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.     

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.     

Critical systems thinking: Edgar Morin and the French school of thought

In response to the call that systems practitioners need to produce a second epistemological break corresponding to a shift of interest from systems science to systems rationality, it is submitted that the preparation for this break has already been carried out. It is shown that systems rationality is firmly established and central to the French school of thought in systemics and that the philosophical groundwork has been extensively laid out by Edgar Morin. A very limited exposé of Morin's work is presented in support of this claim.     

Knowing as intervention: Reflections on the application of systems ideas

The relation between theory and practice is explored in this paper with respect to an examination of various systems approaches. It is argued that the moment of knowing already contains practical implications in that comprehensiongears practice in certain directions. Practice/application can fulfill the demands of theory through the operation of a self-fulfilling prophecy effect. The way in which theoretical conceptions of systems researchers may constrain practice is explored with reference to the work of Beer, Checkland and Scholes, and Ulrich. In the course of this exploration, alternative views of the way in which viable systems diagnosis, soft systems methodology, and critical systems heuristics may be utilised, are offered.     

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.     

Methodological foundations of systems methodologies

In social systems science generally, and in management science particularly, recent developments in the variety of types of specific problem-solving methodologies (under the rubric of hard and soft systems approaches) have given an impetus to a line of inquiry, as well as debate on the nature of those methodologies. On the one hand, there has been the view that what we are witnessing is a form of Kuhnian crisis. On the other hand, a complementarist view of developments has been argued and a contingency approach proposed. But one thing has been common among the competing views: a belief that the prospects for further advances in the design and application of those methodologies, and in resolving the current controversies, lie in serious attempts to reconsider and clarify the underlying metatheoretical assumptions and concerns. This paper is an attempt to contribute to such an endeavor. A brief exposition of three methodological foundations (namely, empiricism, hermeneutics, and critique) is made, not only with the purpose of highlighting the nature as well as the limits of their epistemological and ethical claims, but also as a basis for illuminating both the nature of contemporary work on systems inquiry, design, and problem solving and the ongoing debate on what constitutes appropriate criteria for choice of specific methodologies.     

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.     

Archaeology of (systems) inquiry

In this paper six scenarios for the future of systems problem solving are investigated in order to ascertain whether an approach can be identified (a) that offers prospects for the long-term survival and success of systems problem solving in practice and (b) that does this without incorporating theoretical contradictions. The six approaches come under the four class headings pragmatism, isolationism, imperialism, and pluralism. The theoretical foundations of each approach are explored in a discursive fashion. This makes explicit to systems practitioners the underlying principles on which their activities are overlaid and puts such approaches into the theoretical context of the six approaches identified herein.     

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.     

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.     

Accounting—A virtual autopoietic system?

The debate about the application of the concept of autopoiesis to social systems has been disabled by the difficulties of defining the autopoiesis of a specific social system ostensively. This paper considers the evidence that the circular relations of production which define autopoietic processes appear both in the cognitive domain and in the domains of human activity associated with accounting. Without a sound theoretical footing and, in the eyes of some, fatally flawed, accounting appears to be organizationally closed, capable of adapting itself to its rapidly changing environment, and probably well able to engulf many of the alternative ways of representing activities in society. It is concluded that if there are indeed autopoietic suprahuman systems of a natural kind mobilizing mankind in their service, then accounting is to be numbered among 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.     

The road to emancipation is through organizational development: A critical evaluation of total systems intervention

Total Systems Intervention (TSI) has been claimed to be the practical face of critical systems thinking. This article reviews the central principles of TSI, describes its theoretical base, and outlines its logic. It is argued that, far from being the way forward for management science, as its supporters claim, TSI is beset by logical and conceptual problems which render its use problematic. More specifically, TSI appears to confuse logical types; its use of metaphors tends to be circular and unnecessary; and its avowed complementarism is insufficiently thought out. It is also argued that TSI is only contingently linked to critical systems thinking and that the latter's assumptions are not followed through in practice. TSI, in the final analysis, appears to be relying on commonsense, eclectically drawing on other problem-solving methods, but in itself unable to present a distinctively new, theoretically sound, and methodologically consistent approach.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

An interpretive-systemic study of the University of Los Andes

This article is a summary of an interpretive-systemic study of the University of Los Andes in Venezuela. Following the methodological guidelines of interpretive systemology, three interpretive contextual systems were designed in order to comprehend the sense of the university. These three interpretive contexts were derived from possible different interpretations of the University Law (Statutes). Results obtained from the thematic interpretation of university activities and decision taking reveal an institution removed from any of the missions depicted in the interpretive contexts. A fourth interpretive context was designed to provide an interpretation of the regulative role the institution plays in order to maintain a particular social order and power structure. This fourth interpretive context shows greater interpretive power with regard to actual university activities than the other three.     

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.     

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.