Action Research Outline
Sharon Andrews RN, BN (Hons) & Andrew Robinson RN, PhD
Action Research - background
Action research (AR) is primarily concerned with changing “peoples’ practices, their
understandings of their practices and the conditions under which they practice” (Kemmis, S.
2007). There are a number of distinguishing features of AR these being:
 A cyclical process: AR is operationalised through a cyclical process consisting of problem
identification, planning, taking action and collecting data, evaluation and reflection which
may lead to the identification of new problems or a different focus on existing problems and
subsequent planning, action and evaluation, reflection and so on (Waterman et al. 2001) (see
Diagram 1 below)
 Partnership: AR is carried out between the researcher(s) and practitioners (i.e. RNs, ENs,
PCAs, allied health etc) who have interest in the area of practice under investigation.
Practitioners are understood as “co-investigators” (Waterman et al. 2001).
 Participatory and collaborative: participation and collaboration in AR emphasizes equity
so that everyone engaged in the particular area of practice has an equal opportunity to be part
of the research process. Participation of the co-investigators occurs at all points in the
research, from problem identification, to action planning, taking action, data collection and
evaluation (Kemmis, S. & McTaggart 1988; Waterman et al. 2001).
 Conducted locally: problems that are identified by co-investigators in collaboration with the
researcher are significant to the practitioners in the setting, therefore, planning and change
processes are locally specific, to meet the needs of those in the setting (Greenwood & Levin
1998; Kemmis, S. & McTaggart 1988).
 Reflective: AR engages all participants to candidly look at their practice and investigate what
they say they do compared to what is currently being done. Reflection provides an impetus
for change as practitioners come to identify gaps in their practice that they wish to address.
A recent systematic review of action research, undertaken in the UK offers the following generic
description of action research as follows (Waterman et al. 2001, p. 12):
Action research is a period of inquiry, which describes, interprets and explains social
situations while executing a change intervention aimed at improvement and involvement. It
is problem-focused, context-specific and future-oriented. Action research is a group
activity with an explicit critical value basis and is founded on a partnership between action
researchers and participants all of whom are involved in the change process. The
participatory process is educative and empowering, involving a dynamic approach in
which problem identification, planning, action and evaluation are interlinked. Knowledge
may be advanced through reflection and research, and qualitative and quantitative
research methods may be employed to collect data. Different types of knowledge may be
produced by action research, including practical and propositional. Theory may be
generated and refined, and its general application explored through the cycles of the
action research process.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
The action research process:
Diagram 1
Problem Identification
Plan
Reflection
Take action &
collect data
Analysis/
Evaluation
Replan
Adapted from Street A. & Robinson A. 1995 ‘Advanced clinical roles: investigating dilemmas and changing
practice through action research’. Journal of Clinical Nursing: 4: 349-57
Getting Started
Establishment of a project team
As highlighted elsewhere in the STAR resource guide, the establishment of a project
team that includes partnership with a research institute or university department (with a
falls prevention focus) has numerous benefits for facilitating the translation of evidence
into practice. Partnership with a university/research institute will facilitate:
 ready access to the latest research evidence and falls prevention strategies;
 training, data collection and analysis and evaluation of falls prevention activities; and
 the acquisition of skills amongst Residential Aged Care Facility (RACF) staff
establishing action research.
A project team should include people with skills that traverse a range of skills sets
appropriate for the project. For example in the STAR project the project team included
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
people with skills in research, aged care, falls and project management. A project officer
liaised with RACFs and the university/research institute based members of the project
team.
Management support and establishment of a steering committee
As a first step, it is essential to obtain management support for the project. It is important
to not only discuss with management the aims and purpose of the project, but perhaps
more importantly it is essential to seek support for the use of an action research approach
so that managers are fully supportive of involvement by their staff.
The establishment of a steering committee is also important to provide the members of
the action research group with access to support, guidance and advice throughout the
course of the project from key stakeholders in the field. The committee should
compromise stakeholders associated with the area of investigation with the capacity to
provide advice and feedback on the research direction and progress.
Example of a steering committee from the STAR project:







RACF Director of Nursing,
Project Manager (who has responsibility for overall
coordination of the project),
Research project officer (who facilitate the actual day
to day running of the research)
a member of the action research group,
falls champion,
a representative from the State Department of
Health,
family/consumer representative
Terms of reference for a steering committee could include:
1. To monitor research activities and provide feedback where appropriate.
2. To be a resource to the research group by promoting access to information
networks and key respondents.
3. To promote access to key decision making committees to facilitate the
planning and implementation of action.
4. To make recommendations on issues of concern related to the research.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
The steering committee should meet at regular points during the project, ideally these
meeting should be scheduled that committee members can provide feedback on progress
(results, action plans) and outcomes: Below are some suggested meeting times:
 Commencement of the project – introduction, terms of reference, establish
mechanisms of contact and dissemination of information (e.g. meeting
minutes and other research information);
 Completion of preliminary data collection and problem identification;
st
 Completion of 1 round of action planning;
 Completion of first action cycle and development of subsequent action
plans; and
 At completion of the project to review project outcomes and
recommendations.
Establish a falls action research group (ARG)
In the STAR project each RACF had a falls ARG that was integral to driving change
within the RACFs. The falls ARG comprised various staff from the RACFs and a falls
champion.
Find a Falls Champion
Prior to recruiting ARGs in each facility for the STAR project, a “falls champion” was recruited
at each RACF. This person was an integral member of the project team at their RACF and in the
ARG. The falls champion is a key driver of falls prevention project activities in the RACF and a
key liaison between management and the ARG.
Requirements for setting up a champion position:
 Enthusiastic and willing participant;
 A position description that outlines the key responsibilities of the Champion (see Box 1 for an
example of information that could be included in the position description);
 Dedicated time allocated for the Champion to engage in project activities every week;
 Training for the champion to undertake their role.
 TIPS from our experience:
In the STAR project falls champions held positions as RNs, ENs and PCAs. Our experience
across the various RACFs demonstrated that ideally a falls champion should be a staff member
with a reasonable level of seniority in the facility. While PCAs who were falls champions were
enthusiastic and committed, without significant management support they found it more difficult
to drive change in their facilities’ compared to RNs that occupied more senior positions (e.g.
supervisor, equivalent level 2 or level 3 RN).
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
Box 1
Example of a position description for a falls champion:





Brief background to the project
Aims of the project
Role of the ARG in the project
Approximate allocated time commitment per week
Key responsibilities may include:
o Attend “champion” training day;
o Attend action research training;
o Drive falls prevention activities;
o Distribute project documents (newsletter);
o Assist with recruitment of ARG members;
o Assist with data collection (e.g. falls incident data, falls risk
data);
o Assist with data collection from other key stakeholders
(e.g. other staff, family, resident, physio etc);
o Undertake a lead role in organising and co-coordinating
ARG meetings;
Establish the Action Research Group
The ARG will meet regularity during the course of the project to discuss issues of
concern relevant to the areas of investigation. Key questions to consider when
establishing an ARG are:

Who will comprise the ARG? – a diversity of members will better equip the
group to share a range of perspectives, identify problems for different stakeholder
groups and share knowledge and skills to develop innovative solutions.

How will members of the ARG be recruited? Potential members of the
ARG should to be provided with an opportunity to engage in the project at their
own discretion. While potential members can be accessed in a variety of different
ways (e.g. on recommendation from management, participants in interest groups
and other committees) it is essential that potential participants have a desire to be
involved. If staff feel like they have no choice but to be involved, it is less likely
that they will be committed to the process. Invitation flyers/posters, highlights in
newsletters, public invitations in staff meetings are some suggested methods of
alerting staff about the project and their opportunity to be a member of the ARG.

Who would be suitable members of the ARG? Participants should have an
interest in the area of investigation and be open and enthusiastic to exploring
ways that their practices can be changed and improved.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.

What do participants need to know prior to making a decision to be
involved? AR is an iterative and interactive process that at times can involve
intense periods of work by group members. Potential participants need to be
informed about the level of commitment that their participation will involve and a
realistic idea of the workload associated with the project over time,

How can participation in the ARG meeting be facilitated? Once the
members of the ARG have been recruited, rosters may need to be reviewed to
ensure that meeting times can be established to ensure maximum participation.
Ideally modification of rostering should be done in consultation with management
to ensure ongoing support for ARG members’ participation.

Preparation is critical: Taking the time to prepare ARG members to undertake
their role is a cornerstone to a successful action research project (Gibbon 2002;
Kelly & Simpson 2001; Morton-Cooper 2000; O'Conner 1987; Waterman et al.
2005). There are a variety of strategies that can be used to prepare ARG members.
Box 2 (below) provides examples from our experience that may be useful for
RACF staff.
Box 2
Preparation of ARG members
 Provide position description for ARG members. This
could include:
o Brief background to the project,
o Aims of the project,
o Role of the ARG in the project
o Key responsibilities
o Approximate time commitment per fortnight
 ARG preparatory workshops (8-12 hours)
o Guiding principles of AR
o The AR process - in detail
o Ethical considerations of AR
o Data management in AR
 Written resource guides
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
 TIPS from our experience:
The STAR project had at least two RACFs involved in each participating state (TAS, VIC, QLD).
Action research training workshops were conducted in each state. Members of the ARGs from the
respective facilities attended the training workshop together (where geographically possible).
Feedback from the ARG members indicated that meeting with their peers was invaluable as it
facilitated networking that they may have otherwise not had access to. Enabling RACF staff to
share ideas about and experiences form practice was important in reducing their sense of
professional isolation and establishing state based networks around falls prevention.
Actually undertaking action research requires an organised and systematic approach. The
next section of this resource will provide information about how to operationalise action
research according to it’s key stages of problem identification, planning, taking action
and collecting data, analysis/evaluation and reflection. While the stages are presented
below as being discrete, in reality they often overlap (Kemmis, S. & Wilkinson 1998, p.
21). For example the stages of reflection and re-planning often overlap, given that
knowledge from the reflection on previous action will inform the next round of problem
identification and planning.
Operationalising action research
Problem Identification
A reconnaissance or preliminary investigation will enable members of the action research
group to share and collect information about current practices and identify problems in
relation to falls prevention and management in their RACFs. During this phase the ARGs
meet regularly and reflect on their practices and consider:
 the history of the problem
 the context of their practices – organizational, economic, social
 the culture of the RACF in terms of falls management and evidence based
practice
 what has previously been done to try and improve falls prevention; and
 what sort of data should be collected to better understand falls prevention and
management in their facility (e.g. what data sources are available, who else would
be useful to collect data from.)
The reconnaissance phase assists the action research group to “cement” why they are
concerned about the issue of falls in their facility and should enable them to articulate
problems in their practices.
 Meeting Frequency:
During the STAR project ARGs met on a fortnightly basis during the problem
identification phase. If meetings are too far apart, the group will not gain momentum,
they may forget what they have talked about and not have the opportunity to explore a
range of issues in any detail.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
Considerations Around Data Management:
Ideally, it is best to conduct a project that involves collecting multiple data sources from a
various stakeholders under an ethics framework (could be an organizational ethics
community or a university based committee), as this will ensure that there are measures
to protect people’s anonymity and confidentiality. In the course of discussions ARG
members may disclose sensitive data (e.g. related to organizational processes, facility
management, resident care processes). It is essential that the group members feel safe to
disclose this information if it is useful to the project. Therefore:
 all members of the ARG will be given a pseudonym and this will be used in all
information arising from the group meetings (e.g. minutes, case notes),
 group members will be asked not to disclose the content of any discussions or
research related data to anyone outside the ARG, unless specifically advised by
the project officer and the action research group members. This will ensure
confidentiality of research data.
 Guidelines around communication will be established with the group in the initial
meetings (e.g. how meetings will be recorded and how information will be
distributed e.g. via email, in person).
 TIPS from our experience:
Obviously, group members will be aware of the thematic concern of the research i.e. falls
prevention. So you would assume that discussions amongst the group would occur in relation to
this issue. Initially this may or may not be the case. If group members have previously had little
involvement with research and limited opportunities for professional engagement with their peers,
then for the first few meetings the group may feel it necessary to “air their frustrations”. This
may the first time that they have been asked to share their concerns about practice!! While their
discussions may occur in the context of falls prevention and management, dialogue could centre
on issues that have, from the group’s perspective, the greatest impact on their practice (e.g.
staffing issues, workloads, excessive documentation etc). So for the first few meetings consider
asking the group broad questions in relation to the research area and allow them space to voice
their grievances. This will develop a common understanding amongst the group members that
they share similar problems and concerns, hopefully contributing to the development of cohesive
group relations. The issues that the group raises will also help you understand the context of the
group’s practice.
Action research Cycle – Plan, act, observe, reflect…
From the reconnaissance phase the action research group will have identified a number of
concerns/problems related to falls management. At this stage the first action cycle will be
put into place. This will consist of planning action to address an identified need, taking
action, observing the results of the action and reflecting on the outcome (was the action
successful or not?). Usually the researcher/project officer has a key role in guiding the
first action research cycle. This is when the group will learn the practicalities of
conducting action research. In later phases of the project the action research group will
be better equipped to direct and manage their own action plans. It is important to
remember that action research is RESEARCH so it is imperative that the process reflects
a high level of rigor in the way it is undertaken.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
Plan:
Planning action is a prospective process and needs to be done systematically. When
planning action the ARG needs to consider:





what they wish to achieve from the action and have these objectives been clearly
stated so that all group members are aware of what they are working towards.
Why is this intervention important/how is it going to make a difference?
What do you think will be the outcome of the intervention?
the risks involved with taking the action and why the action might not be
successful – identify the potential barriers to the action. This would include
resource issues, political/cultural issues.
What could go wrong/ What are the risks?
how the action will be monitored while it is underway. What methods will the
ARG members use to observe how the action is progressing and if there are
any problems and how it has initially been received?
how change will be indicated. How will the impact of the action be evaluated
and what data sources will be collected?
Consider the roles of various group members in the action. Who’s responsible?
(Street 1995).
 Meeting Frequency:
The planning phase is usually a busy time and requires the ARG members to carefully
consider a range of issues prior to deciding on action. During this phase it is useful to
meet weekly and depending on the amount of time that it takes the ARG to plan actions,
you may need to extend the meeting times. For example, some groups work best when
they have a block of time to tackle issues, rather than having to stop their work at the end
of an hour meeting. Therefore, it is advisable to consider whether your group will require
a block of 2-3 hours for action planning, across a few weeks. This may provide the time
needed to workshop ideas and systematically plan what action will be implemented, how
it will be conducted, monitored and evaluated.
 TIPS from our experience:
Encourage the group to consider actions that start small, are doable and have a good chance of
success. If the initial action(s) of the group are too complex and the group encounters too many
barriers, they risk becoming despondent and lose commitment and enthusiasm for the project. An
early victory will boost their confidence.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
Take action and collect data
Action is a careful and thoughtful variation of practice and it is at this stage that members
of the action research group go out into practice and implement the planned change.
 TIPS from our experience:
Nurses tend to be very good at acting quickly, to deal with issues in practice, and to solve
problems as they arise. With the best of intentions, nurses in the project may treat a research
based action like their own practice and change an action without consultation with the rest of the
group. It is important that this issue be raised with the group and that there is an understanding
that decisions are made with all group members present and considered in the context of the
research itself (Street 1995, 2002, 2004).
There is no one type of data collection that is best to evaluate the impact of an action in
practice. Rather, the type of data collected should best suit the type of action taken.
However data is collected, the process should reflect a rigorous and systematic approach.
For example, the impact of a staff educational intervention may be best measured through
the use of a survey (per and post test). ARGs in the STAR project collected a range of
data (e.g. surveys, audits, interviews, focus groups, reflective journal’s, informal
feedback) that provided evidence of the impact of their actions and measures of change
(e.g. changes to practice, changes to the knowledge of staff/family/residents, changes to
staff/family/resident attitudes).
Data collection should also take account of the barriers or constraints to the action and
any unintended effects of their action. For the first time that the group takes action the
research project officer will meet with them on a regular basis to provide support and
ensure that methods of observations are occurring and that there are no major problems.
 Meeting Frequency:
The first time that the ARG takes action may be somewhat anxiety provoking for them
and meetings on a regular basis (usually fortnightly) is a good way of ensuring that
group members feel supported, can share concerns and iron our any issues that may arise.
Meetings will become a less frequent occurrence as will the need for support from the
project officer, as the research progresses and the ARG members more comfortable.
 TIPS from our experience:
As mentioned previously, it is important for the group to have some success with this first action,
so that they are not too disheartened. Generally the first round of action raises more problems to
consider. The research project officers will need to be able to assist the group to recognise the
small and positive gains they have made. Group members find it helpful to be reminded that
“opening a can of worms” and looking at the “mess” is the only way a situation can be truly
understood!
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
Analysis/Evaluation and Reflection
Depending on the types of data collected the ARG members may undertake the analysis,
or where specific data analysis skills are required (e.g. statistical analysis of surveys) they
may need help from the project officer. Pragmatic decisions may also be made in relation
to time and resourcing constraints (Street 1995) that means the project officer conducts a
first level analysis of the data (Street 1995). By reflecting the analysed data ARG
members can come to better understand their practices and how their practices in falls
prevention can be improved.
Reflection will also allow the members of the ARG to consider how effective the action
was. Through reflection, the ARG members should not only be interested in what the
outcome of the action was but also how it was discovered. Reflection will enable the
RAG members to will consider if the outcomes of the action met their objectives and
what direction the research will proceed in. For example, the action might have had its
desired effect but a new problem was uncovered which the group wishes to tackle, or the
action might not have had the desired effect and the action is re-planned in light of new
information.
 Meeting Frequency:
Usually the ARG will continue to meet fortnightly while they undertaken data analysis
and reflection activities. Following the completion of the action cycle the ARG members
may need a break. Often taking action and evaluating the impact is exhausting and to
avoid burnout the group may benefit from time away from the project before embarking
on the next action cycle.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.
References
Gibbon, M 2002, 'Doing a doctorate using a participatory action research framework in
the context of community health', Qualitative Health Research, vol. 12, no. 4, pp.
546-558.
Greenwood, J & Levin, M 1998, Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for
Social Change, Sage Publications Inc, California.
Kelly, D & Simpson, S 2001, ' Action research in action: reflections on a project to
introduce clinical practice facilitators to an acute hospital setting', Journal of
Advanced Nursing, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 652-659.
Kemmis, S 2007, 'Action research as a practice- changing practice', Spanish
Collaborative Action Research Network (CARN) Conference, October 18 - 20,
2007., University of Valladolid.
Kemmis, S & McTaggart, R 1988, The Action Research Planner, Deakin University
Press, Geelong, Australia.
Kemmis, S & Wilkinson, M 1998, 'Participatory action research and the study of
practice', in S Kemmis & P Weeks (eds), Action research in practice:
partnerships for social justice in education, Routledge, London, pp. 21-36.
Morton-Cooper, A 2000, Action research in health care, Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford.
O'Conner, P, Franklin R. R. and Behrhorst, C. 1987, 'Hospital record studies as a tool for
staff education: a participatory research project in Guatemala', Journal of
Community Health, vol. 12, no. 2,3, pp. 92-107.
Street, A 1995, Nursing Replay: researching nursing culture together, Churchill
Livingstone, Melbourne.
---- 2002, 'Action Research', in Z Schneider, D Elliott, C Beanland, G LoBiondo-Wood &
J Haber (eds), Nursing Research Methods, Critical Appraisal and Utilisation, 2nd
edn, Mosbey, Sydney, vol. 220-231.
---- 2004, 'Bedtimes in nursing homes: an action research approach', in R Nay & S
Garratt (eds), Nursing older people: issues and innovations, 2nd edn,
ChurchillLivingstone, Sydney.
Waterman, H, Harker, R, MacDonald, H, McLaughlan, R & Waterman, C 2005,
'Advancing ophthalmic nursing practice through action research', Journal of
Advanced Nursing, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 281-290.
Waterman, H, Tillen, D, Dickson, R & de Koning, K 2001, 'Action research: a systematic
review and guidance for assessment', Health Technology Assessment, vol. 5, no.
23, viewed August 2009, <http://www.hta.nhsweb.nhs.uk/fullmono/mon523.pdf>.
© Sharon Andrews and Andrew Robinson, Wicking Dementia Research and Education
Centre, Oct 2009.