IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/syspar/v33y2020i6d10.1007_s11213-020-09538-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Too Smart to Participate? Rational Reasons for Employees’ Non-participation in Action Research

Author

Listed:
  • Kristin Lebesby

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU))

  • Jos Benders

    (Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)
    CESO, KU Leuven)

Abstract

Action research literature promotes broad participation in order to gain better insights into prevailing issues and cope with both present and future challenges in organizations. For good reasons, action researchers view participation as desirable and even necessary. However, emphasizing participation also creates a blind spot: researchers tend to assume that employees are willing or even eager to take part in organizational change projects. A group of action researchers involved in a large-scale organizational development project in a Norwegian public organization initially also had this optimistic assumption. Over time, they realized that many employees were reluctant to participate and often kept silent, so they conducted follow-up research to explore the reasons for employees’ non-participation. The findings show that the employees had rational reasons not to participate, and that employee participation should not be taken for granted. The paper outlines eight different rationales for non-participation, and discusses implications for action research.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristin Lebesby & Jos Benders, 2020. "Too Smart to Participate? Rational Reasons for Employees’ Non-participation in Action Research," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 625-638, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:33:y:2020:i:6:d:10.1007_s11213-020-09538-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11213-020-09538-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11213-020-09538-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11213-020-09538-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Naomi Joy Godden, 2017. "The Participation Imperative in Co-operative Inquiry: Personal Reflections of an Initiating Researcher," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 1-18, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jennifer Keahey, 2021. "Sustainable Development and Participatory Action Research: A Systematic Review," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 291-306, June.
    2. Katharine Tröger & Margareta Amy Lelea & Oliver Hensel & Brigitte Kaufmann, 2018. "Embracing the Complexity: Surfacing Problem Situations with Multiple Actors of the Pineapple Value Chain in Uganda," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 557-580, October.
    3. Pia Andersson & Helena Ringnér & Jan Inglis, 2018. "Constructive Scaffolding or a Procrustean Bed? Exploring the Influence of a Facilitated, Structured Group Process in a Climate Action Group," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 327-345, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:33:y:2020:i:6:d:10.1007_s11213-020-09538-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.