Social Systems as If People Mattered Response to the Kühl Critique of Theory U

ABSTRACT In his critique of Theory U, Kühl suggests that this approach resembles a management fashion based on four specific characteristics and claims, namely: (1) The simultaneous transformation of nearly everything, (2) The suspension of the differences between science, economics, politics, and religion, (3) Resolving conflicts of interest according to a community ideology, and (4) Reliance on purposive-rational thinking. The first part of this response to Kühl's critique argues that these four claims are unfounded or misguided and outlines why that is the case. The second part explores the questions not raised by Kühl. Finally, the third part of this response explores the blind spots of the framework that underlies Kühl's critique (Luhmann-inspired autopoietic social systems theory) and ways in which Theory U actually addresses these. Reflecting on the origins of Luhmann's approach in the early work of Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela [1987. The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Shambhala Publications, Inc.], the question is asked what an alternative approach to social systems theory might look like if it were instead grounded in the more evolved and later work of both Maturana and Varela – which in fact turns out to be the case for Theory U.