Table 3 Challenges and risks in doing... | Emerald Publishing

Table 3

Challenges and risks in doing good and beautiful research (district 3 of Milan Project)

Research/Intervention question	Complexities brought on by the context	Epistemological and methodological risks
The initial proposal was structured around three objectives • Supporting workplace well-being • Supporting organizational well-being • Facilitating the emergence of innovation drivers in specific directions Subsequently, the question became clearer and transformed into a request to reorganize the system of meetings within the District, driven by the goals of reducing redundancies and increasing the perceived effectiveness of the meetings themselves	The project was promoted by an institution that does not directly provide services but coordinates the integration of services offered by various organizations recognized as part of the Social District This institution operates along multiple lines marked by fragmentation and power asymmetries The value of the project lies in two aspects: first, in its recognition of meetings as crucial contexts in which multiprofessional knowledge is turned into organizational practices, and second, in identifying the opportunity to connect various centers of knowledge production—knowledge that is useful, practical, transformative, contextual, dialectical, contended and contested	During the research process, there emerged a risk of adopting an epistemology that sees, reads and interprets contexts without considering intercontextual dimensions and the ways in which organizational narratives and conversations maintain and reproduce inequalities in status and power between different settings On a methodological level, there was a real risk of assuming an organizational design was valid simply because it was constructed through participatory means, assuming that “participatory” equated “legitimate.” However, even democratic participation can leave some people marginalized. Dialogue with those on the outside can lead to a complete and profound revision of the action research project, right down to its epistemological assumptions

Research/Intervention question	Complexities brought on by the context	Epistemological and methodological risks
The initial proposal was structured around three objectives• Supporting workplace well-being• Supporting organizational well-being• Facilitating the emergence of innovation drivers in specific directionsSubsequently, the question became clearer and transformed into a request to reorganize the system of meetings within the District, driven by the goals of reducing redundancies and increasing the perceived effectiveness of the meetings themselves	The project was promoted by an institution that does not directly provide services but coordinates the integration of services offered by various organizations recognized as part of the Social DistrictThis institution operates along multiple lines marked by fragmentation and power asymmetriesThe value of the project lies in two aspects: first, in its recognition of meetings as crucial contexts in which multiprofessional knowledge is turned into organizational practices, and second, in identifying the opportunity to connect various centers of knowledge production—knowledge that is useful, practical, transformative, contextual, dialectical, contended and contested	During the research process, there emerged a risk of adopting an epistemology that sees, reads and interprets contexts without considering intercontextual dimensions and the ways in which organizational narratives and conversations maintain and reproduce inequalities in status and power between different settingsOn a methodological level, there was a real risk of assuming an organizational design was valid simply because it was constructed through participatory means, assuming that “participatory” equated “legitimate.” However, even democratic participation can leave some people marginalized. Dialogue with those on the outside can lead to a complete and profound revision of the action research project, right down to its epistemological assumptions

Source(s): Authors’ own work