This paper explores the prospects of combining Grounded Theory (GT) and Action Research (AR) methodologies to spark further methodological discussion. GT and AR methodologies are sometimes used together in the same study without a discussion of their methodological compatibility. However, different iterations of GT and various forms of AR may inform the level of mutual compatibility. The goal of this conceptual paper is to answer two questions: Which iteration of GT could be more compatible with which form of AR? What benefits and challenges would such a methodological combination pose? The author presents a brief comparative review of GT and AR approaches, commenting on the intriguing complementarities of these methodologies and the benefits of their triangulation in social research. The author concludes that, although the prospect of combining GT and AR is promising, it undeniably requires further scrutiny in the applied research.