Page 123 - Crossing Cultural Boundaries - Cees den Teuling

“AR cycle”. Additionally, it adjusts and ensures the relationship of the AR system with the surrounding environment.
The “action research cycle” approach is embedded in the underlying research by using several AR cycles in the process, i.e. pilot-interviews > questionnaires > focus group sessions > conclusions and recommendations.
AR showed to be agnostic. The action researcher accepts that their previously generated theories and directions for actions, the objectives, the method of research and the problem can be subject to rethinking. Reformulation of previously accepted theories and action models by the researcher is recognised and accepted to be adjusted and reconsidered when entering an unknown, new situation in a position of a researcher.
The research, conducted for the study at hand is free in its direction, not bond to previously taken positions, hypotheses and theories. Depending on the outcomes of each “AR circle”, new positions can be included and elaborated.
AR, above all, is situational. Suitable AR is not based on replications of previously observed connections between actors and the obtained results but depends on the definitions of present situations by individual researchers and practitioners. Intended results are gained by achieved consensus on planned and carefully implemented actions. In the underlying study existing situation is fundamental in the research process. Questioning practitioners on actual obstacles, barriers and obtained results will give the foundation for the elaborated, balanced outcomes with consensus.
Based on the above mentioned it is expected that AR as the chosen and implemented methodology of the research of “KT in trans-boundary environments” is a valuable and appropriate instrument. Supporting argument is also the premise that AR is both recognized as a scientific instrument in the positivist science criteria and relevant in the generation of well-defined and applicable organisational science. Compared with the options of the positivist approach, AR shows a great potential for the in-depth understanding, management and solution of organisational problems.
Furthermore, for the objective of this study, that is to improve the transfer of organisational and managerial knowledge in trans-boundary environments, the aim of the research is reflected in two essential directions of AR: (i) to involve and (ii) to improve (Carr & Kemmis, 2003). Brown and Paliscar (1982, p. 264) argue that “the goal of improvement is directed towards three areas: practice, the understanding of the practice by the involved practitioners, and the improvement of the situation of practice”. A simple criterion may validate the theory of improvement, i.e. “whether it leads to
121