Systemic Practice and Action Research最新文献

For over fifty years, Soft Systems ideas and the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) have played a pivotal role in understanding various problem situations and initiating action. Often tackling the grandest challenges of our time, SSM will retain continued relevance in helping decision-makers address sustainability challenges within organisations and their communities. In this paper, we are concerned with the meaningful co-creation of sustainable value through community-based learning using SSM. More specifically, recognising that a sustainability paradigm, characterised by the need to create a just and safe space for humanity to thrive within the means of a living planet (as called for by Raworth, 2017), is often marginalised or overlooked. This paradigm presents us with an ethical imperative, complex and messy challenges/issues, and a set of ideals (articulated in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals) that are significantly off track. This paper employs a variation of the Delphi method, drawing on the authors' collective interest and experience in applying SSM in communities, to propose a double-loop learning cycle to explore the underlying assumptions of our worldviews and mental models within communities. We suggest that an SSM learning cycle can be enhanced by initiating conversations on relevant models for sustainability (such as Doughnut Economics, UN SDGs, and the principles for a Circular Economy), to find common ground for triggering new learning. This idea is contextualised and proposed as the value(s)-action gap phenomenon, which can help explain the difference between an individual, an organisation, and/or a community's intention(s) and their actual action(s).In doing so, find common ground, shift to higher levels of systems consciousness from an ego-centric to an ecosystem level of awareness, engage communities, and take an intergenerational perspective. We suggest that incorporating a double-loop learning cycle into SSM can support organisations and their communities in putting shared values into meaningful action.

Action research is well recognised as an approach to transform, empower, and emancipate individuals and communities through collaborative enquiry and intervention. A central tenet of action research is to generate learning and new knowledge through the cyclical process of action and reflection. Yet, traditional action research methodologies pose limitations for thoroughly extracting learning from action due to lack of well-developed frameworks for understanding the researcher's role and their evolving identity throughout the research process. This limitation undermines the depth of engagement with the problem context and the potential for a researcher to reflect and generate learning in real-time. Based on multiple in-depth longitudinal case studies conducted over a decade, this paper argues for the emancipation of action researchers through a new Situated Emancipatory Action Research (SEAR) framework developed using a novel soft systems methodology called the Process Oriented Holonic (PrOH) Modelling Methodology. The SEAR framework seeks to overcome the limitations inherent in action research by emphasising the importance of a cognitive journey for the researcher, moving from a primarily detached observer to an immersed agent of change, while continuously reflecting-in-action. This study demonstrates how the SEAR framework enables emancipation of both the researcher and the researched through an intertwining and mutually complementary process of deepening and widening understanding through successive action research cycles. The new SEAR framework facilitates action researchers to become emancipated from their precepts, biases and identity, towards better engaging with problem situations and extraction of new knowledge. This paper recommends further investigation and experimentation using the SEAR framework to refine and improve its application in wider action research settings.

This paper explores the complexities of involving partner organisations in co-generative learning processes within Action Research (AR) initiatives. Despite formal agreements, action researchers often face challenges in collaboratively addressing specific organisational issues through AR cycles. When action researchers adopt the “friendly outsider’ role, their initial task is to secure commitment to an AR initiative from senior leaders as sponsors. However, the existing literature lacks comprehensive guidance on facilitating this commitment. Therefore, drawing from both literature and empirical cases, this paper examines the pivotal role of the AR sponsor in securing funding and political backing, offering constructive critique, and facilitating learning. It provides insights into how action researchers can facilitate sponsors to enact these roles effectively so as to ensure the success and sustainability of organisational changes resulting from AR initiatives.

In this paper I reflect upon soft-systems inquiry. To do this I revisit Churchman’s discourse on the philosophical ideas underpinning inquiring systems and then discuss the practical application of soft inquiry pioneered by Checkland. This body of work suggested ontological models of organisational behavior were inappropriate and only by adopting an epistemological perspective would provide the basis for understanding complex systems that characterise human society. These ideas motivated a new way of addressing complexity. This work created a difficulty for action research since to be faithful to this discovery meant that any method of inquiry should be one that could cope with such complexity. One outcome was Soft Systems Methodology (SSM). Paradoxically the success of SSM has restrained further discussion of these ideas. The purpose of this paper is to revisit the ideas of Churchman and Checkland as a means of returning to first principles. In this paper I reassess their ideas and those of Husserl and Gadamer and suggest there is more to be gained from this rich seam of systems thinking.

We explore digital transformation and socio-technical systems through the perspectives of collaboration, co-generation, and domestication. Building on Morten Levin’s influential work, we discuss how digital technologies are integrated into work environments, emphasising the necessity for democratic, participatory approaches. We discuss how his ideas of collaborative, democratic practice originating in the 1990s hold up to today’s organisational challenges like digital and sustainability transitions. Are the ideas and practices still valid, or do we need to update them? We identify the grand challenges that must be met: Ensuring sustainable digital transitions and developing educated, skilled workers in digitally transformed organisations.

This study presents a dialogic design theory of change through a three-stage process—developing a shared vision, identifying challenges (Problématique), and formulating effective actions—illustrated by the "Famagusta Revival Project" in Cyprus. This action research project engaged participants in three Structured Democratic Dialogues to envision an ideal future for the deserted part of Famagusta, pinpoint obstacles, and devise an action plan. Key outcomes include the proposal of a tax-free, self-governed international hub under EU or UN oversight, the creation of a policy-guiding think tank, and a communication strategy to reframe Famagusta as a unified city. Participants identified critical barriers such as insufficient dialogue on citizenship and diversity, lack of proactive leadership, and the impact of the Annan Plan's rejection. Proposed actions focus on establishing think tanks and lobbying groups to influence government and EU policies, and organizing common activities bringing together more teams to create a better understanding and common approach. Amidst the backdrop of global challenges, this study underscores the importance of action-research-based dialogues and systems science in peacebuilding efforts, offering recommendations for applying these insights to frozen conflicts worldwide.

While complexity increases, current methodologies show some deficiencies. The main defect is when everything in a system is related and all relationships seem the same. It makes finding the difference quite hard. This article attempts to fill the identified gap by offering a methodology. It is named Pluralistic Causal Mapping (PCM). PCM was developed on Postmodern Systems Thinking. It is a mixed methodology that pursues individual emancipation through pluralism. PCM is applied to identify causality structure of large-scale information systems in order to test it in practice. Using the developed methodology, differences could be seen even when everything appeared the same. As a time-based methodology, PCM assigns power to statements based on three inquiry iterations. It distinguishes between the strength of relationships and delays. In addition, it minimizes the effects of practitioners' perception as well as the negative effects of power and group on the results.

In this article, we present what we believe to be the fundamental problem of production systems in Colombia: the domination relationships inherited from colonial structures. We introduce the theoretical foundations of the Community of Learning approach, which we have been developing over the past decades as an option to overcome this issue. We argue that, in the contemporary Latin American context, these relationships are intertwined with the training of individuals for integration into the productive system and its close association with technological tools. This results in the establishment of a domineering sociotechnical system linked to coloniality which some authors associate with modernity. The theoretical foundation of the learning communities approach stems from a philosophical tradition that seeks to examine from a systemic point of view the relationships of domination that produce the alienation of the subject. Our proposal is to establish a pedagogical space for transcending relations of domination, where individuals can explore their identities through interactions with others. In this approach, we aim to foster spaces for collective world-building by affirming one’s own subjectivity within interactions with the environment. We view the technical dimension as inherently linked to these interactions. We term this approach the Community of Learning model, wherein we collectively shape the world through practices that are seen as meaningful actions transforming relationships into learning processes. This approach can be regarded as a means to transcend the domineering aspects of technological practices while concurrently engaging in learning and world-building endeavors. We present, as an example, the results obtained in several cases applying this approach and some proposals that can contribute to effective practices when implementing the Community of Learning approach.

Implementing Industry 4.0 is hindered by the absence of a strategic focus on integrating digital technologies with traditional manufacturing. An inadequate Industry 4.0 implementation framework prevents practitioners from successfully transitioning to an Industry 4.0-enabled industrial environment. Thus, to achieve long-term Triple bottom line (TBL) benefits, the Industry 4.0 implementation framework should be carefully planned, designed, and aligned to effectively manage and optimize company resources (digital and physical infrastructure, human resources, technical processes, and technology systems). This paper proposes an Industry 4.0 framework to manage the key implementation issues using soft system methodology (SSM). A symptom map, rich picture, CATWOE for root definition, initial conceptual model, final implementable model, and Industry 4.0 implementation framework were developed from expert perspectives from multiple functional domains. The proposed framework consists of three main components: the implementation management system, which encompasses the technological framework system, recruitment and retention system, and governing system; the Industry 4.0 enabled manufacturing system; and the digital preparedness evaluation system. This paper offers a comprehensive understanding of the implementation issues linked with Industry 4.0 both at the organizational level and functional domain level.

This article reflects on the complexity of co-generative learning processes between a university and regional actors, drawing on the author’s experience facilitating an action research course. The course engages students in collaborating with regional practitioners on real-life territorial development challenges. Through glimpses into the co-generation process from student exam papers, the article highlights the challenges students face in navigating ambiguity and complexity when exposed to real-life territorial issues. Concepts such as regional complexity, Bildung, interiority, and democratic dialogue are used to analyze how structured reflection and facilitation through participation with regional actors can enhance students’ critical capacities for reflection and action. The main theoretical contribution is extending the concept of co-generative learning of Morten Levin and action research for territorial development by integrating students as reflective, facilitative actors in educational and regional development processes. Action research for territorial development provides a framework for accompanying the social transformations needed to address complex challenges. The article shows that by engaging in real-life issues through participatory, reflective processes, students develop crucial skills for facilitating collective territorial development efforts. Despite limitations related to geographic context and the course structure, the insights gained offer valuable implications for applying Levin’s legacy in other contexts.