Critical approach: Action and evaluation

The critical approach to action research was implicit in the topic of the study. Indeed, while it is true that the debate over sustainability and social responsibility aims to improve and understand the dynamics of business–society relations, its final objective is to transform the dominant economic system away from promoting ecological degradation and social inequity. From this perspective, it can be argued that these action research studies aimed to make the group of entrepreneurs and business students aware of the nature, consequences and context of their marketplace actions and to encourage them to use this awareness as a trigger to work towards more sustainable business practices (see Carr & Kemmis 1986). In the long-run, the process of action and reflection should lead both co-researchers and re-search collaborators towards alternative ways to conceptualise business–society relations and to relate to nature and society as a whole.

Treating reflection as a continuous process helped me realise how my understanding of the notions of development, sustainability, learning and research were challenged and transformed by moral values, discursive practices and multi-stakeholder relations. Indeed, as the action researcher, I was exposed to the forces described in Figure 1 alongside the research participants. The business development study changed not only my view of the relationship between theory and practice but also my conceptualisation of marketing and management. In particular, my reflections on the actions that occurred within the peda-gogical development project drew my attention to the notion of critical reflexivity and al-lowed me to approach the business development project and my research, teaching and developmental practices from a completely new perspective. I not only became a more re-flexive professional but, inspired by Cunliffe’s (2004) thoughts, I also wished to encourage my students to question their own practices and assumptions as a basis for more critical and ethical actions. Towards the end of both the pedagogical development project and my dissertation, I was able to count myself among critical marketing and social constructionist scholars who view learning as a social process through which interpersonal and intraper-sonal relations become the means to construct our way of being in the market and relate to other market actors (see Cunliffe 2004; Dredge et al. forthcoming).

While the reflective analysis conducted during the business development project helped the group of entrepreneurs grasp the notion of sustainability within their local context, this reflection failed to help them break away from neoclassical principles (e.g., growth, competition and efficiency) that shaped their business environment. Reflection only enabled them to learn to accommodate their business approach and sustainability understanding within a market economy. It seemed that these entrepreneurs, despite their high motivation to depart from business as usual, were trapped within the field of power of the managerial discourse in which they took up a particular subject position (see Laine

& Vaara 2007). However, the critical approach to action research in the pedagogical de-velopment project allowed students to examine sustainability in terms of a set of reflexive processes and discursive practices. Compared to the entrepreneurs, the students were able to free themselves from managerialism – at least for a while – to explore new ways of or-ganising, managing and relating in the market.

There were ethical dilemmas that came with these action research studies and their critical perspective. By involving entrepreneurs in the development of more sustainable products, I assumed the responsibility of ensuring that these products stood a chance of being offered on the market (see Heiskanen 2005). I assumed the same responsibility with the students by encouraging them to become reflexive practitioners. How could I ensure that they could apply these reflexive practices in their future professions? To what degree was I responsible for their frustrations, powerlessness and disappointment in failing to change the way business is practiced? Indeed, as an action researcher, I had a moral respon-sibility to facilitate the change I was encouraging and in which I was involving the entrepre-neurs and students, who trusted me. For instance, the action research study with the entre-preneurs created high expectations that a successful business network would be created.

These expectations obliged me, as Heiskanen (2005) argues, to continue the pilot-project longer than was planned by “Equality Trail”. As the action researcher, I felt a sense of duty to continue working with these companies and did so for some time after the pilot-project concluded. However, I eventually had to exit the field and needed to consider the best and most ethically correct way to do so. Finally, I agreed with Heiskanen (2005, 196) that it is difficult for action research studies to achieve large-scale social change, which can be very frustrating for the action researcher. Nevertheless, I saw that the two action research stud-ies I was involved in led to some concrete actions among both the entrepreneurs and the business curriculum of the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Lapland.

Before joining the network, the entrepreneurs operated individually within the mar-ket, selling their services directly to the final customer or through resellers and other in-termediaries. By the end of the action research process, the entrepreneurs had begun to move toward more collective practices that strengthened their business relationships and added value to their market offerings. In fact, the action research study played a key role in developing these trusting relationships between the participating entrepreneurs (see Bal-lantyne 2004). By the end of the project, the network members had decided to continue their collaboration as different groups, a decision that was most likely based on geography.

Though the initial network created by “Equality Trail” dispersed when intervention ended, the entrepreneurs had learned to value and be confident in their knowledge and ability to conduct business in a socially responsible way in collaboration with other market actors.

Through the project, it was possible to learn about the opportunities and challenges of (1) involving project participants in the design, implementation and evaluation of project activities and (2) combining research with development objectives. As a result of these lessons learned and my personal engagement in the project planning at the University of Lapland and the Rovaniemi University of Applied Sciences, there was a higher approval rate for research and development projects in which all participants would play a crucial role in the production of knowledge.

Additionally, the pedagogical development project had some direct consequences for the business curriculum at the Faculty of Social Sciences. The Business Ethics course moved from the master’s curriculum to the bachelor’s curriculum. This decision was based on the students’ comments in their learning journals and feedback questionnaires. Most

students considered it to be important to learn about sustainability and ethics at the begin-ning of their studies and not towards the end, when their professional identity had already been shaped. Sustainability was also integrated into other bachelor’s-level courses. The Environmental Marketing course was changed to a CSR course and continued to be taught to Masters-level students. However, the teaching methodologies and content have continu-ally been enhanced as a consequence of the different action research cycles. My develop-ment as a critical reflexive educator has had a particular influence on the articles and books used in both courses.