Self-referentiality as a power mechanism

Kristiansen, Marianne; Bloch-Poulsen, Jørgen

doi:10.1177/1476750304047981

Cited by 12 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At this stage, when employee/trainee participants were gradually beginning to voice their opinions on conversations, I was addressed as the owner of training in the organization—a title management executives already claimed. This proves that “self-referentiality” is inevitable in insider action research (Kristiansen & Bloch-Poulsen, 2004). Especially, when I felt that explaining the underlying ideas and rules guiding the research to participants would help drive discussions reflexively, unwittingly, my multiple roles as trainer-instructor and researcher-interviewer was becoming more obvious.…”

Section: From Evaluation Over To Evaluation With Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 66%

Giving ‘power to the people’ in a Nigerian hospital: From evaluation over to evaluation with stakeholders

Chukwu¹

2017

Action Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

''Power to the people'' is a popular political slogan that is used to convey the essence of democracy and participation. This paper derives from an action research intervention to implement participatory evaluation in a medium-sized private hospital in Nigeria, where the author was a training consultant. While the original objective of the intervention was to improve effectiveness of training through participatory evaluation, the study enabled an important outcome: it helped in clarifying and resolving social power differences prevalent in evaluation. The paper therefore contributes to the theory and practice of action research by describing how a researcher may better understand and relate to others with regard to social power. This plays a potentially useful role especially in participatory evaluation.

show abstract

Section: From Evaluation Over To Evaluation With Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 66%

Giving ‘power to the people’ in a Nigerian hospital: From evaluation over to evaluation with stakeholders

Chukwu¹

2017

Action Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Keywords: Collaborative research, reflexivity, othering, emergence, ethics i t a t i v e R e s e a r c h i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s a n d M a n a g e m e 3 Much research in management learning contexts focuses on positive and rewarding incidents when addressing the importance of working with reflexivity in participatory learning processes (Corlett, 2012, p. 117;Cunliffe, 2002). However, within critical, reflexive approaches and in the action research community, recent discussions address how democratic ideals of participatory research can be critiqued (Arieli, Friedman, & Agbaria, 2009;Gunnarsson, 2003;Heen, 2005;Kristiansen & Bloch-Poulsen, 2004;. This article contributes to these discussions by addressing the ethical complexity arising in the co-production of knowledge between researchers and participants.…”

Section: Originality/valuementioning

confidence: 99%

“On slippery ground” – beyond the innocence of collaborative knowledge production

Olesen¹,

Nordentoft

2018

Qual Research in Orgs & Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the ethical complexity and dilemmas, which arise in the co-production of knowledge between researchers and other participants. Design/methodology/approach The starting point for the paper is a narrative from a conference the authors attended where the authors, as researchers, found themselves on slippery and emotionally charged ground. Using a critical, reflexive approach informed by post-structuralism, the ambition was to deconstruct gaps between rhetoric and practice and critique normative understandings of the nature of ethically sound co-production processes in collaborative research. More specifically, at the conference, the authors sought to expose and discuss the gap between the good intentions and the own practice as researchers in a collaborative research project at a major hospital. However, instead of reflexive discussions with the research community, the authors experienced that the conduct was criticized and categorized as unethical practice. Findings Instead of omitting sensitive phenomena from the research process, the authors argue that it is an ethical imperative to investigate these phenomena in order to gain insight into what is at stake in dialogical, reflexive processes not only between researchers and research participants—but also between researchers in the research community. An awareness of the emergent nature of power relations in all processes of knowledge production may strengthen the practical validity of “co-produced” knowledge in action research. Originality/value A poststructuralist perspective on collaborative research processes reveals normative expectations regarding ethical research practice and provides insight into the tensions in collaborative research that arise irrespective of the individual competence (or not) of the researcher.

show abstract

“…Dialogic action research has recently been described as a particular approach to organization development that has dialogue as both its object and its method (Kristiansen & Bloch-Poulsen, 2004). Kristiansen and Bloch-Poulsen explain that in their dialogical approach to AR, organizational members are trained on how to engage in dialogue that eventually leads to practical solutions.…”

Section: Examples Of Dialogic Armentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By means of a first-and second-person inquiry into the their assumptions, beliefs, values and mental models, Kristiansen and Bloch-Poulsen (2004) illustrated how unexamined and taken-for-granted perspectives came to bear on their practice as action researchers working with the Danish company Bang & Olufsen. First, the researchers noticed that during supervision conversations between project managers and their supervising managers, the supervising managers interpreted their colleagues' perspectives according to their own a priori perspectives and ways of thinking.…”

Section: Bang and Olufsen Denmarkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a reframing of action research for human resource and organization development

Maurer

Githens

2010

Action Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose a framework for viewing action research (AR) by considering the level of criticality and the emphasis on methodological process. Specifically, we propose conventional AR, critical AR, and dialogic AR as three broad categories for considering AR. This framework is explored through discussing the philosophical foundations upon which these approaches rest and providing examples of AR studies and conceptual writings in the organizational change and development literature. This literature appears to be dominated by perspectives and discourses close to the conventional AR paradigm, which does not actively acknowledge value stances. A central point of the article is that dialogic AR, informed by pragmatic philosophy and philosophical hermeneutics, represents an emerging, promising perspective. Dialogic AR’s primary concern is to create understanding and mutual learning in and through dialogue while also leading to practical solutions. Practical implications of dialogic AR are also considered, in particular the conditions that need to be present for critical dialogue to flourish and the organizational realities that prevent such dialogue.

show abstract

Self-referentiality as a power mechanism

Cited by 12 publications

References 9 publications

Giving ‘power to the people’ in a Nigerian hospital: From evaluation over to evaluation with stakeholders

Giving ‘power to the people’ in a Nigerian hospital: From evaluation over to evaluation with stakeholders

“On slippery ground” – beyond the innocence of collaborative knowledge production

Toward a reframing of action research for human resource and organization development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About