Nissen's Project Summary

Nissen has introduced the debate without propagating any specific methodology to be adopted. He is one of the few scholars who realize that there are negative effects of technology as well but Nissen makes no attempt to elaborate on the point. The stress caused by technology leads to failure in implementations. He introduces the points well and arguments in favor of why study of humans as subjects rather than objects is drawn out well. The most important question that he is able to ask is, “Whom are we creating and systemizing the knowledge for?” When he poses the question he leaves it open to interpretation by the reader and Cooper has responded to it in his comment. Pettigrew’s concerns are also reflected in the question. The nature of this

With regards to this point I have some contentions. Firstly as Cooper has already pointed out that funding plays a major role in deciding research is done for whom so there has to be a balance between helping those who are unaware of their own interests and in helping the interest of those who fund the research. Sandberg’s labor unions present such a case in which employees and their representatives are unaware of how to negotiate and what to negotiate for their own self-interest. Sandberg has done what Nissen is asking researchers to do. Sandberg’s project helps the employees and their representatives to understand what is happening and how it might impact them. Based on this information, the employees can better negotiate with the organizations. Though again, it presents only a single side of the situation. Unless there is information on how senior management plans to implement a new technology, employees would find it difficult to act in their best self -interest. Here Cooper’s argument about such project not working out in Britain seems to be nit picking. Sandberg’s actual motive is not to propagate a project but put forward the research method employed. Even when Cooper argues that it won’t work in Britain, his reasons fail to convince. Though there might be agreement on differences in social structures and cultures across countries, the craft, as Pettigrew would like to call it, is in understanding what would work in a particular setting and create a dialogue, reflect, refine and modify approaches and conclusions. One of the strengths of Action Research is that researcher could see what outcomes an action creates, although there are more than enough variables in real world to conduct a perfect action research. Researcher needs to be aware of these variables and keep a broad and open mind about what else could have led to the results