The growing interest in impact-driven research invites organization and strategy scholars to not merely study, but actively help address grand challenges. This essay explores how action research might offer a robust methodology to impact and study grand challenges by developing theory through action. Action research is introduced, and its contributions, strengths, and limitations are discussed in view of the current conversation about impact-driven scholarly work. Some practical guidance is given to bring action research within reach as a viable approach. The essay concludes with an exploration of how a fuller embrace of action research might help transform academic practice in the interest of urgent planetary change.
AbdallahCBasqueJRouleauL (2017) Designing strategy as practice research. In: CassellCCunliffeALGrandyG (eds) Sage Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 328–344.
2.
ArgyrisCPutnamRSmithD (1985) Action Science. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
ArieliDFriedmanVJ (2013) Negotiating reality: Conflict transformation in natural spaces of encounter. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science49(3): 308–332.
4.
BalogunJHuffASJohnsonP (2003) Three responses to the methodological challenges of studying strategizing. Journal of Management Studies40(1): 197–224.
5.
BansalPSharmaG (2022) Three different approaches to impact: Translating, cocreating, and performing. Business & Society61(4): 827–832.
6.
BansalPSmithWVaaraE (2018) New ways of seeing through qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal61(4): 1189–1195.
7.
BartunekJM (2008) Insider/outsider team research: The development of the approach and its meaning. In: ShaniAB (Rami), MohrmanSAPasmoreWA, et al. (eds) Handbook of Collaborative Management Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 73–92.
8.
BencherkiNSergiVCoorenF, et al. (2021) How strategy comes to matter: Strategizing as the communicative materialization of matters of concern. Strategic Organization19(4): 608–635.
9.
BradburyH (2022) How to Do Action Research for Transformations at a Time of Eco-Social Crisis. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar.
BradburyHGlenzerKKuB, et al. (2019a) What is good action research: Quality choice points with a refreshed urgency. Action Research17(1): 14–18.
12.
BradburyHWaddellSO’BrienK, et al. (2019b) A call for action research for transformations: The times demand it. Action Research17(1): 3–10.
13.
Bradbury-HuangH (2010) What is good action research? Why the resurgent interest?Action Research8(1): 93–109.
14.
CaseyMCoghlanDCarrollA, et al. (2023) Toward a checklist for improving action research quality in healthcare contexts. Systemic Practice and Action Research36(6): 923–934.
15.
CoghlanD (2011) Action research: Exploring perspectives on a philosophy of practical knowing. Academy of Management Annals5(1): 53–87.
16.
CoghlanD (2023) Action research as the social science of change and changing. In: SzablaDBCoghlanDPasmoreW, et al. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Organizational Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 19–46.
17.
CoghlanDBrydon-MillerM (eds) (2014) The Sage Encyclopedia of Action Research. London: Sage.
18.
CoghlanDShaniAB (Rami) (2014) Creating action research quality in organization development: Rigorous, reflective and relevant. Systemic Practice and Action Research27(6): 523–536.
19.
CoghlanDShaniAB (Rami) (2018) Conducting Action Research for Business and Management Students. London: Sage.
20.
CoghlanDShaniAB (Rami)HayGW (2019) Toward a social science philosophy of organization development and change. In: NoumairDAShaniAB (eds) Research in Organizational Change and Development, vol. 27. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 1–29.
21.
CooperriderDLSrivastvaS (1987) Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. In: PasmoreWWoodmanR (eds) Research in Organizational Change and Development, vol. 1. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 129–169.
22.
CornelissenJHöllererMASeidlD (2021) What theory is and can be: Forms of theorizing in organizational scholarship. Organization Theory2(3): 1–19.
23.
EdenCHuxhamC (1996) Action research for management research. British Journal of Management7(1): 75–86.
24.
EdenCHuxhamC (2006) Researching organizations using action research. In: CleggSRHardyCLawrenceTB, et al. (eds) Handbook of Organization Studies, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 388–408.
25.
EgmoseJHauggaard-NielsenHJacobsenSG (2022) Action research in the plural crisis of the living: Understanding, envisioning, practicing, organizing eco-social transformation. Educational Action Research30(4): 671–683.
26.
EisenhardtKMGraebnerMESonensheinS (2016) Grand challenges and inductive methods: Rigor without rigor mortis. Academy of Management Journal59(4): 1113–1123.
27.
EpplerMJPlattsKW (2009) Visual strategizing: The systematic use of visualization in the strategic-planning process. Long Range Planning42(1): 42–74.
28.
Fals-BordaO (2001) Participatory (action) research in social theory: Origins and challenges. In: ReasonPBradburyH (eds) Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage, pp. 27–37.
29.
FreireP (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder & Herder.
30.
FriedmanVJTardieuBAlmeydaG, et al. (2024) Action research for transforming the poverty field. Action Research22(1): 3–14.
31.
GaluppoLGorliMRipamontiS (2011) Playing dissymmetry in action research: The role of power and differences in promoting participative knowledge and change. Systemic Practice and Action Research24: 147–164.
32.
GeartyMRMarshallJ (2021) Living life as inquiry—A systemic practice for change agents. Systemic Practice and Action Research34: 441–462.
33.
GebhardAAllenWSPinoF (2023) Antiracism in appreciative inquiry: Generative tensions and collective reflexivity. Action Research0(0): 1–17.
34.
GélineauLDupéréSRichardJ, et al. (2024) Participatory action research: The woven collective analysis approach to recognize experiential knowledge of poverty. Action Research22(1): 32–50.
35.
GergenKJ (2015) From mirroring to world-making: Research as future forming. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior45(3): 287–310.
36.
GrayB (2023) A call for activist scholarship in organizational theorizing. Journal of Management Inquiry32(3): 179–185.
37.
GreenwoodDJ (2002) Action research: Unfulfilled promises and unmet challenges. Concepts and Transformation7(2): 117–139.
38.
GreenwoodDJ (2007) Pragmatic action research. International Journal of Action Research3: 131–148.
39.
GümüsayAAReineckeJ (2024) Imagining desirable futures: A call for prospective theorizing with speculative rigour. Organization Theory5: 1–23.
40.
HeronJReasonP (2008) Extending epistemology within a co-operative inquiry. In: ReasonPBradburyH (eds) Sage Handbook of Action Research, 2nd edn.London: Sage, pp. 366–380.
41.
HuxhamC (2003) Action research as a methodology for theory development. Policy & Politics31(2): 239–248.
42.
HuxhamCVangenS (2000) Ambiguity, complexity and dynamics in the membership of collaboration. Human Relations53(6): 771–806.
43.
HuxhamCVangenS (2003) Researching organizational practice through action research: Case studies and design choices. Organizational Research Methods6(3): 383–403.
44.
LangleyA (2021) What is “this” a case of? Generative theorizing for disruptive times. Journal of Management Inquiry30(3): 251–258.
45.
LangleyAKlagM (2019) Being where? Navigating the involvement paradox in qualitative research accounts. Organizational Research Methods22(2): 515–538.
46.
LangleyABellEBlieseP, et al. (2023) From the editors: Opening up AMJ’s research methods repertoire. Academy of Management Journal66(1): 711–719.
47.
LêJKSchmidT (2022) The practice of innovating research methods. Organizational Research Methods25(2): 308–336.
48.
LewinK (1997 [1946]) Action research and minority problems. In: LewinK (ed.) Resolving Social Conflicts. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 143–154.
49.
LifvergrenSZandeeDP (2017) Healthcare transformation: Action research linking local practices to national scale. In: BradburyH (ed.) Cooking with Action Research: Stories and Resources for Self and Community Transformation. Portland, OR: AR+, pp. 15–38.
50.
LüscherLSLewisMW (2008) Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal53(2): 221–240.
51.
MacIntoshRMacLeanDSeidlD (2010) Unpacking the effectivity paradox of strategy workshops: Do strategy workshops produce strategic change? In: GolsorkhiDRouleauLSeidlD, et al. (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 291–309.
52.
MacIntoshRMasonKBeechN, et al. (2021) Delivering Impact in Management Research: When Does It Really Happen?Abingdon: Routledge.
53.
MarshallJ (2011) Images of changing practice through reflective action research. Journal of Organizational Change Management24(2): 244–256.
54.
MarshallJ (2016) First Person Action Research: Living Life as Inquiry. London: Sage.
55.
OmondiLA (2023) Learning together: Participatory rural appraisal for coproduction of climate change knowledge. Action Research21(2): 198–210.
56.
OspinaSDodgeJFoldyEG, et al. (2008) Taking the action turn: Lessons from bringing participation to qualitative research. In: ReasonPBradburyH (eds) Sage Handbook of Action Research, 2nd edn.London: Sage, pp. 420–434.
57.
PradiesCTunarosaALewisMW, et al. (2021) From vicious to virtuous paradox dynamics: The social-symbolic work of supporting actors. Organization Studies42(8): 1241–1263.
58.
ReasonP (2006) Choice and quality in action research practice. Journal of Management Inquiry15(2): 187–203.
59.
ReasonP (2024) Extending co-operative inquiry beyond the human: Ontopoetic inquiry with rivers. Action Research22(2): 114–134.
60.
ReasonPBradburyH (eds) (2001) Sage Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, 1st edn. London: Sage.
61.
ReasonPBradburyH (eds) (2008) Sage Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, 2nd edn.London: Sage.
62.
ReasonPGillespieS (2023) The teachings of mistle thrush and kingfisher. Australian Journal of Environmental Education39(3): 239–306.
63.
ReedyPCKingDR (2019) Critical performativity in the field: Methodological principles for activist ethnographers. Organizational Research Methods22(2): 564–589.
64.
ReineckeJBoxenbaumEGehmanJ (2022) Impactful theory: Pathways to mattering. Organization Theory3: 1–20.
65.
RipamontiSGaluppoLGorliM, et al. (2016) Pushing action research toward reflexive practice. Journal of Management Inquiry25(1): 55–68.
66.
ScheinEH (2008) Clinical inquiry/research. In: ReasonPBradburyH (eds) Sage Handbook of Action Research, 2nd edn.London: Sage, pp. 266–279.
67.
ScheinEH (2010) Organization development: Science, technology or philosophy? In: CoghlanDShaniAB (Rami) (eds) Fundamentals of Organization Development, vol. 1. London: Sage, pp. 1–29.
68.
SchwarzGMStensakerIG (2016) Showcasing phenomenon-driven research on organizational change. Journal of Change Management16(4): 245–264.
69.
ShaniAB (Rami)CoghlanD (2021) Action research in business and management: A reflective review. Action Research19(3): 518–541.
70.
ShaniAB (Rami)MohrmanSAPasmoreWA, et al. (eds) (2008) Handbook of Collaborative Management Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
71.
SharmaGBansalP (2020) Cocreating rigorous and relevant knowledge. Academy of Management Journal63(2): 386–410.
72.
ShotterJ (2010) Situated dialogic action research: Disclosing “beginnings” for innovative change in organizations. Organizational Research Methods13(2): 268–285.
73.
SimsekZBansalPShawJ, et al. (2018) Seeing practice impact in new ways. Academy of Management Journal61(6): 2021–2025.
74.
SkeltonDCoyneBBarónBM, et al. (2024) “Taking knowledge on a journey”: Creating conditions for epistemic justice. Action Research22(1): 86–103.
75.
SusmanGIEveredRD (1978) An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly23(4): 582–603.
76.
TrottCD (2019) Reshaping our world: Collaborating with children for community-based climate change action. Action Research17(1): 42–62.
77.
WhittleAMuellerFGilchristA, et al. (2016) Sensemaking, sense-censoring and strategic inaction: The discursive enactment of power and politics in a multinational corporation. Organization Studies37(9): 1323–1351.
78.
WilliamsAWhitemanG (2021) A call for deep engagement for impact: Addressing the planetary emergency. Strategic Organization19(3): 526–537.
79.
WilliamsAWhitemanGWallsJ, et al. (2022) Call for papers: Special issue of strategic organization: Impact driven strategy research for grand challenges. Strategic Organization20(1): 225–227.
80.
ZandeeDP (2024) Action research as an impactful approach to study strategy with practice. In: GolsorkhiCRouleauLSeidlD, et al (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Strategy as Practice, 3rd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
81.
Zuber-SkerrittOFletcherM (2007) The quality of an action research thesis in the social sciences. Quality Assurance in Education15(4): 413–436.
