The relevance and value of action theory for action research is clear, but at one crucial point the Parsonian version of action theory proves inadequate. Many of the resistances and obstacles to successful institutionalization derive from the ascriptive elements of modern social structure. Parsons' theory, by concentrating on hierarchical and exchange relations between institutional spheres in a modern highly differentiated society, tends to under-estimate the functions and consequences of ascription. Action theory must incorporate an adequate theory of the non-normative elements of social structure before it can successfully account for the process of institutionalization. At first glance the use of the word "action" in sociological discourse to modify both "theory" and "research" might seem confusing. Does the word have the same meaning in both instances? What is common to both the