Observation Methods in the Context of Interactive Research

  • Jörgen EklundEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 824)


An interactive research approach was applied in an evaluation of a potential organizational change for mail carriers. Interviews and observations were performed. The results showed that specialization of mail carriers into either mail sorting or mail delivery would lead to more monotonous jobs. Observations showed that sorting mail in a new district takes substantially more time than in a well-known district. An interactive research approach creates a participative collaboration between employers, union representatives and researchers within a project. This influences the choice, planning and execution of methods, of which observation is one. Through the interactive discussions, the planning of how, who, when and where to perform the observations can be improved. This contributes to creating better opportunities to obtain valid results. The use of video recordings enables joint analysis, which contributes to higher acceptance of outcomes and results. The overall conclusion is that the combination of an interactive approach and observation methods is a way to improve both methodological validity and higher validity of the results in addition to higher acceptance of the results and subsequent decisions.


Partnership Video recordings Change readiness 


  1. Ellström P-E, Eklund J, Kock H, Lindström L, Melin U (1999) Knowledge creation through collaborative research: an emerging model. Paper presented at HSS-99, 16–18 March 1999, FalunGoogle Scholar
  2. Svensson L (2002) En analys och blick framåt. In: Svensson, Brulin, Ellström, Widegren (eds.) Interaktiv forskning – för utveckling av teori och praktik. Arbetsliv i omvandling 2002:7. Arbetslivsinstitutet, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  3. Aagaard Nielsen K, Nielsen SB (2006) methodologies in action research. In: Aagaard Nielsen K, Svensson L (eds) Action and interactive research – beyond practice and theory. Shaker Verlag, MaastrichtGoogle Scholar
  4. Kirwan B, Ainsworth LK (eds) (1992) A guide to task analysis: the task analysis working group. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  5. McAtamney L, Corlett EN (1993) RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Appl Ergon 24(2):91–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berns T (2004) Arbetslivsinstitutets expertgrupp för ergonomisk dokumentation: dokument 4: begreppet användbarhet av produkter och tjänster: en kunskapsöversikt. Arbete och Hälsa 2004:8, ArbetslivsinstitutetGoogle Scholar
  7. Imai M (1986) Kaizen. Random House Business Division, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Div. of ErgonomicsKTH Royal Institute of TechnologyHuddingeSweden
  2. 2.Helix Competence CentreLinköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations