The origin of action research is a two-stage process and includes a diagnostic stage and a therapeutic stage. Each of them is explained below: Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Diagnostic stage: It begins with the identification of research problems and issues related to the current situation and arrangements to deal with such problems. This step involves a mutual analysis of the social situation by the researcher and his research subjects. Based on the research area, research hypotheses are formulated (Baskerville, 1999; Baskerville & Pries-Heje, 1999; Blum, 1955; Coghlan & Brannick, 2014; Peters & Robinson, 1984). Therapeutic stage: This is the second stage of action research. , where planned collaborative experiments are carried out and the effects of such interventions are studied (Baskerville, 1999; Blum, 1955; Baskerville and Pries-Heje, 1999). However, to achieve more scientific rigor in the research process, a more detailed broader structure is usually imposed on projects. This method may vary depending on the implementation. More elaborately, action research is viewed as a cyclical iterative process that follows five steps until the solution is reached (Susman, 1983; Susman and Evered, 1978). Stage 1 (diagnostic stage): This is the main stage of action research where real-time problems or issues are identified for organizational change. These issues are identified through collaborative investigation of the social situation conducted by both the researcher and the individuals/research subjects. This helps the researcher formulate research hypotheses on organizational problems (Baskerville, 1999; Blum, 1955). Stage 2 (Action Planning Stage): During the action planning stage, the researcher and practitioner design specified action plans that can be helpful in eradicating. the main problems of the organization. The desired action plans are created based on the theoretical framework that specifies the desired stage of the organization and the specific action plans to activate the desired outcomes (Suman, 1983). Stage 3 (Action-taking stage): It is considered as the third stage of action research where the planned actions or interventions are implemented in the organization by the researchers and the practitioner together. These interventions target the desired organizational changes. Several key strategies can be implemented directly or indirectly to eradicate existing organizational problems. Step 4 (evaluation stage): After the execution of the planned action at the organizational level, the next step of the action researcher is to evaluate the results of the intervention and see how well the intervention implementation was successful. If the desired organizational change fails, some adjustments or improvements are made to the initial formation of the research hypotheses and the same research cycle continues until the desired solution is obtained. Therefore, this is considered an iterative process of organizational problem-solving mechanism (Davison, Martinsons & Kock, 2004). Step 5 (Specify the learning stage): The final stage of action research deals with the overall learning achieved during the research. journey. Knowledge will be created at each evaluation stage of the action research process, regardless of the project outcome (success/failure). The knowledge created during the evaluation phase of each intervention in case of failure serves ascontribution to new action plans. The knowledge gained from such field interventions will be useful in providing new directions for future researchers and the action research community as a whole (Mathiassen, 2002; Baskerville, 1997). Unlike conventional social sciences, their aim is not primarily or only to understand social arrangements, but also to achieve the desired change as a way forward to generate knowledge and empower stakeholders.Types of Action ResearchAction ResearchAction Research is an example of inquiry where the primary goal of the researcher is to improve the researcher's capacity and consequent practices instead of producing theoretical knowledge (Elliott, 1991). Practice improvement refers to improving the quality of the process and products. An important feature of action research is that research institutes change based on the feeling that something needs to change to create a better situation. The aim of the researcher is to provide direction towards achieving the objectives. The researcher can act as a team or as an individual. The researcher tries to improve the skills of the client and also deepens his knowledge during the research process. The researcher leads the research process by identifying problems, collects relevant facts and opinions from clients, and identifies research gaps. There is a consistent design among all researchers and there is no division of roles or specialized tasks. The researcher and the client jointly identify the actions to be taken and the analysis of the results is carried out jointly, reflect on these actions and results, and also recommend new courses of action. The researcher and clients act together to produce positive results for change. The researcher leads the group in identifying the plan of actions to be disseminated, but does not necessarily have to commit to these actions.Participatory ResearchParticipatory research is a method where the main objective of the researcher is to construct an environment and a process in which context-specific knowledge emerges to develop logical and actionable theory. Participatory research is proposed by the organization of interest. The researcher and participants come together closely in a group process to study and modify their social reality (Whyte, 1989). All members of the organization are allowed to participate in participatory research. Participants should be willing to participate and take on dynamic roles and define the problem, choose the data collection methodology, analyze the data, report the results and create actions. The participants treat each other like contemporaries. Through the exchange of dialogic processes, participants and researcher learn together. The role of the researcher is not that of an expert but that of a co-learner. The researcher has less control over the research design and the provenance of the data, and he or she also has less control over the research process. A participatory researcher must develop a context-specific structure, being flexible to changes in structure based on the participant's knowledge. The outcome of this type of association is very context-specific to enhance new shared understandings.Participatory Action ResearchParticipatory action research integrates both the goals of higher researcher capacity and practice, as in case of action research, and also achieves various practical and social objectives..