Action Research Strategies for Researching Organizations and Management Practices

Kelley A. Conrad

University of Phoenix School of Advanced Studies

Action Research – Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) -- Transferring Insight into Practice (TIP)

• An Action Research approach– Origins in Lewin’s (1946) research– Action Science defined by Argyris, Putnam, & Smith

(1985)– Action Inquiry by Torbert (1976)– Action Learning by Mwaluko & Ryan (2000)

General Principles of Action Research

DiagnosingIdentify or

define problem

Action Planning

Consider alternative

Actions

Taking Action

Select Course of Action

EvaluatingStudy

Consequences

Specifying Learning

Identify

Findings

Susman (1983), O’Brien (1998)

Action Research – Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) -- Transferring Insight into Practice (TIP)

• Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) developed over 30 years by Checkland (2000)– Systems Thinking, Systems Practice (1993)– Soft Systems Methodology: A 30 year Retrospective

(1999)– Refined in Learning for Action by Checkland and

Poulter (2006)

Action Research – Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) -- Transferring Insight into Practice (TIP)

• Transferring Insight into Practice (TIP) developed by Huxham and Vangen over 21 years– Working together: Key themes in the management of

relationships between public and non-profit organizations (1993)

– Researching organizational practice through action research: Case studies and design choices (2003)

– Managing to collaborate, the theory and practice of collaborative advantage (2005)

Soft Systems Methodology -Problematical Situations

Begins with a perceived real-world

“problematical” situation.

We identify a situation that makes us think “Something should be done about this, or it needs to be improved.”

Think “problematical situations” NOT “problems”

They can be improved but not “solved”

Soft Systems Methodology-Worldview

Different People have different perspectives business and organizational situations have multiple interacting perceptions

Problematical situations are never static and have two characteristics:

• Different worldviews need to be surfaced and examined• People are trying to act purposefully

SSM using a social learning approach to taking action to improve the problematical situation

Soft Systems Methodology -Problematical Situations

Define the problematical situation and the characteristics of the intervention to improve it

Several SSM strategies:

Rich Pictures

3 Analyses

One – The intervention

Two – Social

Three – Political

Soft Systems Methodology-Rich Pictures

• Informally capture: – the main entities, structures, and viewpoints in the

situation– Structures being used involved– Unique viewpoints– Processes– Current issues that are recognized– Potential issues

Soft Systems Methodology -Example of a Rich Picture

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 26.)

Soft Systems Methodology -Three Analyses

Analysis one – The intervention

Think about the three “roles”

The person who caused the intervention (the client)

The people conducting the investigation (the practitioner)

The people affected by the situation and outcome (other issue owners )

Soft Systems Methodology -Analysis 1

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 29.)

Analysis 1

• Problematical Situation• Practitioner investigates using SSM• Process uses SSM to address how to do the

study• Content of problematical situation addressed by

SSM

Soft Systems Methodology -Analysis 2 - Social

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 31.)

Analysis 2 – Social

• Reviews– Roles both formal and informal– Norms– Values

• Envisioned as a creates and recreates cycle• Asks what are the interacting social roles that

characterize the situation

Soft Systems Methodology -Analysis 3 - Political

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 37.)

Soft Systems Methodology -Analysis 3 - Political

How is the power expressed in this situation?

SSM uses a “Commodities” metaphorWhat commodities signal that power is possessed in the situation?

How are these commodities obtained, used, protected, defended, passed on, relinquished?

Root Definitions (RD) are Central

• Root Definitions (RD) are descriptive statements describing the activity system to be modeled

Soft Systems Methodology -Root Definition PQR Formula

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 40.)

Use SSM to Construct a model of a Purposeful Activity System

• PQR formula guides the RD process

Do P (Purposeful Activity- What to do?)

By Q (How to do it? A Theory for support.)

To Contribute R (Results – Why do it?)• Purpose is to create clarity about the activity that

is appropriate to the Problematical situation

Soft Systems Methodology -Root Definition PQR Formula

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 40.)

Soft Systems Methodology -General Model of any Purposeful

Activity - CATWOE

C = Customers – Those affected by the Activity

Victims or Beneficiaries

A = Actors who perform the Transforming Activities

T = Transforming Process based on Worldview

W = Worldview

O = Owners who could stop the process

E = Environmental Constraints taken as a given

Soft Systems Methodology -General Model of any Purposeful

Activity - CATWOE

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 41.)

Soft Systems Methodology -Root Definition CATWOE Formula

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 40.)

Soft Systems Methodology -Three E’s – Performance Criteria

Efficacy – is the transformation (T) producing the intended outcome?

Efficiency – is the transformation being achieved with minimum use of resources?

Effectiveness – is the transformation helping to achieve some higher level or longer term aim?

The 3 E’s are always relevant in building SSM models but we may add other criteria when appropriate, like Elegance or Ethnicity.

Soft Systems Methodology -Root Definition 3 E’s

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 40.)

Soft Systems Methodology -Introducing Change

• Introducing change can be modeled using SSM• Two key ideas

– What enabling action is needed for the potential change to be accepted?• Recognizes the social context for the change• May require enabling action

– Difficult to define the criteria by which the change will be judged ‘completed’ and/or ‘successful.’

Soft Systems Methodology -Introducing Change

(Checkland & Poulter, 2006, p. 58.)

Soft Systems Methodology -Facilitation

• Use the SSM Model and model building process in consultation with the client to question the perceived real-world situation.

• Structure the discussion/debate about the change.

• Seek accommodations (versions which different people with different worldviews can live with) which meet criteria– Systemically desirable– Culturally feasible

Final Phase is Meta-level reflection, evaluation, and improvement

• Monitor all stages of the SSM model• Refine or redefine criteria for efficacy and

efficiency • Separately define criteria for effectiveness• Evaluate SSM model and results• Take necessary Control Actions• Record in order to Refine model

TIP version of SSM elaboratedAction Research

Susman (1983), O’Brien (1998)

• Eden & Huxham (1996) are proponents of rigorous Action research– Deliberate, Systematic data collection

• Collect all flip charts• Take notes at meetings

– Reflexively review the “data”– Consider how to “justify” the research results

• Accuracy • Generalizability

– Role played by the Researcher-Facilitator

Key Issues with TIP

• The degree to which the research agenda is raised overtly with the participants

• The visibility to participants of the research methods used

• The ambiousness and risk level of the action intervention (likelihood of being favorably perceived)

TIP Model – Including Collaborative Consultation

Inputs

ResearchOutputs

Developing & Testing

Sensemaking, Theory Building, & Writing

Reflexivity

Reflex

ivity

Systematic DataCollection

Sys

tem

atic

Dat

aC

olle

ctio

n

Quick Summary - SSM

• Most discussions in human situations is of poor quality– Topics interact– Participants speak at different levels– Participants bring different judgments to bear– Participants have different worldviews

• SSM can make discussions more coherent and deepen level of thinking (it surfaces the worldviews which govern the way issues are perceived and judged)

• The methodology alone will do the job but SSM can increase the quality of the conversation.

Quick Summary

• The methodology should be treated as a set of principles but that they need to be tailored to the situation

• The the best way to learn SSM is to use it• The principles are very resilient – they work well

in practice even if unevenly applied• The understanding of the problematical situation

is only a springboard to action.

Thank You

What Questions or Comments do you Have?

Thank You