As each cycle examines the topic of study from two different perspectives, the biases of any one of them are more likely to be identified. Finally, implementation determines in a compelling way if the understanding can be used to improve the situation. To summarise, we have argued that appropriate concepts of validity depend upon situation and intended outcomes. Validity has come to have meanings which are appropriate for experimental paradigms. For action research, with its need for responsiveness and change, different concepts of validity are required.
All paradigms seek to understand the world.
Action research wishes to use this understanding to inform simultaneous action. We illustrate them by describing soft systems methodology in a way which reveals more clearly the use of these strategies. Finally, we suggest that the resulting description provides a general inquiry process which need not depend upon systems concepts as the language for describing the situation studied. Notes This document, with only minor editing, is a copy of a paper given at the Third Action Research Congress, Bath, 1994. Systems thinking, systems practice .