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.     

The roots of reductionism: A counter-ontoepistemology for a systems approach

Both an ontoepistemology for reductionist modern science (counter-ontoepistemology) and an ontology for interpretive Systemology have been outlined in the two preceding papers in this special issue ofSystems Practice. In the present article, the notion of truth is interpreted in terms of both the ontoepistemology of reductionism and the ontology of interpretive systemology. Both interpretations are discussed. Such a discussion represents the objective of this paper, that is, to outline the epistemological face of the ontoepistemology of interpretive systemology. In order to design that epistemological face, the relation between ontology and epistemology must be clarified. Such a relation is seen from the standpoint already provided by the ontology. After the discussion on the notion of truth, the general shape of a systemic-interpretive inquiring process is outlined.     

“Think Like an Ecosystem”—Embedding a Living System Paradigm Into Participatory Planning

The European Union Water Framework Directive offers an unparalleled opportunity for improving river basin management and moving towards a sustainable future. It is widely accepted that the concept of sustainable development itself can be understood in fairly simple terms, but that implementation, making the concept practically operable, is difficult to achieve in practice. There is a need to animate this process, making it more engaging and comprehensible for participants. This research examined the emerging role of active stakeholder participation in planning for sustainability. The DesignWays planning process, developed by the author, was tested in the context of waterside regeneration in the Mersey Basin Campaign. The overall aim of this research was to explore the use of a systems thinking paradigm to inform participatory ecological design. It has demonstrated that a process consistent with a living systems paradigm can contribute to the development of more integrated, ecologically sound plans.     

A Maturing of Systems Thinking? Evidence from Three Perspectives

This paper reviews trends in systems theory/thinking from the 1970s to the early 2000s. It proposes a maturation of the field based on certain conceptual and methodological advances that have sought to liberate systems thinking from earlier strictures. An edited dialogue among three prominent systems thinkers from different systems schools—Merrelyn Emery, Bob Flood, and Eric Wolstenholme—provides evidence. Similarities and differences are identified, complementarities among the schools are derived and analyzed, and trajectories for future research are indicated.     

Approaching Action Research from a Socioecological Perspective

The paper seeks to explicate an action research methodological framework that can provide practical guidance to those approaching action research from a socioecological perspective. It does so by revisiting the developmental foundations of the Emery and Trist socioecological paradigm, by drawing on insights left scattered throughout Emery's writings, and by drawing on the author's own experience in action research. The framework explicated seeks to provide practical guidance for (i) intervention in field settings, to coproduce open social systems–environment active adaptation, i.e., action-research guided interventions to produce sought management outcomes, and (ii) generation and formalization of theory extensions to socioecological theory concerned with intervention strategy and intervention methodologies, i.e., action-research guided generation of socioecological theory suitable for social scientific publication.     

Systems thinking,systems practice,and practical philosophy: A program of research

IfSystems Practice is to serve the cause of socially rational decision making, its understanding of systems approach must open itself up to the communicative dimension of rational practice uncovered by contemporary practical philosophy. This programmatic paper argues that building the bridge between the two traditions of systems thinking and practical philosophy is a key challenge to be faced by the systems community. A three-level framework of rational systems practice is suggested as a point of departure for a program of research.     

The origins and nature of critical systems thinking

Critical systems thinking is a relative newcomer in the systems tradition of thought. Nevertheless, it has already made a number of significant contributions to the field and is now developing more quickly than any other part of systems thinking. The paper charts the origins and nature of this evolving, critical systems, body of work. The author's own impressions of its development are first set out. This helps establish that critical systems thinking has come to rest upon five commitments which define its essential character. These commitments are then used to classify the published literature associated with critical systems thinking. The result is a review of the origins and nature of critical systems thinking up to 1990.     

Critical systems thinking,paradigms, and the modelling space

Inquirers explore situations from their ownWeltanschauung and model them through a paradigm. A relationship between Weltanschauung and the paradigm is explored, as is that between paradigms and situations. Within the context of Critical Systems Thinking, exploration of how paradigms and their coordination, and thus the methodologies that they entertain, can be used within the action of complementarism.     

Tracking the development of the Emery-Trist systems paradigm (ETSP)

This paper is written to accomplish two objectives: first, to introduce the Emery-Trist systems paradigm to the critical systems thinking, a largely neglected and under-utilized paradigm; second using a critical systems thinking framework, to provide a rational justification in an attempt to track the developments in the ETSP so that an extended heuristic map is offered to the scholars interested in the Emery-Trist systems paradigm. Four tracks within ETSP are identified and analyzed to produce a liberation theme that has not previously been articulated. The liberation theme imminent in all four tracks of the paradigm development denotes the value and the promise of the ETSP to the critical systems thinking community as well as to other systems thinkers.An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 34th meeting of the International Society for Systems Science, Portland, Oregon, in July 1990.     

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.     

Dealing with a Differentiated Whole: The Philosophy of the WSR Approach

This paper seeks to explore a philosophical ground for the formulation and practice of an Oriental systems methodology, the wuli–shili–renli approach (WSR). Drawing insights from ancient Chinese thought, WSR contends that, in sociotechnical systems design/management, we should investigate and follow wuli, shili, and renli, which constitute a differentiable, dynamic whole. Wuli, shili, and renli condition and determine the fate of our projects, meaning different methods are needed to deal with each differentiable aspect. It also points out that, to deal with wuli, shili, and renli properly, we need to engage in encounters with the "dark side" of Confucianism and with the contemporary tendency of scientism.     

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.     

Critical introductory notes on farming systems research in developing third world agriculture

In Third World agricultural research of household-managed production units, the systems approach is applied in the form of Farming Systems Research (FSR). Several authors reviewed here have criticized the way in which this is done. It appears that most of them neglect the fact that most FSR belongs to the hard systems approach. The problem context (the household production unit and its surrounding socioeconomic system), however, consists of sense-giving subjects, which have conflicting goals and interests. Their thinking and behavior are determined largely by power relations. Therefore, in FSR, the hard systems approach should be discarded and a critical alternative approach should be developed instead.     

Multi-Modal Systems Thinking and a Self-Study of Teaching Reform: Realizing the Ethical Mode of Being

I describe multi-modal systems thinking in the context of my qualitative investigation of the influence of open discourse on technicism in a University Business Computing Course. I discontinued the research on realizing, through a reflective self study, influenced by my reading of the multi-modal thinking of the Amsterdam School, that I had acted unethically. I thus changed my research and my teaching practice. I note that this approach has recently been incorporated into systems thinking in the work of J. R. D. de Raadt, whose university informatics teaching reform, informed by the "way of the prophet," resonates with my reforms.     

Engineering Systems Thinking: A Multifunctional Definition

This paper asks what engineering systems thinking is and seeks to determine what distinguishes it from systems thinking. The purpose of the study was to identify the characteristics of engineers who are able to think in the manner we call engineering systems thinking. The study seeks to define the term engineering systems thinking on a theoretical level and then to move from the theoretical level to the operational level. A thorough understanding of engineering systems thinking on both the theoretical and operational levels will prove useful in the design of curricula to improve and develop thinking of this sort. Our study was based on 28 interviews, 14 lectures, and 2 observation sites. This paper treats only the material that pertains directly to engineering systems thinking.     

On Requisitely Holistic Understanding of Sustainable Development from Business Viewpoints

In the new millennium, and in its global economy, everybody will have to be very competitive and hence innovative. For this reason most humans, economies, and businesses must innovate our understanding of economics in all areas and levels of human activity. The new challenges require a thorough innovation of work, including a requisitely³ holistic consideration of sustainable development (SD). In our contribution we would like to shift attention from a principle-based moralizing about relations between the sustainable development and enterprises to a very practical issue: how to support a more requisitely holistic understanding of SD from business viewpoints. The most important or most frequent issues of a new understanding and implementation of SD include the following: SD requires holism, hence professional and political aspects in synergy, hence systems thinking; SD requires linking of different approaches to problem solving; businesses should no longer forget about SD; ISO, etc., standards are not holistic enough concepts to solve all SD problems; A more requisitely holistic methodology is needed for implementation of SD in business. We offer some new suggestions.     

Knowing Wuli,Sensing Shili,Caring for Renli: Methodology of the WSR Approach

This paper presents an outline of an Oriental systems methodology: the Wuli Shili Renli approach (WSR). The basic theme of WSR contends that wuli (regularities in objective existence), shili (ways of seeing and doing), and renli (patterns underlying human relations) constitute a differentiated whole that conditions systems projects. WSR suggests that we should design and employ appropriate methods to address and tackle wuli shili and renli elements in a theoretically informed and systemic way. The background, philosophy, process, principles, and some practical applications of the methodology are preliminarily outlined.     

Total systems intervention: A practical face to critical systems thinking

This is the first exposition of a new methodology (or perhaps meta-methodology) for systems practice known as Total Systems Intervention (TSI). Designed to overcome the weaknesses of hard, cybernetic, and soft systems approaches and build on their strengths, TSI represents a practical face of critical systems thinking. It advocates combining three building blocks-systems metaphors, system of systems methodologies, and individual systems methodologies—in an interactive manner which is deemed to be particularly powerful and fruitful. In this paper the philosophy, principles, and phases of the TSI methodology are set out and two very different examples of its use are provided.     

Dealing with Human Relations in Chinese Systems Practice

This paper is about the Wuli, Shili, Renli (WSR) systems methodology. An important concept within this, Renli, has been developed from Confucian philosophy to clarify to Chinese researchers the necessity of dealing with human relations in systems practice. At present, the only formal means of operationalizing Renli that people are exploring in China is to import from the West methods for organizing debate. However, the concept of Renli suggests that more is needed than methods alone. In particular, facilitation skills are required. It is argued that the development of facilitation skills can be enhanced if researchers can gain both theoretical and practical knowledge of group dynamics, and engage in activities of self-reflection to look at, and alter, their own roles in these dynamics and the wider sociopolitical system. There are therefore three aspects to Renli: the use of systems methods for organizing debate, the acquisition of facilitation skills, and self-reflection geared toward the development of facilitation skills and enhanced critical awareness of the politics of intervention.