Dealing with coercion: Critical Systems Heuristics and beyond

This paper begins with an introduction to the philosophy and methodology of Critical Systems Heuristics (CSH). Following this, various citicisms of CSH are reviewed. One particularly important criticism is that CSH should not be seen as a replacement for other systems approaches, but as complementary to them. It is this idea of complementarity that has led several Critical Systems thinkers to take CSH, along with a number of other systems methods, and try to show that they are most appropriately used in different contexts. CSH, it is said, is at its most useful when we are confronted with coercive situations. However, in this paper it is argued that coercion is usually characterised by closure of debate. Therefore CSH, which depends upon the possibility of communication (or arbitration) between stakeholder groups, becomes redundant when coercion is experienced. It is further argued that coercion can only be addressed adequately by widening our definition of systems practice to include campaigning and direct political action. There is still considerable scope for developing these areas in the systems domain.