Organizational knowledge building through action research

Organizational knowledge building through action research By Lone Hersted and Søren Frimann Department of Learning and Philosophy Aalborg University Lone Hersted, assistant professor, email address: lhersted@learning.aau.dk Søren Frimann, associate professor, email address: frimann@learning.aau.dk Key words Action research, dialogue, organizational learning, management learning, tacit knowledge. Introduction This abstract presents the framework for a forthcoming paper based on a current action research project where we discuss to what extent and how action research can support organizational learning and change processes in relation to organizational knowledge building and knowledge sharing. The project draws on the dialogue tradition within action research (Coghlan et al.; 2010; Reason & Bradbury, 2001; Ripamonti et al 2016) and social constructionist ideas (Cunliffe 2002, 2004; Gergen 2003, 2015; Gergen & Thatchenkery (1996); Cunliffe & Shotter, J. (2006), Shotter 2013; McNamee 2014). Organizational context The project is developed and carried out in close collaboration between the Center for Deafblindness and Hearing Loss (CDH) and Aalborg University. CDH is a regional center located in Northern Denmark who works with: • Accommodation for children, adolescents and adults with deafblindness and hearing loss • Learning activities for children and youth with deafblindness and hearing loss • Teaching and supervision related to deafblindness and hearing loss The project examines and discusses if and how action research can offer a frame for reflexivity, learning, knowledge production and knowledge sharing across the organization and, how action research can support and sustain organizational change through the active involvement of employees and managers in reflexive conversations (Cunliffe 2002, 2004) and initiatives for change. Motivation and roles The overall motivation for the project derives from increased expectations from external stakeholders regarding the inclusion of specialized professional knowledge and research based knowledge within the field of deafblindness and hearing loss. CDH has signed a 4-year contract with The National Board of Social Services, which implies that the center works from a ‘knowledge-based’ approach and has agreed to collect, develop, elaborate and communicate knowledge and share their expertise with external partners e.g. schools and other specialized centers of learning and pedagogy in relation to the target groups. Our paper will discuss different understandings and social constructions of knowledge and, furthermore discuss the question: who defines legitimate knowledge and for whom? Within this frame the project works with organizational learning and change based on research questions and small local projects formulated and carried out by the participants. During the first year (2017) the project involved 24 employees, and the forthcoming year (2018) it will involve 14 managers. In the project we work from a process and change perspective (Shotter 2005; Chia 1996; Tsoukas, & Chia (2002)) based on a dialogical approach. Two internal consultants fulfill the roles as process facilitators of the action research process, and the two researchers from Aalborg University (LH and SF) are contributing with ideas, sparring, qualitative research design and methodology, facilitation of focus group interviews and the development of papers for publishing in collaboration with the participants. Aims of the project The overall aim of the project is to support the experience of coping in relation to the tasks as an employee or a manager in a ‘knowledge based organization’ and the requirements of being capable to work from a ‘knowledge-based’ approach including the collection, development, processing and dissemination of practice-based knowledge in combination with research-based knowledge. In relation to this, the project is paying special attention to the verbalization and externalization of tacit knowledge (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Polanyi, 2009). Through the active engagement of employees and managers the projects seeks to build bridges between practice and theory. Related to this overall aim, the project should contribute to: • Support and strengthen reflexivity, learning and knowledge production in the organizational context • Enhance awareness about the pedagogical practice on a reflected and knowledge-based basis • Promote knowledge sharing among employees and across professional groups. • Strengthen the participants' use of theoretical concepts and professional communication skills • Support organizational learning and an overall organizational identity as a ‘knowledge based organization’ Research question: The research is based on the following overall question: How can we share and co-create knowledge through dialogical and reflexive processes in a collaborative setting for learning, involving employees and managers, including as well the sharing of knowledge throughout the organization? In addition, we are curious to examine whether action research as an inquiry for learning and change can act as an alternative to the New Public Management paradigm? In NPM focus usually is kept on top-down implementation of evidence-based knowledge in pedagogical practice. Data collection and analysis: Our research is based on the collection and analysis of qualitative data from observations through participation, field notes, focus group interviews, documents and posters elaborated during the process, and the forthcoming paper will contain a qualitative analysis of data from two specific cases related to the first year of the project while discussing the use of action research for organizational knowledge building. In the paper we will examine and discuss the challenges, the preliminary findings and future potentials of the project. In relation to this we will explore how the dominant understandings of what it means to be a ‘professional’ working in a ‘knowledge based organization’ can be de-constructed through action research. The data analysis will pay special attention to: • Reflexive process though dialogue • Externalization of tacit knowledge through verbalization • Narratives and discourse including the discursive construction of knowledge, professional identities and relationships • Bridge building between practice and theory • Polyphony, relationships and power (e.g. who defines legitimate knowledge?) • Signs of organizational learning and organizational change Preliminary findings and concluding remarks Our preliminary findings show that there is a great potential in working with action research for organizational knowledge building and bridge building between practice and theory, because this inquiry actively involves participants in experimenting, exploring and verbalizing their own professional practice and, furthermore can inspire participants to seek knowledge from relevant literature and research within their professional field.   Literature Chia, R. (1996). The Problem of Reflexivity in Organizational Research: Towards a Postmodern Science of organization. In: Organization 3(1) pp. 31-59. Coghlan, D. & T. Brannick (2010). Doing Action Research in Your Own Organization. 3rd ed. London: Sage Crevani, L., Lindgren, M., & Packendorff, J. (2007). Shared Leadership: A postheroic perspective on leadership as a collective construction. In: International Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(1), pp. 40-67. Cunliffe, A. (2002). Reflexive Dialogical Practice in Management Learning. In: Management Learning 2002, 33(1) pp. 35-61, March 2002. Sage Publications. Cunliffe, A.L. (2004). On Becoming a Critically Reflexive Practitioner. In: Journal of Management Education, 28 pp. 407–426. Cunliffe, A.L., & Shotter, J. (2006). Wittgenstein, Bakhtin, Management and the Dialogical. In: D. M. Hosking & S. McNamee (Eds.): The Social Construction of Organization (pp. 226-241). Malmö, Sweden: Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press. Gergen, K. J. (2003). Knowledge as socially constructed. In: Gergen, M. and Gergen, K.J. (Eds.). Social Construction: A Reader. (pp.15-17). London: Sage. Gergen, K.J. (2015). From Mirroring to World-Making: Research as Future Forming. Winner of the 2014 essay competition, Independent Social Research Foundation, London, UK. In: Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 45, 2015, pp. 287-310. Gergen, K.J. & Thatchenkery, T. (1996). Organizational Science in a Postmodern Context. In: Journal of applied Behavioral Science vol. 32, pp. 356-378. McNamee, S. (2014). Research as Relational Practice: Exploring Modes of Inquiry. In: G. Simonand A. Chard (Eds.), Systemic Inquiry: Innovations in Reflexive Practice Research pp. 74-94. London: Everything is Connected Press. McNiff, J. and Whitehead, J (2011). All you need to know about action research. Second Edition. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington: Sage Publications. Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. Oxford: Oxford University Press (s. 56 – 73). Nonaka, I, Chia, R. , Holt, R. & Peltokorpi, V. (2014). Wisdom, management and organization In: Management Learning 2014, Vol. 45(4) 365–376. Polanyi, M. (2009): The Tacit Dimension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Reason, P. & H. Bradbury (2008): The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi and Singapore: Sage Publications. Ripamonti, S, Galuppo, L., Gorli, M., Scaratti, G. and Cunliffe, A. (2016). Pushing Action Research toward Reflexive practice. In: Journal of Management Inquiry 2016, vol. 25(1) pp. 55-68. Schön, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Schön, D.A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Shotter (2015). Undisciplining Social Science: Wittgenstein and the Art of Creating Situated Practices of Social Inquiry. In: Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 2015. John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Tsoukas, H. & Chia, R. (2002). On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change. In: Organization Science, 13(5), pp. 567-582. Wittgenstein, L. (1953/2009). Philosophical Investigations. Revised 4th edition by P.M.S. Hacker and J. Schulte. West Sussex (UK): Wiley-Blackwell.