‘Let’s get practical’, or ‘let’s get theoretical’? Scholarly aspirations in Practice-Based Studies Research seminar, Mählardalen University, 24

(1)

ved at markere ordet(ene)

‘Let’s get practical’, or ‘let’s get theoretical’?

Scholarly aspirations in Practice-Based Studies

Research seminar, Mählardalen University, 24^th May 2021 Anders Buch, PhD

Head of research program & docent, VIA University College Guest professor, Jönköping University

22. maj 2021 1

(2)

1. eller 2. linje i overskriften ved at markere linjen fonten

3. Niveau = Bullet 25 pkt

9. Niveau = Bullet 10,5 pkt

‘Forøg/Formindsk listeniveau’

for at hoppe mellem niveauer

Background

How can scholarly research become relevant for practitioners?

22. maj 2021 2

Scholarly knowledge

Practical knowledge

Rigor Abstract Universal Theoretical Theory

Relevance Concrete Particular Practical Practice

(3)

Knowledge

22. maj 2021 3

”Knowledge, as an abstract term, is a name for the product of competent inquiries. Apart from this relation, its meaning is so empty that any content filling may be arbitrarily

poured in.” (Dewey LW12: 16).

Limiting the discussion to propositional, declarative,

discursive scholarly knowledge about – say – organizational issues, business, etc.

(4)

Research question and agenda

How does scholarly knowledge differ from practical knowledge?

1. A critique of attempts to connect scholarly knowledge and practical knowledge

2. Conceptual constructions of theory and practice (dichotomies and alternatives)

3. A practice theoretical reframing: What kind of ‘work’ do scholarly knowledge do?

4. Some consequences for scholarly knowledge production

22. maj 2021 4

(5)

1. Attempts to bridge the

‘knowledge-to-action-gap’

22. maj 2021 5

(6)

Bridging the gap through translation

• Knowledge-transfer (one way communication)

• Knowledge-exchange (interaction)

• Research utilization (implementation of research knowledge)

• Research dissemination / diffusion

• Further and continuous education

• …and more

22. maj 2021 6

(7)

Implicit assumption

Ontological premise

– Knowledge is a substance / ‘thing’

– Knowledge represents something ‘real’

– Knowledge can be codified – and communicated/translated

Epistemological premise

– Acquisition of knowledge / learning is a cognitive process

– Learning is about transmission and internalization of knowledge

22. maj 2021 7

(8)

The Cartesian Gap

– Descartes's two realms

– Body vs. mind – Nature vs. society – Outer vs. inner

– Physical vs. spiritual

– Primary vs. secondary qualities – Objective vs. subjective

– Concrete vs. abstract – Practice vs. theory – The represented vs.

representation – the core question of epistemology

(9)

2. The genisis of theory and practice

22. maj 2021 9

Praxis: teleological change and becoming Theoria: pure viewing and reflection Poesis: manufacturing – production Theoria’s virtues:

Sofia: divine cognition – eternal truth Nous: intuitive cognition

Episteme: cognition of material reality Poesis’ virtues:

Phronesis: right action

…..

Techne: craftmanship

(10)

Kantian-Aristotelianism

Pure (theoretical) reason:

• Episteme: empirical apperception

• Material domain

• The sciences Practical reason:

• Relates to praxis – the moral and social domain

• Self-legislations, moral principles

• Social sciences

22. maj 2021 10

(11)

Hegelian-Aristotelianism

Praxis is becoming and bringing forth

• Historicity

Theory is abstraction and reflection brought forward in historical praxis in order to grasp phenomena

Theory is not other than praxis – but a mode of praxis Scientific – theoretical – knowledge is not different in principle from practical knowledge – the difference is concrete (in relation to the goals)

22. maj 2021 11

(12)

3. The practice theoretical refraiming

If ‘theory’ is ‘modes of practices’ – what do the theoretical modes do?

22. maj 2021 12

(13)

Habermas – Knowledge and Human Interest

• Technical interest – prediction and control

• Hermeneutic interest – understanding

• Emancipatory interest – critique and liberation

Pointing to purposive and interested use of theories…

23. maj 2021 13

(14)

Sandberg & Alvesson – criteria of theories

• Their purpose (like Habermas)

• Ontological and epistemological premises: what is the phenomenon?

(substances, processes, relations, …)

• Conceptual ordering mechanisms invoked (logically related variables, systems of meaning, dynamics,…)

• Criteria of relevance / selection (what, who, why, how,…)

• Boundary condidtions (who, what, where, systems, domains,…)

• The relation to the empirical (empirical fit, support, reliability, …)

• Type of insight (causal relations, meaning, reproductive mechanism, …)

23. maj 2021 14

(15)

Sandberg & Alvesson

Identification of five types of theories / modes of theorization

• Explanatory theories – variables, causality

• Comprehending theories – understanding experience, phenomenology, qualities

• Ordering theories – typologies, categories

• Enactment theories – (re)production, change, mechanisms

• Provoking theories – deconstruction, exposing contingency, proposing alternatives

23. maj 2021 15

(16)

Preliminary conclusion

Scholarly practices and practical practices enact knowledge differently – they may pursue different objectives, they have different interests, subscribe to different ontologies and epistemologies

Scholarly and practical practices are not different in principle – but they differ in their concrete enactment of knowledges

Reevaluating the knowledge-to-action-gap -> Must consider objectives.

Theories are instruments for action. Which theories are appropriate must be pragmatically evaluated in relation to epistemic objectives.

23. maj 2021 16

(17)

”There is nothing so practical as a good theory.”

24. maj 2021 17

Kurt Lewin

(18)

4. Consequences

23. maj 2021 18

(19)

Eikeland and Nicolini

Ways of turning to practice in the social sciences

Broadly practical (Aim:

triggering action, producing change, and improvement)

Broadly theoretical (Aim:

gaining insight, producing

explanation and understanding From outside and above (from a

spectator position outside the action concerned)

1

Developing specialized

techniques / applied research

2

Normal science (explanatory and interpretive approach – theoresis)

From within and below (from a position immersed in the action concerned)

3

Inform deliberation (phronesis)

4

Trigger critical dialogue – immanent critique (theoria)

23. maj 2021 19

Eikeland, O. & Nicolini, D. (2011): Turning practically: broadening the horizon, Journal of Organizational Change and Management, 24(2), 164-174.

(20)

What are the consequences of the theoria- approach

• Some similarities between provoking theorization and the theoria-approach Deconstruction – exposure of immanent normativities

• Action research – but what kind?

• Who should be involved and why?

• How should they be involved?

• What should be considered ‘improvement’?

• …

23. maj 2021 20

(21)

Critical Participatory Action Research (e.g.

Kemmis)

• An emergent world view: holistic, relational, experimental (and some would say systemic)

• The world does not only consist of things – but also relations which we co- author (practice architectures)

• How to orchestrate change?

• through changing PRACTICES

• Who can change practices?

• Only the practitioners (participants in practices)

• Guiding / facilitating the action research

• The role of the consultant / expert / professional researcher

23. maj 2021 21

(22)

Questions about normativities

Research processes are normative practices (theorization is a normative endeavor inflicted by objectives)

But research processes are also inflicted by a two-dimensional (2D – Rouse &

Okrent) normativity: researchers are pressed to consider which research practices should be adopted

23. maj 2021 22