The Armageddon Machine: Reflections upon Critical Action Research at BCTel

1. The Armageddon Machine: Reflections upon Critical Action Research at BCTel Duane Truex CIS Department, Georgia State University, USA Jeremy Rose, Aalborg University, Denmark

2. In the IS community research techniques tend to be at the service of management. So what? • What if one finds oneself in a setting where the research partners do not accept organizational doxa and do not accept the status quo as presented by management? What if… • To research the interest of the less-empowered? • To hear the ‘other’ voices? • Action research with a Trade Union as the research partner

3. The ‘managerialist’ tradition • Characteristics of ‘managerialist’ tradition • Serving the interest of managers • Organizational interests understood to be synonymous with managerial interests • Allows us to speak of ‘organizational goals’ • Other interests may be safely/systematically ignored • Language of the discourse • Focused on managerial constructs • principally control • Audience, beneficiaries and actors are described by management

4. ERP and managerialism • The ERP described in managerial terms • “the central nervous system…” (Yen et al, 2002) • Automators of managerial functions (Gupta, 2000) • Embodiment of ‘best practices’ (Kumar et al 2000) • Embedded goals of “globalization, and efficiency” (Hanseth et al 2001) • Generally described as furthering management goals • Imposes its own logic on a company’s strategy, organizational design and culture. (Davenport, 1998) • Who’s logic? • Rationalization, downsizing, cost reduction, standardization, consolidation, … • “extend management control” (Wilson and Robinson, 2001) • ERP success ==> Manager’s success ==> Business success

5. Action Research engagement via/with a Trade Union • Problems • AR is traditionally interpretive • Trade union interests (the research setting) have emancipatory overtones • At the TWU Goal 1 was to ‘level the playing field’ with expert opinion • At the TWU Goal 2 was emancipatory and avoid shuffling of power relationships vis a vis management and the union • Suggests a critical social theoretic (CST) backdrop • Might one properly marry CST and AR?

6. Action Research, a management tool? • Genealogy of AR tends to draw upon management theorists (c.f., Baskerville and Wood-Harper, 1998) • little non-managerial tradition to fall back on • Management consultancy • “Authority warrant” in ISD is that of the decision-maker or manager (c.f., Avison, 2001) • Analysts are at the behest of management • Strong participatory tradition (ETHICS, Multiview, etc.) • Even in highly participatory situations management discourse prevails because of the absence of ideal speech situations (Mumford, 2003)

7. Why is interpretation not enough? • Interpretation of social reality does not provide a clear prescription for action nor does it provide an explanation of human action

8. Carr and Kemmis on the grasping the intelligibility of individual’s meaning and action • “..the interpretive approach offers no way of examining the ideological character that these meanings and actions possess, and the purposes they serve in social life. …interpretive social science would have to provide a mode of enquiry within which individual’s own interpretations can be critically reconsidered and reassessed. … fails to explain the relationship between people’s interpretations of reality and the social conditions under which these interpretations occur, … offers an inadequate account of how theory relates to practice … suggests that to simply present an interpretive account, revealing the possibility of alternative definitions and conceptions, is sufficient grounds for expecting individuals to reinterpret their situation and change their actions. But this is to ignore … that conceptual changes [and action] do not occur simply because one interpretation is more rational or correct than any other. An individual’s ideas and beliefs are not merely a set of true or false statements that have been adopted on the basis of purely rational considerations. Rather they are intimately related to the individual’s way of life…It is precisely because an individual’s identity is so closely related to the values, beliefs and attitudes inherent in the style of thought of the social group to which he or she belongs that any alternative interpretation of what he or she is doing will invariably be resisted. “ Carr and Kemmis (p. 95-97)

9. Critical Action Research • Definition • Action research undertaken within a critical social theoretic framework. • Action research and CST share ontological and epistemological values • Focus on particular knowledge interests other than instrumental and technical interests • A social constructivist perspective • Practical concerns • Acknowledging rich social contexts • Accept that a researcher is not an ‘objective’ outsider • Reflexive use of/refinement of theory • How complimentary are the two approaches?

10. Complimentary of knowledgeinterests? • CST recognizes three basic knowledge interests • Technical -the need to predict and control • Practical -focusing on human interactions, traditions, behaviors and relationships • Emancipatory-freeing people from injustices and inequities • Takes the improvement of the human condition and the furtherance of emancipatory knowledge as central concerns • In research this may require studying • Events and processes leading to or restricting emancipation • Action research is about dual goals or solving practical problems and understanding/learning reflexively in the process

11. Complimentarity ofSocial Construction and Action • Both AR and CST admit rather than close out social richness • AR is an inherently social, shared cooperative approach • The research design and action settings are mutually defined. Neither are given as ‘fixed’ • In CST all acts are social • E.g., they are oriented towards or arising from social conditions and settings • The ‘social’ in ‘social action’ refers to the orientation of actions toward others

12. Complementarity ofPractical Concerns • CST • Action is rooted in life, in praxis • AR • Response to and in service of a problem to be addressed or solved

13. Complementarity of theReflexive theory use and refinement • “AR is collaborative social action coupled with a practical knowledge interest, undertaken within an explicitly defined set of ethical constructs.” (Rappaport, 1970) • AR is oriented to the joint solution of organizational problems • With the specific outcome/goal of organizational and individual learning • And that theory will be tested or advanced • In CST • Reason and critique are inseparable and reflexive • Theory and practice must be interconnected • All knowledge is value-laden and socially shared

14. Evaluating Critical Action Research Projects • Simple criteria i.e., Has the problem been solved? • Unsatisfactory because • Success like action itself is a shared social experience • It is not determined by outsiders but by the actors themselves • Such project yield huge amounts of ‘text’ to be analyzed and interpreted • Coupling a critical stance with the interpretation of these ‘texts’ helps overcome limitation of grounded interpretive fieldwork (Carr and Kemmis, p 111-114) • Needs to be both scientific and interpretive • Interpretive --generating theories that can be grasped and used by practitioners • Scientific--provide a coherent challenge to the assumptions incorporated in the theories

15. (Evaluation cont’d)... BUT • Description and theoretical generalization are not enough • Objectivity, rationality and truth are themselves social constructions • Interpretative self-description may be systematically distorted by circumstances and ideology (c.f., Kvasny on the ‘digital divide, or the lead up to the war in Iraq) • Requires an approach to overcome distortion • Needs to be interpretative and simultaneously self-critical and reflexive

16. In Closing • There are fieldwork and other settings where • Traditional interpretive approaches are not enough • Managerialist bias needs to be confronted • Emancipatory goals beg for consideration • A critical action approach is appropriate and methodologically defensible

17. Parting Perspective • Enterprise integration has risen to one of the most pressing and mission critical issues of the decade. • Sam Palmasino, 2003 • If you see this as a research challenge/opportunity • Then how will you choose to study the problem?