Essai: real time/real space research; connecting action and reflection in organization studies

Organization Studies, Nov-Dec, 2002 by Roland Calori

Abstract

This essai discusses real-time/real-space research in which the time-space of the researcher and the time-space of the researched overlap, and in which action and reflection are intimately connected through fusion or cooperation. The paper first presents the principles of a pragmatic epistemology, and then briefly reviews real-time/real-space research strategies, particularly co-authorship, by reflective practitioners and pragmatic researchers who get involved together in theory building.

Descriptors: time, space, research, action, reflection

Introduction

Organization studies can benefit from a double stretch towards philosophy and towards the knowledge expressed in practitioners' narratives (Tsoukas and Cummings 1997; Calori 1998, 2000a). In particular, philosophers and practitioners may inspire the construction of theories which include the moral dimension of human conduct in organizations and explain the dynamics of complex processes over time. In this essai, stretching towards philosophers such as Aristotle, James and Habermas gives some foundations of a pragmatic epistemology, and stretching towards knowledge in action suggests some unorthodox research strategies.

I will discuss real-time/real-space research in which the time-space of the researcher and that of the researched overlap, and in which action and reflection are intimately connected through fusion or cooperation. Many such research designs are based on a pragmatic epistemology which is contested by orthodox academic principles.

Walking the Path

A 'pragmatic epistemology' may, indeed, sound like an oxymoron to many scholars. Its origin can be found in Aristotle (nichomachean ethics, 1976 Ed.). According to Aristotle, 'episteme'--scientific knowledge--proceeds by deduction or induction and is concerned with invariable universals, 'phronesis'--practical knowledge--is the quality of those who understand the management of households or states. Phronesis takes cognizance of particulars, because it is concerned with conduct, and conduct has its sphere in particular circumstances, but it also contains traces of universal regularities. Moreover, and more importantly, according to Aristotle, these intellectual virtues 'tend to coalesce' in the mind of a single person and 'there must be some coordinating science which studies their relationships'. Hence the concept of 'pragmatic epistemology'.

American pragmatic philosophers offer coordinating concepts. For instance, William James (1950) made a distinction between knowledge of acquaintance, which arises through action and experience (similar to Aristotelian phronesis), and knowledge about (similar to episteme). In the social world, the pragmatic epistemology sees the scientific method as the interaction of the two types of knowledge: experience provides immediate 'knowledge of acquaintance', 'knowledge about' is the result of the systematic thought that 'eliminates the subjective and contextual contingencies of experience and extracts the principles that lie behind the knowledge of acquaintance' (Spender 1996: 49). Following a pragmatic epistemology, the researcher and the researched should share time-space and action-reflection in face-to-face situations, in order to generate knowledge of acquaintance and transform it into knowledge about. For Alfred Schutz, a 'face-to-face' situation is a pure 'we-relationship' which allows a 'true understanding' of human beings:

'I speak of another person as within reach of my direct experience when he shares with me a community of space and a community of time. He shares a community of space with me when he is present in person and I am aware of him as such (...). He shares a community of time with me when his experience is flowing side by side with mine, when I can, at any moment, look over and grasp his thoughts as they come into being; in other words, when we are growing older together. Persons thus in reach of each other's direct experience I speak of as being in a "face-to-face" situation. The face-to-face situation presupposes, then, an actual simultaneity with each other of two separate streams of consciousness.' (Schutz 1967: 163)

Philosophical hermeneutics clarifies what should be the relationship between the interpreter (researcher) and the actor. In order to reach 'understanding', the researcher should engage in a process of communicative action with the actor in the lifeworld, as defined by Habermas (1984: 102141). The 'participation' of the researcher requires space-time co-location or at least a dialogue with the actor (so as to 'bridge the temporal distance' and fuse time and space 'horizons'). Communicative action also relies on the exercise of mutual criticism and dialogue between the social scientist and the agent 'who possesses just as rich an interpretative competence as the observer himself' (Habermas 1984: 118).

A simplistic view of Aristotelian phronesis, knowledge of acquaintance, and communicative action between social science interpreters and actors, is summarized in the science fiction film by the Wachowski brothers, entitled 'Matrix'. Morpheus (the mentor) tells Neo (who is in trouble): 'If you want to know the path ... you have to walk the path'. In face-to-face situations, the researcher and the researched 'walk the path together' and try to reach a mutual understanding.