مقاله سال ۲۰۱۶

 مجله مدیریت خرید و تامین – Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management

Action research can be defined as an emergent inquiry process that integrates theory and action to couple scientific knowledge with existing organisational knowledge and to address real organisational problems together with the people of the system under inquiry (Coghlan, 2011; Shani and Pasmore, 1985; Rapaport, 1970; Lewin, 1947). It is a participatory and collaborative approach and is aimed at bringing change to organisations, developing competences, and contributing to scientific knowledge through a co-inquiry cyclical process (Coghlan and Shani, 2014; Reason and Bradbury, 2008; Shani and Pasmore, 1985).

The epistemological underpinnings of action research are grounded in so-called Mode 2 knowledge production, defined and discussed as being antithetic to the traditional Mode 1 approach (Bartunek, 2011; Hodgkinson, 2001; MacLean et al., 2002; Tran- field and Starkey, 1998; Gibbons et al., 1994). In the Mode 1 approach, knowledge production occurs mainly as a result of an academic agenda. In the Mode 2 approach, knowledge production requires collaboration among academics and practitioners across different academic disciplines; it is developed through a knowledge-in-action process aimed at solving real and contextembedded issues and entails different methodologies (e.g., intervention research, clinical inquiry, appreciative inquiry, collaborative management research, action science, action learning).

The two contrasting modes still animate a vibrant debate within the management research community that is centred on the rigour-relevance gap in managerial research (e.g., Kieser et al., 2015; Bartunek and Rynes, 2014; Hodgkinson and Rousseau, 2009; Shani et al., 2012; Kieser and Leiner, 2009; Bartunek and Rynes, 2006). On the one hand, some Mode 1 scholars claim that collaborating with practitioners may bring a lack of rigour to the research process (e.g., Kieser and Leiner, 2009). On the other hand, Mode 2 scholars show how, in the last decade, much of the management research appearing in top-rated journals has been of little relevance for most practitioners (e.g., MacLean et al., 2002; Bartunek, 2011; Zhang et al., 2015).