چکیده:
Regarding the state of equilibrium or a balanced research system, one can speak from various dimensions; for example, how a research system should be both present-oriented and future-oriented, how it should combine quantitative and qualitative approaches in research, etc. This writing looks at this subject from a specific dimension and intends to bring a different aspect of balance into discussion. This specific dimension addresses research characterized by the nature of action research as a complement to scientific and academic research. The main claim of this article is that creating balance (or achieving a desirable state) in research systems dealing with the realm of human and social sciences is partly due to paying attention to and legitimizing the action research or research-in-action approach. Subsequently, under the shadow of this theory, it addresses a different definition of research-oriented management or decision-making and evaluates common definitions as insufficient and inadequate. In the final section of this writing, the theoretical consequences resulting from accepting the legitimacy of action research in the discussed research systems are discussed.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Further explanation is that managers and policymakers, or decision-makers in general, are expected that if they find themselves in conditions where they are inevitably forced to act to confront an unpleasant issue or situation, and on the other hand, they do not have scientific researches whose results could inspire the method of dealing with or confronting that situation, by adhering to common sense and using their own and others' past experiences, to the extent that is possible within the framework of time and available resources, they find the courage and boldness to formulate a program- executive or decision-making, and test it as a reasonable solution.
In other words, research-oriented managers or managers attached to scientific encounters with issues and situations related to their field of duty in the realm of human and social sciences are not only those managers who make their decisions preceded by and dependent on the results of scientific research findings (if managers can even be identified with such a narrow and limited criterion), but managers who make research dependent on action, deed, and decision also belong to this group.
In other words, what should be considered in a research system related to human and social realms regarding managers and decision-makers7 is the degree of enjoyment of rationality 3 in their decision-making and policymaking, which can manifest in scientific research as well as in action research.
(
, 
, 
)
