A scientific methodology for MIS case studies
MIS Quarterly
A review on the use of action research in information systems studies
Proceedings of the IFIP TC8 WG 8.2 international conference on Information systems and qualitative research
Communications of the ACM
Diversity in information systems action research methods
European Journal of Information Systems
Beyond rigor and relevance: producing consumable research about information systems
Information Resources Management Journal - Special issue on the role of business in information technology research
Empirical research in information systems: the practice of relevance
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on intensive research in information systems
Rigor vs. relevance revisited: response to Benbasat and Zmud
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on intensive research in information systems
GIS for district-level administration in India: problems and opportunities
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on intensive research in information systems
A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on intensive research in information systems
Understanding software operations support expertise: a revealed causal mapping approach
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on Intensive research in information systems: using qualitative, interpretive, and case methods to study information technology—third installment
Understanding GDSS in symbolic context: shifting the focus from technology to interaction
MIS Quarterly - Special issue on Intensive research in information systems: using qualitative, interpretive, and case methods to study information technology—third installment
Investigating information systems with action research
Communications of the AIS
The qualitative interview in IS research: Examining the craft
Information and Organization
MIS Quarterly
Style composition in action research publication
MIS Quarterly
A framework for classifying design research methods
DESRIST'13 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Design Science at the Intersection of Physical and Virtual Design
Hi-index | 0.00 |
In dialogical action research, the scientific researcher does not "speak science" or otherwise attempt to teach scientific theory to the real-world practitioner, but instead attempts to speak the language of the practitioner and accepts him as the expert on his organization and its problems. Recognizing the difficulty that a practitioner and a scientific researcher can have in communicating across the world of science and the world of practice, dialogical action research offers, as its centerpiece, reflective one-on-one dialogues between the practitioner and the scientific researcher, taking place periodically in a setting removed from the practitioner's organization. The dialogue itself serves as the interface between the world of science, marked by theoria and the scientific attitude, and the world of the practitioner, marked by praxis and the natural attitude of everyday life. The dialogue attempts to address knowledge heterogeneity, which refers to the different forms that knowledge takes in the world of science and the world of practice, and knowledge contextuality, which refers to the dependence of the meaning of knowledge, such as a scientific theory or professional expertise, on its context. In successive dialogues, the scientific researcher and the practitioner build a mutual understanding, including an understanding of the organization and its problems. The scientific researcher, based on one or more of the scientific theories in her discipline, formulates and suggests one or more actions for the practitioner to take in order to solve or remedy a problem in his organization. Dialogical action research recognizes that the practitioner's experience, expertise, and tacit knowledge, or praxis, largely shapes how he understands the suggested actions and appropriates them as his own. Upon returning to his organization, he takes one or more of the suggested actions, depending on his reading of the situation at hand. The reactions or responses of the problem to the actions or stimuli of the practitioner would embody, in the practitioner's eyes, success or failure in solving or remedying the problem and, in the scientific researcher's eyes, evidence confirming or disconfirming the theory on which the action was based. The scientific researcher may then suggest, based on her theories, additional actions, hence initiating another cycle of action and learning. To illustrate dialogical action research, this paper reconstructs some dialogues between an information systems researcher and a managing director at a European company called Omega Corporation.