In the action research and learning literature, there continues to be an absence of writing about the process of theory building (Dick et al, 2009; Dick 2004). From my field experience with Participatory Action Research, I can empathise with the difficulty in explaining in any replicable way, how the process of theory development occurred. How does one describe insight and the intuitive mental pathways that one really uses? The nature of engaging with a particular community is subjective and focuses on beneficial processes whereas the abstraction of concepts and relationships from the experience require learning and reflection drawn from a wide variety of knowledge fields in which you do not have mastery. Genat (2009) describes the process of theory building using shared experience to co-create a conceptual framework within a specific local context. As recent contributions to transferable theory Raymer (2009) and Poonamallee (2009), describe the development of theory as a second phase of the learning process. Raymer (2009) used a theory-mapping tool to revisit her project data. Poonamallee (2009) uses a philosophical framework to crystallize theoretical learning from her research. These examples illustrate how data collection and theory building required two methodologies. This makes writing about the process very complicated. The abstraction required for straddling multiple methodologies loses the detail in what Dick et al (2009, p. 117) would recognise as how it is done. In addition, dealing only with the theory development raises frustrations about how theory relates to participation (Dick et al, 2009).

In this paper, a participatory experience is used to tell the story of Grounded Theory (GT) development embedded in participatory activities that also occurred in two phases. The “observe and participate” phase focussed on the emerging design and creation of a data set during an extended engagement with stakeholders. In the “constructive” phase, space within which to theorize required distance from the emotions of participation as well as access to face-to-face discussion within an academic discourse. The paper tells the narrative of the research process as a whole, and then focuses on the use of Grounded Theory as the taproot for building theory as a purposeful companion to action research. Discussion supports GT as a valid method for transdisciplinary theory building in action research and highlights learning within the participatory experience. The process supports the strengths of action research in facing system challenges as well as identifying attitudes and processes that inform the de-colonization priority of creating institutional structures with a social and moral identity.