Page 117 - Crossing Cultural Boundaries - Cees den Teuling

social or educational practices; (ii) the participants’ understanding of these practices and the situations in which they carry out these practices”.
Various types of social groups, e.g. students, colleagues, parents and any other community members can be involved. The main criteria are the shared concern and motivation to address that concern. To be considered as implemented in the framework of AR, the approach should be collaborative and the results should be achieved through the critically examined actions of individual group members. For the purpose of this study, “social and educational practices” mentioned under (i), in the definition are replaced by “organisational and managerial practices”. As group of involved actors, linked together in the underlying study, were researchers/practitioners, entrepreneurs, sole proprietors, managers and staff of the responding and actively participating organisations, to be characterized in a pragmatic form.
The AR process can be explained and defined in a model of cycles spiralling from phase to phase. The phases follow each other in a continuous sequence: (i) planning, (ii) acting, (iii) observing, and (iv) reflecting (Marquardt, 2007). The following model, (Figure 8) stemming from the work of Lewin (1946) and developed further by Kemmis et al. (2013), is helpful for explaining that iterative and continuous process. All stages of the action research are involved: planning the development and research, active intellectual questioning and improvement by practice, observing the results, critical reflection, revision of planning etc.
In line with the theory, technical, practical and emancipator / critical types of AR are differentiated by Zuber-Skerritt (2001). This study’s focus is on the emancipatory AR variant as an inquiry originated by the involved actors (owners, managers, consultants, trainers) acting as researchers in collaboration, directed to a critical / self- critical approach to processes and retrieved outcomes. As “problem owners” they feel the urge to solve the “problem” for which they are (or at least feel) accountable and responsible. All mentioned actors are organised as a “team” and involved in a cyclical process as described before and shown in the “Spiral of AR cycles” below.
Figure 8: The spiral of action research cycle proposed by Zuber-Skerritt (2001, p.15) 115