Last week pre-meeting we discussed about action research related to EBD. Action research is a scientific approach to assist the “action” in improving or refining his/her actor. The most important is, action research is always relevant to the participants. “Relevance” must be guaranteed, as it ensures that a specific solution would be figured out to the problem. Linking to EBD, even though this project is centred on designing a product or experience that smooths the Velocity releasing into market in May, however, it is not a real focus that should be defined by the researchers. Zip World and RibRide are hunting for the potential solutions to increase extra values on their cooperation and products, while they are not sure what exactly they are looking for. So the knowledge building and delivering in each workshop is at general level, while not well-targeted. Second, feedback, i.e. collecting the data regarding participants’ actions is an essential process that enables researchers and academics to adjust and improve participants’ actions in future. Currently, there is no this particular process. Therefore, this spiral process is cut off without this feedback process. For participants, build their knowledge as the block is quite challenging, as they rarely did the reflection by themselves neither given by the outside. They developed their own communication styles and social constructions, which might not be the most efficient way to create idea then form the product in the end.
From the side of researchers and academics, introduce the context is necessary, but how to deliver the most specific and relevant information about it is also important. As if participants not well understanding the context, then their actions will not relevant for the purpose of the research and consequently no specific solutions to the problem. Considering EBD, all participants are undergraduates with few working experience and business thinking. When academics deliver and introduce the knowledge at the beginning of each workshop, should think about if these participants digest the information and knowledge properly and efficiently. Based on what I saw among group performance, they are not managing very well. Unsurprisingly, their actions are far from the requirements of the tasks, sometimes even give up playing their roles on it. This kind of learning-analyzing-improving process is destructed.