Abstract
Canonical action research (CAR) aims to address real-world problems and improve organizational performance by combining scholarly observations with practical interventions. However, efforts to conduct CAR have revealed challenges that reflect a significant research-practice gap. We examine these challenges by revisiting the process, principles, and criteria of CAR developed earlier. The specific roles of two different types of theory in the cyclical action research process are considered. A project undertaken in two public relations firms illustrates how our methodological revision improves the rigor and quality of CAR. This article contributes both a significantly enhanced action research method, with detailed guidelines and suggestions that emphasize the roles of focal and instrumental theories, and an emerging theory of knowledge sharing that incorporates key elements of Chinese management and culture.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
