IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa10p1456.html

Action research in the field of societal entrepreneurship. Building participative relationships

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Rosell

Abstract

Research on entrepreneurship has taken "the linguistic turn" inspired by postmodernism, narrative methods and a social constructionist perspective. This movement is particularly evident in the Scandinavian entrepreneurship research tradition (Hjorth, 2008). As a consequence, many of the inhibitions that traditionally have hindered researchers from getting close to their study objects are removed. Postmodernism teach us that the researcher doesn't have to be a distant, observing and disembodied narrator claiming universal and general knowledge. As Gergen (2003) notes, the basic assumptions that comes with a social constructionist perspective makes action research both a legitimate as well as promising pathway for further experimentation and development in qualitative research. He also notes that action research is gaining a steady momentum within the social sciences. Action research differs from both basic and applied social research in terms of people's involvement in the research process. With this involvement follows an integration of action with research, and a practice-based nature of the knowledge that is entailed (Park, 2001). Knowledge is seen to be enriched through direct involvement, intervention or insertion in processes of social action. The ambition is to arrive at a subject/ subject relationship with the ones being "studied", combining different kinds of knowledge in the research process (Fals Borda, 2001). Although participation is singled out as the main defining character of action research (Reason & Bradbury, 2001) and is widely discussed in the action research literature, relatively few studies deal with building the participative relationship itself. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the knowledge of the relationship building process in action research projects. Based on a description of a co- operation between researchers and practioners, the ambition is to give a detailed account of this process, letting the voices of the researchers as well as the participating co- researchers/ practioners be heard in the text.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Rosell, 2011. "Action research in the field of societal entrepreneurship. Building participative relationships," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1456, European Regional Science Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa10p1456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa10/ERSA2010finalpaper1456.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chris Steyaert, 2007. "‘Entrepreneuring’ as a conceptual attractor? A review of process theories in 20 years of entrepreneurship studies," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 453-477.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Helen M. Haugh & Alka Talwar, 2016. "Linking Social Entrepreneurship and Social Change: The Mediating Role of Empowerment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(4), pages 643-658, February.
    2. Kuebart, Andreas & Ibert, Oliver, 2019. "Beyond territorial conceptions of entrepreneurial ecosystems: The dynamic spatiality of knowledge brokering in seed accelerators," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 63(2-4), pages 118-133.
    3. Maria Tunberg & Alistair R. Anderson, 2020. "Growing a small firm; experiences and managing difficult processes," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1445-1463, December.
    4. Magnus Hoppe, 2016. "Policy and entrepreneurship education," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 13-29, January.
    5. Daniel Hjorth & Bengt Johannisson, 2008. "Building new roads for entrepreneurship research to travel by: on the work of William B. Gartner," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 341-350, December.
    6. Laura Aufrère & Philippe Eynaud & Olivier Gauthier & Corinne Vercher-Chaptal, 2018. "De l’entreprendre à l’ « encommuns ». Comment un processus entrepreneurial peut-il s’inscrire dans une perspective de création de communs ?," Working Papers hal-03407872, HAL.
    7. Amira Laifi & Yabo Octave Niamié & Olivier Germain, 2023. "The Ignored Legitimation Paradox of Northern Technology-based New Ventures Encountering Southern Contexts: Case Study of a French e-Books Company," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 32(2_suppl), pages 159-183, November.
    8. Per Davidsson & Jan Henrik Gruenhagen, 2021. "Fulfilling the Process Promise: A Review and Agenda for New Venture Creation Process Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 45(5), pages 1083-1118, September.
    9. Nathalie Schieb-Bienfait & Ivan Dufeu & Jean-Pierre Bréchet, 2020. "The business devices, engine of a collective entrepreneurial dynamic [Le dispositif de gestion, moteur d’une dynamique entrepreneuriale collective. Le Projet Bio Loire Océan]," Post-Print hal-02558960, HAL.
    10. repec:hal:cepnwp:hal-03407872 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Kuebart, Andreas, 2022. "Open creative labs as functional infrastructure for entrepreneurial ecosystems: Using sequence analysis to explore tempo-spatial trajectories of startups in Berlin," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(9).
    12. Per Fors & Thomas Taro Lennerfors, 2019. "The Individual-Care Nexus: A Theory of Entrepreneurial Care for Sustainable Entrepreneurship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    13. Vladi Finotto & Anna Moretti, 2014. "Unveiling the founder effect: a conceptual framework of entrepreneurial imprinting," Working Papers 07, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    14. Colin Donaldson, 2019. "Intentions resurrected: a systematic review of entrepreneurial intention research from 2014 to 2018 and future research agenda," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 953-975, September.
    15. Leo Dana & Jan Age Riseth, 2011. "Reindeer Herders in Finland: Pulled to Community-based Entrepreneurship & Pushed to Individualistic Firms'," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1448, European Regional Science Association.
    16. Patrick Gregori & Patrick Holzmann, 2022. "Entrepreneurial practices and the constitution of environmental value for sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3302-3317, November.
    17. Francisco Liñán & Inmaculada Jaén & Domingo Martín, 2022. "Does entrepreneurship fit her? Women entrepreneurs, gender-role orientation, and entrepreneurial culture," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(2), pages 1051-1071, February.
    18. Catherine Welch & Niina Nummela & Peter Liesch, 2016. "The Internationalization Process Model Revisited: An Agenda for Future Research," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 783-804, December.
    19. Isabell Stamm & Marie Gutzeit, 2022. "Group conditions for entrepreneurial visions: role confidence, hierarchical congruences, and the imagining of future in entrepreneurial groups," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 1023-1041, October.
    20. Marta Gancarczyk & Anna Ujwary-Gil, 2021. "Entrepreneurial cognition or judgment: The management and economics approaches to the entrepreneur's choices," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 17(1), pages 7-23.
    21. Golshan Javadian & Crystal Dobratz & Alka Gupta & Vishal K. Gupta & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2020. "Qualitative Research in Entrepreneurship Studies: A State-of-Science," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 29(2), pages 223-258, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa10p1456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.