Cybernetics and Participation: From Theory to Practice

A combination of recent cybernetic discourse provides guidelines for reconsidering our way of thinking about the relationship between government and the governed. With reference to contemporary understanding of natural biological systems and complexity, it is possible to reformulate a language that has tended to be dominated by notions of competition and survival of the fittest. Instead we can perhaps move toward reconsidering social systems in terms of a more dynamic and equitable understanding of the fit and structural dance of different systems, and postulate that the motor for progress is the coexistence of difference rather than might over right. This paper synthesizes the somewhat different insights of Stafford Beer and the Santiago School of Cognition, and reports on a real-world initiative that sought to instantiate governance as a phenomenon constituted by the governed. Technological developments of the knowledge age are proposed as supporting such democratic initiatives.     

Researching-Acting-Reflecting on Public Health Services in Venezuela. I. A Conceptual Framework

This is the first of a duology of articles reporting on an action research project about public health services in Venezuela. This first paper presents a summary of a conceptual framework from which a process of intervention was launched. The second paper, which follows immediately in this special issue, presents a narrative of the intervention process and a final discussion about it. The conceptual framework is constituted by two types of interpretive models of the role of the state concerning health services. On the one hand, four logical interpretive models are summarized. They correspond to four theories about the socioeconomic mission of the state in a modern society. Different thematic interpretations concerning the role of the state in health services are derived from such general missions. On the other hand, two different and, to a certain degree, opposed historical interpretive models about the present Venezuelan socioeconomic-political situation and their corresponding power structures are outlined. The four logical interpretive models are discussed in the light of the two historical models in terms of desirable and feasible courses of political action.     

Action Research as Experimentation

This paper suggests that the metaphors of experimentation and the laboratory are applicable when positioning action research vis-à-vis more conventional business school research. Following on from three different action research projects in a large multinational pharmaceutical company, the paper argues that an action researcher can never construct a sheltered environment wherein certain qualities of nature can be isolated, purified, and enhanced, but must always undertake research activities in vivo, in real life organizational setting. Still, the metaphor of the laboratory is applicable because it enables for an understanding of how what Ian Hacking calls interventions in the hard sciences share certain characteristics with the action research activities. When action researchers intervene within organizations, the activities are always experimental in nature, i.e., they can never be fully predicted or anticipated, but are initial steps in an emergent process of organizational change.     

The Engagement Approach to Real-World Problem Solving: Toward a Coherent Soft-Systems-Based Theoretical Platform for Real-World Problem Solving

This paper presents an approach to understanding problem solving and innovation from the perspective of engagement. The approach is derived primarily from two research projects undertaken over the last 5 years. The first one into the apparent Comparison Parado in Soft Systems Methodology, and the second an 18-month research program into the social reality implied by Soft Systems Methodology. Engagement is argued to be the innovation of a framework of ideas within a social context. In this sense engagement is an extension of the nature in which humans take ideas and place them inside a social context and use this as a platform to make sense of their environment and take action in such surroundings with an eye to understanding, learning, meaning, adaptation, innovation, and interpretation of such situations. Therefore, this paper presents a conjectured model of Engagement that is argued to be useful in helping to manage social complexity and real-world problem-solving activity. The paper positions engagement as a purely theoretical approach with multidisciplinary applications for whoever would like to use it.     

On the Usefulness of the Ackoff–Gharajedaghi Model of System Types for the Design of Business Systems

The Ackoff–Gharajedaghi Model of System Types distinguishes 3 fundamental empirical systems: deterministic, animate, and social, with regard to their purpose. It has been formulated as a meta-model to support understanding, selection, and formulation of management models and theories. It is argued here that this model is also valuable for the interpretation and design of actual, empirical business systems. A study of a malfunctioning business is presented and interpreted with the Ackoff–Gharajedaghi Model, which supports this argument. Additionally, the study shows a pragmatic value of the proposed Imperative of Goals Alignment for the design of business systems, which is an operationalization of the Ackoff–Gharajedaghi Model. Furthermore, the investigation illustrates the importance of clear goals and incentives in business design; and it supports the thesis of the Ackoff–Gharajedaghi Model that management models and theories, founded upon empirical observations of deterministic and animate systems, impose limitations on the design of business systems.     

Participatory Action Research and the Development of Critical Creativity: A “Natural” Combination?

This paper focuses on the research strategy that I employed during doctoral studies. An overarching framework of Action Research (AR) was used in the development of a complementary approach to creative studies. At the time of the studies AR seemed to be a natural choice and I did not overly concern myself with exploring as to why that was the case. However, I recognize the value of contemplating the appropriateness of research strategy and, in this paper, now reflect on some of the parallel strands implicit in AR and in critical creativity that I now realize served to enrich the overall research process.     

Environmental Paradigms,Biodiversity Conservation,and Critical Systems Thinking

In 1994 Gerald Midgley addressed the issue of the boundary implications of two different paradigms of thought about the environment, namely, humanis and the ecological perspective The distinction that he makes is important because it draws attention to the value implications of an uncritical acceptance of boundaries around human interests that serves to marginalize the environment. It is argued here, however, that Midgley does not go far enough. Just as an uncritical acceptance of humanis marginalizes the environment, so an uncritical acceptance of the environmental perspectiv runs the risk of prioritizing some elements of the environment over others, e.g., the interests of individual animals over species or over ecosystems. This paper seeks to correct this limitation in Midgleys account by developing a more sophisticated framework of environmental paradigms: a framework that can be used to clarify the values of stakeholders in critical systems interventions involving the management of biodiversity.     

Self-Reflection and Vulnerability in Action Research: Bringing Forth New Worlds in Our Learning

This paper looks at experiences in using action research in a self-reflective fashion. It addresses some of the problems which the action researcher has in coping with ourselves in our research. Mendes (1996) quotes Maturana: Everything is fundamental in our being alive and therefore, if we want to explain human experience we need to understand how being alive together generates our existence.² Although I would add that the social view of existence can be complemented by the view that our personal existence comes forth from a deeper domain, this statement is my starting point. Working from a anecdote which demonstrates the critical importance of individual perception in labeling any issue as a mess, I discuss the importance of self-reflection in the research process and the importance to us as researchers in recognizing our own vulnerability in the research context. Finally, I describe some positive outcomes or prizes of recognizing our vulnerability in research processes and using this vulnerability as a spur to improving our research.     

Some Common Ground That Can Provide a Basis for Collaboration Between Action Researchers and Scientists: A Philosophical Case That Works in Practice

By analysing 22 case studies of good research, both action research and agricultural science, I believe I have found some criteria of good research that is common to all of them. These criteria match the philosophical pragmatists argument that the best a researcher can do is to provide a warranted assertion from a methodology which is fit for the specific research purpose and is internally consistent. They also include Popper's requirement that a methodology needs to seek disconfirming evidence and Habermas's requirement that subjective data is important in all research. These criteria have provided me with a basis for collaboration with my scientific colleagues and can provide a basis for collaboration between other researchers, whatever their methodology.     

Building in Dialogue Between Consumers and Staff in Acute Mental Health Services

This paper describes some aspects of the methodology, material, and findings from a lengthy participatory action research engagement by a consumer organization in Australia, which was undertaken in collaboration with staff at a major public psychiatric hospital and then went on to involve players throughout the local and national mental health services system. A small first phase established a dialogic methodology for the exchange of experiences and thinking between staff and consumers. The purpose of the second phase of the research was to explore how consumers' voices might be heard, and how staff–consumer communication about that feedback, might be built in to ongoing organizational structure and culture. Systems thinking about defensive routines, silences, and voice-as-discourse is reported as offering a possible way of cracking the puzzle of the closed-loop cycle of claim/ blame-defense-and-counter-claim/blame-defense that has been characteristic to date.     

Consideration of Categories and Tools for Holistic Thinking

Ethical thinking strives to understand the shape of the perceptions of all the stakeholders and eschews thinking in terms of simplistic categories or binary oppositions. This paper attempts to provide some tools for workers who are concerned about the quality of their practice and wish to find creative solutions. Tools can be used to enhance the ability of human service workers in both the corporate and the public sector to think creatively. Theoretical literacy is a response to a postmodernist reality of competing constructs of truth. The complexity of the variables with which we are faced needs to be considered in each instance, not brushed aside with a uniformly applied formula.     

The scene for Interpretive Systemology

In this introductory paper to the special issue ofSystems Practice devoted to Interpretive Systemology, some of the conditions under which this trend in systems thinking has come to life are briefly depicted. For that purpose a wider and a narrower scene are presented. The wider scene presents the general questions and problems that are to be tackled by Interpretive Systemology, within a wide international perspective of systems thinking and practice. The narrower scene, which is related to more particular conditions, shows how some circumstances connected to the socalled Third World or underdeveloped countries have helped to trigger the launching of Interpretive Systemology. Finally, a brief outline of the research program for Interpretive Systemology is introduced.     

Testament to conversations on critical systems thinking between two systems practitioners

This is a testament to conversations held in Berne and Fribourg, Switzerland, in late 1988. The main theme that we present concerns seeking to find an adequate epistemology for systems practice, to find a truly critical approach, by shifting our interests from systems science to systems rationality (i.e., by reaching out toward a systems epistemological ideal) and by dealing with sociological phenomena such as the effects of material conditions and false consciousness and inequalities associated with these. Social rationalities relating to positivism, interpretivism, and critique are considered. Limitations and legitimacies of these rationalities in social contexts are made explicit in these discussions.Conversations were held in Berne and Fribourg, Switzerland, between 30 November and 5 December 1988.     

A Comparison of Interactive Planning and Soft Systems Methodology: Enhancing the Complementarist Position

Flood and Jackson (1991) explain the diversity of systems-based methods with a pluralistic System of Systems Methodologies by categorizing the various methods according to the problem context for which they are deemed to be best suited. The two methods classified as most appropriate for complex-pluralistic problems, Ackoff's Interactive Planning and Checkland's Soft System Methodology, are compared according to their underlying theory, problem-solving techniques, and outcomes. Despite their shared focus on the same problem context, the two methods are derived from different ontological assumptions which yield different techniques and outcomes. An argument is presented for conducting additional comparisons of methods that address the same problem context.     

Experience in the Practice of One Tradition of Multimethodology

This paper explores issues arising from the growing experience in the practice of just one of the traditions of multimethodology, namely that associated with a set of theoretical principles labeled pragmatic pluralism, and a methodological framework which is being developed to put these into action, namely, PANDA (participatory appraisal of needs and the development of action). The paper begins with a short historical introduction to the tradition of multimethodology under consideration; Section 2 then briefly describes some of the main features and principles involved in the PANDA framework. We then present three short case studies to illustrate different features of PANDA in action. The concluding section reflects on the issues that arise from the use of PANDA and discusses our future agenda for its development.     

“Underneath the iceberg” — Challenges to the process of operational research (OR)/systems from alternative practice

Conventional OR/systems practice, it is argued in this paper, is based upon assumptions which make it unsuitable for guiding interventions in nontraditional organizations. Any methodology or method rests upon a social theory,upon craft knowledge, and upon a theory of how change can and should be brought about. Conventional OR/systems is not explicit about any of these matters. Reflecting on why conventional methods often fail to work with nontraditional organizations, however, enables us to get beneath the iceberg and unearth what is being taken for granted. It is then obvious that the nature of many organizations in the social economy requires a different type of practice. Soft OR/systems is a response to the failings of the traditional approach, but goes only some way toward meeting the criticisms.     

Why There's Nothing Wrong With Systems Thinking a Little Chaos Won't Fix? A Critique of Modern Systems Theory and the Practice of Organizational Change It Informs

We find ourselves at the dawning of a new millennium, uneasy denizens of a world of growing flux. The models of reality on which we rely in our continuing effort to master the turbulent and hypercompetitive marketplace are failing us. Even the much touted 20th-century innovation referred to by Peter Senge in his 1990 bestseller of the same name as the fifth discipline, that is, systems thinking, turns out to be less than adequate to the task. Therein lies the central purpose of this paper: to demonstrate why there's nothing wrong with systems thinking that a little chaos can't remedy. My intent is twofold: first, to expose the problematic partialness of this paradigm, given its tendency to direct one's focus to not to the whole system, but to its exterior half, and, second, to introduce the reader to Chaos, the powerful cosmology now emerging from 20th-century science, as a science of whole wholes—one that enables the practitioner of management and systems sciences to comprehend the system's externality, its subtle within, and most importantly, the crucial relationship between them.     

Fostering Design Culture Through Cultivating the User-Designers' Design Thinking and Systems Thinking

In this paper, the essence of design thinking and systems thinking is reviewed, analyzed, and synthesized. Although there are many valuable schools of systems thinking, I focus on both Banathy's and Senge's since there are design spirit embedded in their systems thinking. I attempt to grasp the spirit of Banathy's systems models and the essence of Senge's systems thinking, incorporating them into my design inquiry. I propose adopting an enlightened, transformative design approach in order to enhance the revolution of the public's inner and outer systems through collaborative design engagement. It is expected that by utilizing the transformative design approach, the public or user–designers could gain the necessary skills to envision their own learning, assume responsibility for designing their own learning environments, and systematically reflect upon their habitual thinking and actions. Ultimately, the user-designers would be able to transform their model-driven or theory-driven approaches to systems application into a cultural approach to the cultivation of systems thinking and design thinking. Indeed, design thinking, as well as contemporary systems thinking are two powerful wings to make us fly in the capacious learning world of the 21st century.     

Strategic Management in Action

This paper sets out to overview the strategic management process and its alignment with a systemic approach and to briefly review the necessary enablers, namely: the presence and practice of learning at the individual, group, and organizational level, a culture of exploration and innovation, which implies a receptiveness to new ideas, and the space or opportunities to practise the skills putting the learnings into action. Having set the study's theoretical context, the paper then explores some of the realities and implications, both for strategic management and the action researcher, by examining two quite different case scenarios from within a large Australian-based financial services organization, the first, Case Study A, involving a more strategic focus, and the second, Case Study B, an operational one.