The generation and analysis of data in action research is significantly effective when it is done as an interactive process between stakeholders (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). Most of the data for this study was therefore generated from the interaction between the participants and the researcher, as well as from their interaction with one another. Data generation refers to the various ways in which data is obtained for a study (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). In qualitative research, there is a wide range of methods of data generation, namely personal experience, introspection, life stories, interviews, observations, reflections, and interactions (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011).
3.9.3.1 Narratives: Cycle 1
In this study the researcher generated data using the method of narratives which are spoken or written accounts of an event or an action in chronological order (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). The purpose of narratives is to convey experiences as they are expressed in the lived and told stories of individuals (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). The researcher requested the participants in focus groups to write narratives (participants’ narratives) with the purpose of investigating their individual perspectives on project task management and to explore the individual issues that they face that hinder their ability to complete their activities or tasks in time. The participants were required to write a narrative about what is good and what is challenging in the whole project value chain, recorded in a memo presented as Annexure F. Allowing the participants to write narratives about their experiences helped the researcher to obtain insight into their understanding of sequencing project tasks and activities and to establish a starting point for working with them. Apart from narratives, the participants did drawing narratives. This exercise was meant to stimulate the participants’ thinking by allowing them to visualise the ideal causal linkages they wanted to work with and to think of how they could plan to achieve their desire
3.9.3.2 Recording of action learning sets: Cycles 1 and 2
An action learning set is a small group of three to five members working together in a specified area of discussion facilitated by a researcher(Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). The participants were engaged in action learning sets that were underpinned by the action learning principles of capacity building and continual improvement of professional practice.
71
It also included mutual respect and commitment to establishing and pursuing goals as well as working together to achieve them (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). In this kind of arrangement, the participants were assisted to improve their performance and achieve their goals (Buys, 2010). The researcher in his role as facilitator, acted as a coach to facilitate the improvement of their instructional leadership (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). In this regard, coaching was focused on helping team members to improve their problems as well as to develop and support them in their overall development for their current positions and for future functioning on the project (Buys, 2010). This was a non-directive form of coaching, which was focused on helping team members to close the gap between where they needed to be and where they were (Buys, 2010).
The participants were required to discuss the current state of their tasks or activities in relation to the overall activities of the project, set their own achievable goals that would effect change and improvement, explore new possibilities that would lead to their desired change, support one another in their plan of action and assess their own performance (Buys, 2010). The members of an action learning set help one another to improve their professional practice and leadership and this constituted an ongoing and sustainable professional development activity. Figure 3.5 illustrates the process undertaken by the researcher in his capacity as a coach and also presents the roles of participants as learners in their action learning sets. The participants were required to discuss their current situation, set their own achievable goals that would effect change and improvement, explore new possibilities that would lead to their desired change, support one another in their plan of action, and assess their performance (Buys, 2010). The members of focus group helped one another to improve their professional practice and leadership, and this thus constitutes an ongoing and sustainable professional development activity. Figure 3.5 illustrates the process undertaken by the researcher as facilitator and also the participants as role-players responsible for decisions in their respective roles on the project.
72
Figure 3.5: The focus group interaction process within action-learning (Researcher’s concept)
To ensure continuous and long-lasting legacy in their project roles and responsibilities, the participants met regularly as a group to critically reflect on the research process. Their meeting involved identifying and discussing issues that hinder their abilities to complete tasks on time, developing strategies to help improve the identified hindrances, discussing the implementation of such strategies, reflecting upon the effectiveness of the strategies and the significance of their changed practice for their support to the overall project goals (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011). In order for this to happen, the researcher established a good relationship with the participants and ensured that the participants, too, had a good relationship with one another. Establishing a good working relationship required that the participants openly state what they expected from their participation in this study, how they visualised working together, when and how often they interacted with the researcher, and what was expected of the participants (Buys, 2010). The researcher also ensured that the encounters were a safe and supportive environment for the workshop and further helped the participants to understand that being older and more experienced does not guarantee expertise in any particular area. He further emphasised the importance of unity of purpose
3. Participants share their perspectives 2. State the current problem: Causes of delays 4. Focus groups are formed for
interactive processes 5. Participants interact and share views 6. Participants provide feedback 7. Participants reach consensus on streamlined action 1. Researcher as facilitator builds relationships and vision with
73
to empower one another to be in the execution of their respective tasks to help them in the achievement of overall project success (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011).
In their action learning focus groups, the participants discussed issues together in a dialogical and productive relationship that created a sense of community through the sharing of perspectives, the negotiation of meaning and the development of collaboratively produced improvement strategies that they could use to improve the achievement of project deliverables (Collins, 1999). To ensure the effectiveness of the action learning sets, general principles of conducting a group discussion were followed. Participants were encouraged to respect one another, to accommodate other people’s opinions, to take turns in speaking, to listen to one another, not to dominate the discussion and to treat others as equals as well as to make their dialogue a success (Creswell, 2008). This is a way for accomplishing both a sense of community and a living democracy that action research espouses, via dialogical conversations (Kindon et al., 2010). The dialogue is considered a multi-voice powerful representation, where the voices and responses of others can occur in a non-threatening setting and all this contributed to participants’ professional development. The researcher generated data by recording the entire conversations during the meetings, which were later transcribed and analysed. (Turesky and Gallagher, 2011).