1. The principle of researcher-client agreement in canonical action research Petter Øgland, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo NEON, 25 th -27 th November 2014

2. Plan for presentation Motivation (3 minutes) – Problem: RCA is important for CAR, but sometimes difficult to achieve – Possible solution: Use NoA approach for developing RCA Monopoly model and bootstrap algorithm (7 minutes) – Explanatory theory: The RCA context can be understood as a Monopoly game – Norm. theory: The Bootstrap Algorithm (BA) tells us how to win at Monopoly – Hypothesis: The BA tells us how to establish an RCA Testing the hypotheses in a NTAX action research study (7 minutes) – Researchers and clients in NTAX action research as Monopoly game players – The BA is used for establishing the RCA, but ultimately fails – Discussion: What was the reason for failure? Normative theory (BA), explanatory theory (Monopoly game), both, or none? Conclusion (3 minutes) – How to establish an RCA in non-trivial situations has to be seen as a formal research question to be answered through the initial cycles of CAR

3. Action research fundamental #1: Researcher-Client Agreement (RCA) Without agreement the action research project can easily become a whistleblower project

4. But getting an agreement can be hard Can we establish an RCA with management for researching how to improve labour conditions through workplace democracy?

5. Reaching agreement (RCA) is like winning Monopoly 2. Academic researchers try to build monopolies of knowledge (streets, houses & hotels) 1. Industry clients try to build monopolies of practice (streets, houses & hotels) 3. Action researcher tries to build monopolies of knowledge about practice (streets, houses & hotels)

6. Reaching agreement (RCA) is like winning Monopoly Bootstrap algorithm (Hanseth & Aanestad, 2003; Øgland, 2013): Phase 1: Invest in all research opportunities Phase 2: Negotiate to establish monopolies (define domain of expertise) Phase 3: Develop properties (become a domain authority) Phase 4: Positive feedback; the rich get richer, the poor get thrown out of the game

7. How to test the Monopoly strategy through real world experiments? Networks of action (NoA) is an action research strategy used for investigating the BA hypothesis in the real world (Braa et al, 2004). The Bootstrap Algorithm (BA) is based on knowledge, skill and luck (Bewersdorff, 1994; Øgland, 2013).

8. The RCA Monopoly at NTAX illustrated through the 2009 world championships Client industry Research community Action researcher

9. The RCA Monopoly at NTAX illustrated through the 2009 world championships Action researcher develops research proposal Client requests external funding (even though action researcher is employee in client organisation) Action researcher tries to get funding and struggles Client refuses research before funding exists

10. The RCA Monopoly at NTAX illustrated through the 2009 world championships Client is defeated. He accepts research proposal. Action researcher presents funding source and research proposal to client

11. The RCA Monopoly at NTAX illustrated through the 2009 world championships Action researcher submits grant application.

12. The RCA Monopoly at NTAX illustrated through the 2009 world championships Action researcher believes he is going to be Monopoly champion.

13. The RCA Monopoly at NTAX illustrated through the 2009 world championships Application gets rejected. No action research can be done. Action researcher believes he is going to be Monopoly champion.

14. Why did it go wrong? Wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment Wrong diagnosis, right treatment Right diagnosis, wrong treatment Right diagnosis, Right treatment

15. Why did it go wrong? Unlikely that the action researcher was completely incompetent as the proposed research was an extension of recently completed PhD research. Wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment ? Wrong diagnosis, right treatment Right diagnosis, wrong treatment Right diagnosis, Right treatment

16. Why did it go wrong? Perhaps industry client and/or research community were not interested in further action research, but communicated this in a vague manner? Perhaps the RCA game was impossible to win? Wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment Wrong diagnosis, right treatment ? Right diagnosis, wrong treatment Right diagnosis, Right treatment

17. Why did it go wrong? According to Mintzberg (1994) it is not uncommon that there are differences between intended and emergent strategies. Perhaps the action researcher did not do exactly as he intended? Wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment Wrong diagnosis, right treatment ? Right diagnosis, wrong treatment ? Right diagnosis, Right treatment

18. Why did it go wrong? Monopoly is a game of chance, skill and strategy. Sometimes loss can be due to back luck. Wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment Wrong diagnosis, right treatment ? Right diagnosis, wrong treatment Right diagnosis, Right treatment ?

19. Why did it go wrong? Wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment Wrong diagnosis, right treatment Right diagnosis, wrong treatment Right diagnosis, Right treatment Seems like best explanation, but does not produce learning.

20. Why did it go wrong? Wrong diagnosis, wrong treatment Wrong diagnosis, right treatment Right diagnosis, wrong treatment Right diagnosis, Right treatment Seems like best explanation, but does not produce learning. Not necessarily best explanations, but produce interesting questions for further investigations

21. Contribution to CAR theory How to establish an RCA should be a formal research question in CAR studies.

22. Summary of presentation Contributions to CAR theory and implications for CAR practice – How to establish an RCA should be a research question for each CAR study Why should the establishment of an RCA be defined as an RQ? – Action failure: Using the BA as method for establishing an RCA – Discussion: What was the reason for failure? Normative theory (BA), explanatory theory (Monopoly game), both, or none? – Unless the RCA is easily established, it becomes an RQ by default How did we expect the RCA to be established? – Explanatory theory: The RCA context can be understood as a Monopoly game – Norm. theory: The Bootstrap Algorithm (BA) tells us how to win at Monopoly – Hypothesis: The BA tells us how to establish an RCA Why was the BA interesting? – Problem: RCA is important for CAR, but sometimes difficult to achieve – Possible solution: Use BA/NoA approach for developing RCA