A Systemic View of Transformational Leadership

A systemic view of transformational leadership is developed. Initially the terms administration, management, and leadership are distinguished. Leadership as an aesthetic function is then discussed. Growth, visions, and strategy continue discussions. It is then argued why leadership cannot be taught. Ways of viewing the world as systems that underpins transformational leadership are then set out. The paper concludes with a discussion of systemic transformation.     

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.     

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.     

From Fitness Landscapes to Knowledge Landscapes

Based on the complexity theory concept of fitness landscapes, this article develops and discusses the concept of knowledge landscapes. A knowledge landscape is a metaphor describing the ever-changing potential knowledge peaks and valleys that surround each one of us. Individuals, communities, and organizations move on their own knowledge landscapes by simultaneously climbing local peaks and exploring other visible peaks. The higher one climbs, the harder it is to climb still higher. Our ability to climb is also limited by our identity, who we are, which on an organizational level is linked to the tightness of organizational interconnectedness. Coevolutionary struggles between individuals and organizations can lead us to climb potential knowledge peaks faster. Moreover, our knowledge landscapes exist on many levels of scale, meaning that what appears to be one peak is actually a series of subpeaks on a smaller level of scale.     

Increased competence as a process of surviving in shared information spaces

Connections between people and groups are growing more frequent and more intense. Cultural events, changes in laws, activities of organizations, and new ideas elsewhere affect one's own decisions and activities more and more. This development has strong implications for the way people can increase their competence and how they can affect what happens to their own community or geographical area. In this paper consequences are considered for a special type of tool, the so-called problem language, that appears to be intimately entwined with many other tools in operations research, cybernetics, and systems research. The language appears most adequate in situations where boundaries can be found such that external events have minimal impact on what happens inside those boundaries. The change in connectivity makes finding such boundaries less and less probable. This suggests looking for another language, to structure the processes necessary when one intends to overcome difficulties that cannot be represented and solved as problems. A language of access is proposed, derived partly from studies in areas where it has never been possible to find boundaries as indicated. Within the framework of this language one can derive methods of externalization that imply speeding up flows of information in a shared workspace or shared information space. Their implementation is greatly facilitated—or even made possible at all—by recent developments in information technology.     

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.     

Rhetorics and Realities in Public Service Organizations: Systemic Practice and Organizational Learning as Critically Reflexive Action Research (CRAR)

This article sets out to develop an argument and theory-in-practice related to organizational learning and systemic practice as critically reflexive action research (CRAR). It explores principles and concepts associated with CRAR, in the context of different emphases in understandings of and approaches to managing or working with change. The notion of epistemologies of practice is developed, as the basis for introducing on-site and off-site CRAR as interweaving cycles of managerial and organizational learning. A multilayered illustration of an improvisational CRAR environment, using principles of dialectical enquiry and critical learning theater, is offered. A diagrammatic analysis provides the framework for describing and reflecting critically on key CRAR processes. This is expanded with a consideration of possibilities for documentation that can assist with the validation of quality in CRAR processes and outcomes. This has relevance in the context of postpositivist action research at postgraduate levels or within project-based CRAR partnerships. This leads to a further discussion of principles and concepts, in the context of other literature and pressures on public services.     

Man–Machine Systems: People and Technology in OR

This paper provides an exploration of how different understandings of man–machine systems have accompanied developments in Operational Research. In particular, the paper will challenge the notion that we are in a position of mastery with respect to technology. Both Hard OR and Soft OR are criticized for a failure to examine adequately the relationship between people and technology. Toward the end of the paper a new way of understanding this relationship will be proposed in terms of technologies of the self or what Michel Foucault called ethics.     

“Becoming Different”: Accessing University From a Low Socioeconomic Community—Barriers and Motivators

Access to tertiary education by individuals from low socio-economic backgrounds has been extremely low historically, despite policies to address this inequity. Twenty eight people from a low socio-economic community with almost the lowest rates of access to university in Australia were interviewed to identify the barriers they had encountered and the factors that had enabled them to access and complete a university qualification. Barriers reported occur both within the community, and external to, or on the boundary of the community. Internal barriers included lack of information about the existence of university or its value for individuals, cultural beliefs about acceptable aspirations, a lack of role models within the community, and a lack of the opportunity to compare the impact of a university education on lifestyle, opportunities and options. Motivators identified are categorised as nature of work; interest, role models/comparisons competition/proving, and encouragement.     

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.     

Systems and organizations: Distal and proximal thinking

The paper introduces the contributions to this special issue ofSystems Practice on Systems and Organizations: New Directions in terms ofdistal andproximal thinking. Distal thinking refers to ready-made concepts, to the finished effects and outcomes of thought and action; proximal thinking, to process and event, to the continuous and unfinished. The papers presented here deal with various aspects of the distal/proximal distinction in social systems and organizations, and especially draw out the implications of recent work in information technology, sociology of technology, accounting theory, and organization studies for a proximal conception of systems and organizations.     

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.     

Complexity Theory and the Fifth Discipline

Complexity Theory is a relatively new area of research, which has been applied successfully in the chemical and biological sciences and is now beginning to find applications in the social sciences, especially in economics and organizational analysis. The paper sets out an understanding of Complexity Theory and its application to problems in the Management area and, in particular, relates current Complexity Theory thinking in Management with Senge's approach of the Fifth Discipline. It puts forward a set of principles for Complexity Theory in organization which form the basis for this comparison. After raising some concerns about the concept of self-organization, which is shown to be one of the key concepts in Complexity Theory, and the apparent lack of focus in Complexity Theory research to date with organizational politics and success criteria, the paper concludes by considering whether, at present, Complexity Theory can be considered to have deeper applications in addition to providing useful metaphors relevant to organizational analysis.     

Researching-Acting-Reflecting on Public Health Services in Venezuela. II. Community Action and Critique

This paper, the second in a duology reporting on an action research project about public health services in Venezuela, presents a narrative of an intervention process launched on the basis of the conceptual framework presented in the first paper of the duology. Thereafter, a deeper reflection on such process, its meaning and its historical possibilities is presented. In this way a cycle of research-action-research is completed.     

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.     

An Inquiry into the Historical Meaning of “The Fifth Discipline”

This paper shows a possible way to unfold the historical meaning of The Fifth Discipline. The thread of this way is the question about the new way to be human promoted by The Fifth Discipline. It is shown that this new way of being is not modern and coincides at several points with the ancient one. This situation is given two opposed interpretations. The first one points to a sort of a returning of our cultural worldview to the ancient one. A critique to this interpretation leads to a second possibility, which points to a radicalization of the instrumental trends of high modernity. Then a second critique is articulated which shows that the shift in the idea of humanity manifested by The Fifth Discipline remains obscure and problematic for our current way of thinking.     

Business Action Research in Practice—A Strategic Conversation About Conducting Action Research in Business Organizations

The objectiveof this paper is to provide practitioner researchers with insights into the initial findings around the challenges of conducting business action research in practice in commercial settings on the basis of experiences of a PhD cohort at Monash University in the first 18 months of candidature. In performing the role of a concluding paper, it sets out a generic framework for action research that the cohort has come to embrace. In doing so, it draws on emergent themes spread across the six diverse topics that are the subject of action research interventions of the cohort members. The paper then identifies and analyses the common patterns that have emerged and offers observations and conclusions for those involved in practitioner research.     

Application of (dialectical) systems thinking to understand managerial problems in Yugoslavia today

Soon after its reestablishment in 1945, Yugoslavia saw no other official solution for its management and government modernization but self-management. This was underestimated by many influential people, so the Tayloristic model of the thinking and the working subsystems was not dissolved. It stresses specialization and reinforces one-sidedness. It also divides people into those who command and those who obey, leaving little room for wholism and creativity. New solutions are needed, and we see them in the transition toward the managerial style we all think, we all work, based on creative cooperation of the Many in constant search for change by innovation. This can also be a new partial system of self-management: the doers' innovation of the daily work processes.     

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.     

Reflection on the Purposes of Research,Action, and Scholarship: A Case of Cross-Cultural Participatory Action Research

Beginning with some basic principles of participatory action research, the author draws upon personal experience to identify the ways in which the experience of the practice of participatory action research creates forms of publication somewhat different in intent and nature from conventional forms of research. The experience selected involves cross-cultural research, and the particular problems of representation of the other in such settings are engaged. The overall experience is then drawn upon to identify some of the key qualities of action research which differ both from other forms of research and from some of the advocacies for action research.