Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cooke, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Cold War origin of action research as managerialist cooptation

Bill Cooke

Manchester Business School, UK,drbill.cooke{at}gmail.com

Managerial applications of action research (AR) (e.g. in Organization Development) have been critiqued as cooptational. Their participatory focus on means over ends of change, on micro-, intra-organizational issues, and the tacit but questionable claim to rigour, are said to conceal and reinforce existing power relationships, rather than deliver the meaningful empowerment promised. This article shows an empirical connection between the Cold War US and these problematic features of today’s managerialist AR. Drawing on a correspondence between Ronald Lippitt and John Collier, two AR founders, it shows a more profoundly socially engaged version of AR was proposed, but shut down by US Cold War inquisition. It was in response to this alternative version of action research that the problematic, now managerialist, version of AR was first consciously and deliberately articulated. This shows that managerialist AR’s self-detachment from social circumstances is evident not just in its application, but its historiography

Key Words: action research • Cold War • cooptation • John Collier • Ronald Lippitt

Human Relations, Vol. 59, No. 5, 665-693 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0018726706066176


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
OrganizationHome page
M. Tadajewski
The Politics of the Behavioural Revolution in Organization Studies
Organization, September 1, 2009; 16(5): 733 - 754.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Management & Organizational HistoryHome page
B. Cooke
The Tavistock's everyday use of benzedrine, and more: On the multiple significances of DB, scholar--publisher
Management & Organizational History, May 1, 2009; 4(2): 203 - 206.
[PDF]


Home page
OrganizationHome page
C. Grey
Security Studies and Organization Studies: Parallels and Possibilities
Organization, March 1, 2009; 16(2): 303 - 316.
[Abstract] [PDF]