Birth and Demise of a Social Protection Organization in Venezuela

In this article a context for the study of a social protection organization is presented. This context is based on three ideas: (i) social protection is a requirement for assuming the cohesion and continuation of society; (ii) in an industrialized society, social protection is conceived in connection with salary; and (iii) the organizational form of social protection in Venezuelan society is Social Security guaranteed by a Welfare State. The becoming of our Social Security organization is interpreted with these concepts. The interpretive process consists in the unfolding of the relation between the organizational form and the conceptions about social protection since the birth of the organization 60 years ago. This unfolding simultaneously reveals failure concerning coverage of the risks typical of social security and a radical change in the conception of social protection in Venezuela. These results rest on the non-realization of premise ii of the interpretive context in the case of the Venezuelan society. The article concludes by showing the need to understand the conceptions regarding social protection in contexts different from that of an industrial society (advanced or not).     

An Interpretive-Systemic Framework for the Study of Community Organizations

This paper presents a conceptual framework for the systemic study of community organizations (COs) in contemporary societies. This framework is made up of two ideal-type models of COs. These models are structured around the notions of rights, social interaction, and the State. The first ideal-type model is based on a liberal conception of society, and the second model is grounded on communicative ethics as developed by Habermas for contemporary deliberative democracy. The relevance and limitations of such interpretive framework are discussed when a brief exploration on the social meaning of COs in Venezuela unveils grounds for further questioning about the role of COs in contemporary society.     

A Conceptual Framework Based on Maturana’s Ontology of the Observer to Explore the Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology

This paper explores Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) through the lenses of a theoretical framework that incorporates key concepts from Maturana’s Ontology of the Observer (OoO) with the view of complementing Checkland’s SSM application process. We outline and examine paradigmatic compatibility between: Checkland’s ontological position (reality is problematic/chaotic) together with his interpretivist epistemology (multiple perceptions enrich the ever-changing reality); and Maturana’s OoO (we are immersed in the praxis of living in an ontological multi-universe). We argue that OoO resonates with key SSM theoretical underpinnings. After establishing compatibility between these two influential systems thinkers, we advance a conceptual framework in which Checkland’s SSM learning process is re-visited through a the framework grounded on Maturana’s OoO. The proposed framework illustrates how key ideas drawn from Maturana’s OoO can shed light into the way in which some of the main SSM devices (i.e.: Root definitions, Conceptual model) are used in the SSM process. By doing that, SSM is enriched and becomes more flexible as the stakeholders involved are placed within the domain of constitutive ontologies from which, a deeper dialogue can be promoted in a domain of coexistence in mutual acceptance. We argue that this is a suitable way to have more flexible and holistic views for a SSM intervention in particular to promote the learning process and debating proposed changes amongst the stakeholders involved. The proposed framework, when applied, may enhance the power of SSM learning process and when adopted can have substantial implications to complement the SSM process.

     

Unfolding a Theory of Systemic Intervention

This paper interrogates four perspectives (structuralist community psychology, deconstruction, interpretive systemology, and critical systems thinking) to inform the unfolding of a theory of systemic intervention. A vision of epistemology is provided which clarifies the relationships among knowledge, power, will and intervention, and a normative framework for systemic intervention is then presented. Finally, the theory unfolded in this paper is deconstructed to reveal a second theory, yet to be explored, of systemic life projects. This provides an exciting agenda for future research.