Model of Change Management
• Mintzberg and Quinn’s Model of Change
• Scott and Jaffe Change Model
• Anderson & Anderson’s Change Model
• McKinsey 7S Change Model
• Transformational Change & Change Management
• Models of Transformational Change
• Organizational Change and Transition Management
• Determining Forces of Organizational Change
• Forces of Organizational Change: Planned vs. Unplanned Change and Internal & External Change
• Systems Model of Change Management and Continuous Change Process Model
• Importance of Communication in Change Management
• Psychological Contract and Change Management
• Emotional Competence Framework and Change Management
• Characteristics and Capabilities of Successful Change Agents
• Key Factors in Effective Change Management
• Battle Between Change Agents and Status Quo Interests in Every Organization
• Managing the Transition from Hierarchical to Network Organizational Structures
• Why it is Becoming Difficult to Change the Status Quo in Economies and Organizations?
• Disruptive Initiatives Must be Well Thought and Carefully Executed to Avoid Chaos
• Future Shock, Present Shock, and the Fourth Industrial Revolution
• The Changing Nature of Power in the Age of Networks
• How Organizations Must Learn to Deal with Radical, Disruptive, and Disorienting Change
• Driving Organizational Change by Embracing Agile and Facing the VUCA World
• How Relevant is the Corporate Planning Function in the Digital Age of Agile Organizations
• Paradigm Shift is Needed for Organizations to Succeed in the Digital Age
• The Organizational Challenges as the American Economy Transitions to the Digital Age

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.

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 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.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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 September 3, 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

Module 15: Organizational Change

Models of change management, learning outcomes.

• Analyze models and process for change management

Navigating change is a constant organizational issue, whether it’s on a small or large level. When it’s planned change, managers can stay ahead of change resistance and create a calculated plan to put change in place. There are several models and processes for managing organizational change. Let’s take a look at them now.

Lewin’s Three-Step Model

Kurt Lewin, a researcher and psychologist we studied earlier when we talked about leadership styles, proposed that successful change in an organization should be conducted in three steps: unfreezing, movement, and refreezing.

In the “unfreezing” process, the equilibrium state can be unfrozen in one of three ways. The driving forces, which direct behavior away from the status quo, can be increased. The restraining forces, which hinder movement from the existing equilibrium, can be decreased. Or, managers can put a combination of the two to use.

The second part of the process, “movement,” is the actual implementation of change. New practices and policies are implemented.

In the third step, “refreezing,” the newly adopted behaviors and processes are encouraged and supported to become a part of the employees’ routine activities. Coaching, training and an appropriate awards system help to reinforce.

Lewin’s model of change has four characteristics:

• It emphasizes the importance of recognizing the need for change and being motivated to implement it.
• It acknowledges that resistance to change is inevitable.
• It focuses on people as the source of change and learning.
• It highlights the need to support new behaviors.

Kotter’s Eight Step Plan for Implementing Change

John Kotter, whom we studied earlier when we talked about the difference between managers and leaders, embellished Lewin’s three step model into a more detailed eight step model.

Kotter studied all of the places where failures could occur in Lewin’s model. Kotter recognized that several things needed to be added in:

• a sense of urgency around change
• a coalition for managing the change
• a communicated vision for the change
• the removal of obstacles to accomplishing change
• the continued pursuit of change in spite of apparent victory
• an anchoring of the changes into the organization’s culture

His revised eight steps of change are as follows:

Kotter expanded Lewin’s “unfreezing” step with his first four recommendations. His steps five, six, and seven correspond with Lewin’s “movement” stage and step eight is parallel with the “refreezing” process.

Nadler’s System Model

David Nadler, an American organizational theorist, proposed a system model that suggests that any change within an organization has a ripple effect on all the other areas of the organization. He suggests that, to implement change successfully, a manager must consider four elements:

• Informal organizational elements: communication patterns, leadership, power
• Formal organizational elements: formal organizational structures and work processes
• Individuals: employees and managers, and their abilities, weaknesses, characteristics, etc.
• Tasks: assignments given to employees and managers

In accordance with a systems view, if a change impacts one area, it will have a domino effect on the other areas.

As an example, a company may put out a new travel and entertainment policy. That policy, a formal organizational element, has an impact on information organizational elements, individuals and tasks. A new CEO joins and creates changes throughout the organization, impacting items at every level.

Ultimately, though, outputs are positively impacted. The travel and entertainment policy minimizes work processes and saves the company money. The CEO increases shareholder value.

Action Research

Action research is a change process based on systematic collection of data and then selection of a change action based on what the analyzed data indicate. The process of action research consists of five steps, very similar to the scientific method:

In the diagnosis stage, information is gathered about the problem or concerns. During analysis, the change agent determines what information is of primary concern and develops a plan of action, often involving those that will be impacted by the change. Feedback includes sharing with employees what has been discovered during diagnosis and analysis with the intent of getting their thoughts and developing action plans.

Finally, there is action. Employees and the change agent (this is a person who champions and sees change management from start to successful finish) carry out the actions required to solve the problem. Then, the final step is evaluation, where the action plan’s effectiveness is reviewed and, if necessary, tweaked for better performance.

This approach is very problem focused, where many people approach a problem with a more solution-centered outlook. It also minimizes resistance to change because it involves affected employees all along the process.

Organizational Development

Remember earlier when we said that these models for change don’t usually solve for organizational inertia? To a certain extent, organizational development addresses that. Organizational development is a collection of planned-change interventions, built on humanistic-democratic values, that seeks to improve organizational effectiveness and employee well-being.

The guiding principles of organizational development are:

• Commitment to long-lasting change
• Humanistic approach
• Action research tools
• Focus on process

Organizational development requires the organization to invest a good deal of time and research and it isn’t as much a fix for organizational inertia as it is a prevention of it. Some of the techniques and interventions employed by organizational development departments include the following:

• Sensitivity training. This is training that seeks to change behavior through unstructured group interaction. The objective is to provide subjects with increased awareness of their own behavior and how others perceive them, to facilitate better integration between individuals and organization.
• Survey feedback. The use of questionnaires to identify discrepancies among member perceptions, with discussion and remedies following.
• Team building. High interaction among team members to increase trust and openness.
• Intergroup development. These are efforts to change the attitudes, stereotypes and perceptions that groups have of each other.
• Appreciative inquiry. This process seeks to identify the qualities and strengths of an organization, on which performance improvement can be built. The inquiry usually involves strategizing with employees on performance improvement and “future state” ideals.

Crisis Management

Crisis management is really just the management of unplanned change. When managers unsuccessfully anticipate their competitor’s next move or don’t accurately read the environment, a crisis can occur. It can also occur as the result of organizational inertia.

Crisis management can be avoided by keeping the organization healthy. That is, not allowing it to become inflexible, infusing a certain amount of conflict in order to stave off complacency, and keeping innovation fresh by encouraging experimentation and bringing in new people with new ideas.

Please note that this is not referring in any way to a public relations crisis. “Crises” like Volkswagen’s issue covering up their vehicles’ excessive emissions, or Les Moonves’ poor judgement with the opposite gender at CBS, are a different kind of animal altogether and not what we’re talking about here.

Practice Question

Organizations that can anticipate change, minimize resistance and come out on the other side are far more likely to be successful. Almost always, those companies that suffer from poor change management suffer the consequences financially, often leading to the organization closing its doors. In the next section, we’ll take a look at a few companies that faced change, the decisions they made, and how it worked out for them.

• Models of Change Management. Authored by : Freedom Learning Group. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image: Lewins Three-Step Model. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image: Lewins Three-Step Chart. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image: Kotter Eight Step Plan. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image: Action Research. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution

Action Research

• Reference work entry
• First Online: 01 January 2023
• Cite this reference work entry

• David Coghlan 2  

574 Accesses

Action research is an approach to research which aims at both taking action and creating knowledge or theory about that action as the action unfolds. It starts with everyday experience and is concerned with the development of living knowledge. Its characteristics are that it generates practical knowledge in the pursuit of worthwhile purposes; it is participative and democratic as its participants work together in the present tense in defining the questions they wish to explore, the methodology for that exploration, and its application through cycles of action and reflection. In this vein they are agents of change and coresearchers in knowledge generation and not merely passive subjects as in traditional research. In this vein, action research can be understood as a social science of the possible as the collective action is focused on creating a desired future in whatever context the action research is located.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Action Research As an Ethics Praxis Method

Banks, S., & Brydon-Miller, M. (2018). Ethics in participatory research for health and social well-being . Abingdon: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Bradbury, H. (2015). The Sage handbook of action research (3rd ed.). Sage: London.

Bradbury, H., Mirvis, P., Neilsen, E., & Pasmore, W. (2008). Action research at work: Creating the future following the path from Lewin. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The Sage handbook of action research (2nd ed., pp. 77–92). London: Sage.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bradbury, H., Roth, J., & Gearty, M. (2015). The practice of learning history: Local and open approaches. In H. Bradbury (Ed.), The Sage handbook of action research (3rd ed., pp. 17–30). London: Sage.

Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., & Maguire, P. (2003). Why action research? Action Research, 1 (1), 9–28.034201[1476–7503(200307)1:1].

Article   Google Scholar  

Chevalier, J. M., & Buckles, D. J. (2019). Participatory action research. Theory and methods for engaged inquiry (2nd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.

Coghlan, D. (2010). Seeking common ground in the diversity and diffusion of action research and collaborative management research action modalities: Toward a general empirical method. In W.A. Pasmore, A.B.. (Rami) Shani and R.W. Woodman (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development (vol 18, pp. 149–181). Bingley: Emerald.

Google Scholar  

Coghlan, D. (2016). Retrieving the philosophy of practical knowing for action research. International Journal of Action Research, 12 , 84–107. https://doi.org/10.1688/IJAR-2016-01 .

Coghlan, D. (2019). Doing action research in your own organization (5th ed.). London: Sage.

Coghlan, D., & Brydon-Miller, M. (2014). The Sage encyclopedia of action research . London: Sage.

Coghlan, D., & Shani, A.B.. (Rami). (2017). Inquiring in the present tense: The dynamic mechanism of action research. Journal of Change Management , 17, 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2017.1301045 .

Coghlan, D., Shani, A.B.. (Rami), & Hay, G.W. (2019). Toward a social science philosophy of organization development and change. In D.A. Noumair & A.B.. (Rami) Shani (eds.). Research in organizational change and development (Vol. 27, pp. 1–29). Bingley: Emerald.

Gearty, M., & Coghlan, D. (2018). The first-, second- and third-person dynamics of learning history. Systemic Practice & Action Research., 31 , 463–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-017-9436-5 .

Greenwood, D., & Levin, M. (2007). Introduction to action research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Heron, J., & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3 , 274–294.

Heron, J., & Reason, P. (2008). Extending epistemology within a cooperative inquiry. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The Sage handbook of action research (2nd ed., pp. 366–380). London: Sage.

Huxham, C. (2003). Actionresearch as a methodology for theory development. Policy and Politics, 31 (2), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557303765371726 .

Koshy, E., Koshy, V., & Waterman, H. (2011). Action research in healthcare . London: Sage.

Lonergan, B. J. (2005). Dimensions of meaning. In B. J. Lonergan (Ed.), The collected work of Bernard Lonergan (Vol. 4, pp. 232–244). Toronto: Toronto University Press.

Marshall, J. (2016). First person action research: Living life as inquiry . London: Sage.

Owen, R., Bessant, J., & Heintz, M. (2013). Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society . London: Wiley.

Pasmore, W. A. (2001). Action research in the workplace: The socio-technical perspective. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), The handbook of action research (pp. 38–47). London: Sage.

Revans, R. W. (1971). Developing effective managers . London: Longmans.

Revans, R. (1998). ABC of action learning . London: Lemos& Crane.

Schein, E. H. (2013). Humble inquiry: The gentle art of asking instead of telling . Oakland: Berrett-Kohler.

Shani, A.B.. (Rami), & Coghlan, D. (2019). Action research in business and management: A reflective review. Action Research . https://doi.org/10.1177/1476750319852147 .

Susman, G. I., & Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23 , 582–601. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392581 .

Torbert, W. R., & Associates. (2004). Action inquiry . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Whitney, D., & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2010). The power of appreciative inquiry: A practical guide to positive change . Oakland: Berrett-Kohler.

Williamson, G., & Bellman, L. (2012). Action research in nursing and healthcare . London: Sage.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Trinity Business School, University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

David Coghlan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Coghlan .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Vlad Petre Glăveanu

Section Editor information

Webster University Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Richard Randell

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Coghlan, D. (2022). Action Research. In: Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_180

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_180

Published : 26 January 2023

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-90912-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-90913-0

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Implementing the Action Research Model

• Dr. Nancy Zentis
• August 23, 2015

SHARE THIS POST

Implementing the Action Research Model Change influences every aspect of life. For organizations, change is the way to remain competitive and to grow. Being prepared to initiate, anticipate, and respond positively to change is beneficial to efficiency and sustainability of organizations. To further plan for change to achieve the best results, organizations can implement successful change programs for short and long term. Therefore, the Action Research Model can help to facilitate change.

Action research is problem-centered, client-centered, and action-oriented. It helps involve the client system in a diagnostic, active-learning, problem-finding, and problem-solving process. Further, action research requires change agents, who act as the conduits for delegation and feedback, to take on pivotal responsibilities and information to effectively communicate data.

This data is then introduced in joint, open sessions instead of being simply returned in the form of a written report. The client and the change agent then collaborate in identifying and ranking specific problems, in devising methods for finding their real causes, and in developing plans for coping with them both realistically and practically.

Action research focuses on putting information to action. Accordingly, the OD approach to action research includes three stages:

• STAGE 1 A series of planning actions initiated by the client and the change agent working together. During this stage, the client and change agent begin initial research of the problem(s) and theorize perspectives.
• STAGE 2 The action or transformation phase. This stage requires collaboration and involvement of all active participants.
• STAGE 3 The output or results phase. This final stage produces findings, analysis, conclusions and reflections.

An example of action research is the Warner Burke’s Action Research Model. The Warner Burke’s Action Research Model provides us with a seven-step model to implement change.  This model helps clients identify business needs and challenges, create a contract to define the working relationship and deliverables, collect data to identify the gaps and find the root causes, analyze data to identify priorities and actions needed, identify the interventions needed, and create a project plan. This project plan helps achieve long term goals, implement the interventions, collect feedback to measure results, and transfer the skills and knowledge learned to imbed the process into the culture.

By using the action research model, OD Practitioners demonstrate better skills as facilitators, coaches, counselors, meeting planners, conflict mediators, and process owners.  They transfer their knowledge to the organization in data collection, analysis, statistical tools borrowed from areas such as quality management, strategic planning, communication, problem solving and decision making, team building, culture change, systems thinking, leadership development, and process improvement.

Author:  Dr. Nancy Zentis, CEO of Institute of Organization Development. She can be reached at [email protected].

If you would like to learn more about the Action Research Model and our OD Certification Program, please click on the relevant link below.

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.

MBA Knowledge Base

Business • Management • Technology

Home » Modern Management Concepts » Action Research in Organizational Development

Action Research in Organizational Development

Action research is another view of the organizational change process . It is an organizational change process that is based on a research model specifically one that contributes towards the betterment of the sponsoring organization and contributes to the advancement of knowledge of organizations in general. In Action Research , the change agent is usually an outside person, who is involved in the total change process, from diagnosis to evaluation. This person usually contracts with the sponsoring organization to engage in organizational research, whereas the typical change agent is called in to make a specific change. Action Research in organizational development provides a scientific methodology for managing planned change .

Kurt Lewin described action research 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”. In The Handbook of Action Research, Reason and Bradbury (2006) defined action research as “a participatory, democratic process concerned with developing practical knowing in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes, grounded in a participatory worldview which we believe is emerging at this historical moment. It seeks to bring together action and reflection, theory and practice, in participation with others, in the pursuit of practical solutions of pressing concern to people and more generally the flourishing of individual persons and their communities”. French and Bell (1995) describe Action Research as a “process of systematically collecting research data about an ongoing system relative to some objective, goal, or need of that system; feeding these data back into the system; taking actions by altering selected variables within the system based both on the data and on hypotheses; and evaluating the results of actions by collecting more data”. Shani and Pasmore described “Action research may be defined as an emergent inquiry process in which applied behavioral science knowledge is integrated with existing organizational knowledge and applied to solve real organizational problems. It is simultaneously concerned with bringing about change in organizations, in developing self-help competencies in organizational members and adding to scientific knowledge. Finally, it is an evolving process that is undertaken in a spirit of collaboration and co-inquiry”.

The process of Action Research consists of five steps as explained below:

• Diagnosis: In the first step, the change agent gathers information about problems, anxieties and required changes from members of the organization. The information is gathered by asking questions, interviews, review of records and listening to employees. The diagnosis will help the agent in finding out what is actually ailing the organization.
• Analysis: The information gathered in the first step is analyzed in this step. The type consistency and patterns of problems are studied. This information is analyzed into primary concerns, problem areas and possible actions.
• Feedback: In this step, the change agent will share will the employees what has been found in steps one and two. Thus, the employees will be actively involved in any change programme. In determining what the problem is and how to create the solution. The change agent, in participation with the employees, develop action plans for bringing about any needed change.
• Action : Action plans decided in the previous step are set in motion in this step. The employees and the change agent carry out the specific actions to correct the problems that have been identified.
• Evaluation: As action research provides a scientific methodology for managing the planned change, in the final step, the change agent evaluates the effectiveness of the action plans. Using the initial data as the benchmark, any subsequent changes can be compared and evaluated.

Action research is a very important change process. It is a problem focused method. The change agent looks for problems and on the basis of the problems he decides the change action. Since employees are actively involved in the change process, the resistance to change is reduced. The evaluation of the organization and any changes taken to improve it over a period of change can provide valuable information to both the organization and the researcher.

Related posts:

• Organizational Development through Team Building
• Intergroup Interventions in Organizational Development
• Survey Feedback as an Organizational Development Tool
• Guide to the Development of Research Questionnaires
• Strategic Business Decisions on Research and Development (R&D)
• Organizational Development Through Management by Objectives (MBO)
• Modern Aspects of Organizational Structure Development
• Organization Development Interventions
• Personnel Action Systems (PAS)
• Role of the Change Agent In Organizational Development and Change

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *