Third Person Action Research

Third person action research—as distinct from first and second person action research—involves several issues. In this entry, third person activities are taken to refer to processes between people who do not have direct contact with each other. This entry focuses on the myriad challenges posed by third person inquiry and on the possibilities it presents in terms of action research's broader contribution at societal, systemic levels. It also exemplifies some contemporary attempts at third person work.

Although the originators of action research, such as Kurt Lewin, were preoccupied with broadly framed social issues, not least anti-authoritarianism and democracy, their main approach was the utilization of face-to-face groups, where the researchers are either themselves members of the group or work in close contact with it. Against this background, moving beyond the group to reach a wider audience and promote change within, say, large organizations, regions and societies represents a challenge. Various responses have been proposed. The most conventional is to present the experiences from the face-to-face project in a text and expect the text to diffuse the message. Another possibility is to repeat the project a number of times until a ‘critical mass' is reached. A third is to organize the project as a large-scale intervention in the first place, where many people participate in a mass meeting, open inquiry or festival. Sometimes this works well and ensures a broad anchoring through one sweeping move. There are, however, problems: These events are difficult to organize and, as such, tend to be stand-alone events with little ‘before’ or ‘after’. Furthermore, although many people are present, there are generally differences between them: Some are ‘on stage’, while others constitute an audience. A fourth option is to work with managers and leaders and expect them to transmit the message to those they lead. A fifth is to perform the initial project with units that exist within social contexts—such as networks—which can carry the message further. These are just some examples. Each one can take many different shapes, in addition to which they can be combined in various ways. They can all be strengthened through training and education. They have all been tried, and all can claim advances under certain circumstances. There is, however, no specific approach, or combination of approaches, that functions under all circumstances.

Whatever strategy is chosen, the products of action research have to be fed into more broadly framed processes. While research, under the influence of René Descartes and his successors, has seen the objective observer and disinterested bearer of truth as the foundation for research and, consequently, sought to maximize the distance to other actors, action research has from the beginning departed from this perspective: Research exists within the world, in multiplex relationships to other actors. Research has access to the same channels of influence as all other social phenomena, and since there are numerous sources and means through which society is constituted, there are also numerous channels through which action research can reach out beyond its own immediate context. In this sense, third person inquiry, strategy and process can be identified as the active use of all channels of influence society offers, which go beyond a demand for face-to-face contact. From this perspective, it is not participation in society-level discourses that is the challenge; rather, it is to identify the specific contributions which action research can offer within specific kinds of discourse. What is it that action research can contribute that cannot be contributed by others?

...