oriented on creating organisational/social change agents rather than them (Denis and with for Lehoux, 2009). This is done by participative communities of seeking ‘to create inquiry’… a practice of participation, engaging those who might otherwise be subjects of [through]… research or recipients of interventions to a greater or lesser extent as co-researchers’ (Reason and Bradbury, 2008: 1). Given this orientation on participation, active agents and social change, it is surprising that action research has had modest take-up in industrial relations and sociology of work (Huzzard and Björkman, 2012), despite both containing vibrant labour-oriented traditions (Heery, 2012; Thompson, 2010). Huzzard and Björkman (2012) argue that action research unions and workplace actors in with general should comprise a deeper form of collaborative research (see Denis and Lehoux, 2009) with a on both action and Significantly, this ‘much stronger emphasis collaboration’ (p. 163). enhanced emphasis corresponds with the principles of the organic intellectual (Mackinnon, 2009), as researching agents means rather than being about action. with research in action, This democratic partnership’ with agents at every stage of the research involves ‘a collaborative process, ensuring that knowledge outcomes are co-produced (Huzzard and Björkman, 2012: 163-164). While we support and (2012) understanding of action research, they Huzzard’s Björkman’s omit its widely-held emancipatory principle. As Reason and Bradbury (2008: 5) explain, action research its liberating and emancipatory dimension is a shadow of its full possibility ‘without and will be in danger of being co-opted by the working within the action status quo’. Those research umbrella tradition (see Reason and Bradbury, 2008: 7-8) wanting to emphasise its emancipatory dimension have in response developed (PAR) Participatory Action Research (Kemmis, 2006). PAR is a critical approach that focuses on the research ‘democratizing
oriented on creating organisational/social change with agents rather than for them (Denis and Lehoux, 2009). This is done by seeking ‘to create participative communities of inquiry’… [through]… a practice of participation, engaging those who might otherwise be subjects of research or recipients of interventions to a greater or lesser extent as co-researchers’ (Reason and Bradbury, 2008: 1). Given this orientation on participation, active agents and social change, it is surprising that action research has had modest take-up in industrial relations and sociology of work (Huzzard and Björkman, 2012), despite both containing vibrant labour-oriented traditions (Heery, 2012; Thompson, 2010). Huzzard and Björkman (2012) argue that action research with unions and workplace actors in general should comprise a deeper form of collaborative research (see Denis and Lehoux, 2009) with a ‘much stronger emphasis on both action and collaboration’ (p. 163). Significantly, this enhanced emphasis corresponds with the principles of the organic intellectual (Mackinnon, 2009), as researching with agents means research in action, rather than being about action. This involves ‘a collaborative democratic partnership’ with agents at every stage of the research process, ensuring that knowledge outcomes are co-produced (Huzzard and Björkman, 2012: 163-164). While we support Huzzard’s and Björkman’s (2012) understanding of action research, they omit its widely-held emancipatory principle. As Reason and Bradbury (2008: 5) explain, action research ‘without its liberating and emancipatory dimension is a shadow of its full possibility and will be in danger of being co-opted by the status quo’. Those working within the action research umbrella tradition (see Reason and Bradbury, 2008: 7-8) wanting to emphasise its emancipatory dimension have in response developed Participatory Action Research (PAR) (Kemmis, 2006). PAR is a critical approach that focuses on ‘democratizing the research
WES%20Partisanship%20%28final%29%202012.docx