Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to Use Ambiguity in Problem Framing for Enabling Divergent Thinking: Integrating Problem Structuring Methods and Concept-Knowledge Theory

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Behavioral Operational Research

Abstract

Collective behaviors and participatory models could be hampered by the presence of ambiguity that reflects the multiplicity of interpretations that different actors bring to a modeling exercise. Despite commonly overlooked in modeling, how ambiguity in subjective problem frames is embraced determines the quality of the participatory modeling process. This work describes an innovative approach based on the integration of Problem Structuring Methods, specifically Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping (FCM), and Concept-Knowledge (C-K) design theory, as a means to transform ambiguity from a barrier to an enabling factor of divergent thinking in participatory modeling. The integration of methods allows to identify and analyze ambiguity in problem framing, avoiding viewpoints’ polarization that hampers the development of collective behaviors. However, individualistic problem frames can still yield organized collective actions when these frames are sufficiently aligned. Often environmental policies fail because decision-makers are not aware of the misalignment and their decisions are based on wrong assumptions about the others’ problem frames. This work discusses the results of two case studies aimed to design environmental policies for groundwater protection in Kokkinochoria area (Republic of Cyprus) and Apulia Region (South-East Italy), demonstrating the potential of FCM and C-K theory integration in supporting divergent thinking in participatory modeling.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1962). Scientific Method. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1978). The Art of Problem Solving: Accompanied by Ackoffs Fables. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agogué, M., Hooge, S., Arnoux, F., & Brown, I. (2014b). An Introduction to Innovative Design: Elements and Applications of C-K Theory. Paris: TRANSVALOR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agogué, M., & Kazakçi, A. O. (2014a). 10 years of C–K theory: A survey on the academic and industrial impacts of a design theory. An Anthology of Theories and Models of Design (pp. 219–235). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borri, D., Camarda, D., Pluchinotta, I., & Esposito, D. (2015). Supporting environmental planning: Knowledge management through fuzzy cognitive mapping. In Y. Luo (Ed.), Cooperative Design, Visualization, and Engineering CDVE 2015 Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 9320, pp. 228–235). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brugnach, M., Dewulf, A., Henriksen, H. J., & van der Keurd, P. (2011). More is not always better: Coping with ambiguity in natural resources management. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(1), 78–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brugnach, M., & Ingram, H. (2012). Ambiguity: The challenge of knowing and deciding together. Environmental Science & Policy, 15(1), 60–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brugnach, M., Tagg, A., Keil, F., & de Lange, W. J. (2007). Uncertainty matters: Computer models at the science-policy interface. Water Resource Management, 21(7), 1075–1090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. B. (2000). Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, 11–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. B., & Holwell, S. (2004). Classic OR and soft OR: An asymmetric com-plementarity. In M. Pidd (Ed.), Systems Modelling: Theory and Practice (pp. 43–60). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colorni, A., & Tsoukiàs, A. (2018). What is a decision problem? Designing alternatives. In N. Matsatsinis & E. Grigoroudis (Eds.), Preference Disaggregation in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (pp. 1–15). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J., MacDonald, A., & White, L. (2010). Problem-structuring methods and project management: An example of stakeholder involvement using Hierarchical Process Modelling methodology. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 61(6), 893–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Marchi, G., Lucertini, G., & Tsoukiàs, A. (2016). From evidence-based policy making to policy analytics. Annals of Operations Research, 236(1), 15–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C. (1992). On the nature of cognitive maps. Journal of Management Studies, 29(3), 261–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C. (2004). Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems. European Journal Operational Research, 159(3), 673–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2006). Where next for problem structuring methods. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 766–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferretti, V., Pluchinotta, I., & Tsoukiàs, A. (2019). Studying the generation of alternatives in public policy making processes. European Journal of Operational Research, 273(1), 353–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giordano, R., Brugnach, M., & Pluchinotta, I. (2017a). Ambiguity in problem framing as a barrier to collective actions: Some hints from groundwater protection policy in the Apulia Region. Group Decision and Negotiation, 26(5), 911–932.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giordano, R., D’agostino, D., Apollonio, C., Scardigno, A., Pagano, A., Portoghese, I., et al. (2015). Evaluating acceptability of groundwater protection measures under different agricultural policies. Agricultural Water Management, 147, 54–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giordano, R., & Liersch, S. (2012). A fuzzy GIS-based system to integrate local and technical knowledge in soil salinity monitoring. Journal Environmental Modelling & Software, 36(October), 49–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giordano, R., Pagano, A., Pluchinotta, I., Olivo del Amo, R., Hernandez, S. M., & Lafuente, E. S. (2017b). Modelling the complexity of the network of interactions in flood emergency management: The Lorca flash flood case. Environmental Modelling and Software, 95, 180–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen, R. P., Luoma, J., & Saarinen, E. (2013). On the importance of behavioural operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 228(3), 623–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, S. R., & Qureshi, M. E. (2000). Choice of stakeholder groups and members in multicriteria decision models. Natural Resources Forum, 24(1), 11–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2003, January). A New approach of innovative design: An introduction to C-K theory. In International Conference on Engineering Design (1– 15). Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B., (2002). C-K theory: Notions and applications of a unified design theory. In Proceedings of the Herbert Simon International Conference on “Design Sciences”   (pp 1–22).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2007). Design as forcing: Deepening the foundations of C-K theory. Sixteenth International Conference on Engineering Design proceedings.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. C. (2006). Beyond problem structuring methods: Reinventing the future of OR/MS. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 868–878.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J. A. E. B., Hoekstra, A. Y., de Kok, J. L., & Schielen, R. M. J. (2009). Delineating the model-stakeholder gap: Framing perceptions to analyse the information requirement in river management. Water Resource Management, 23(7), 1423–1445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keys, P. (1997). Approaches to understanding the process of OR: Review, critique and extension. Omega, 25, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kok, K. (2009). The potential of fuzzy cognitive maps for semi-quantitative scenario development, with an example from Brazil. Global Environmental Change, 19, 122–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosko, B. (1986). Fuzzy cognitive maps. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 24(1), 65–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, T., Page, T., Hubacek, K., Smith, L., & Hiscock, K. (2012). The role of expert opinion in environmental modelling. Environmental Modelling and Software, 36, 4–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Masson, P., Weil, B., & Hatchuel, A. (2017). Design Theory: Methods and Organization for Innovation. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leskens, J. G., Brugnach, M., Hoekstra, A. Y., & Schuurmans, W. (2014). Why are decisions in flood disaster management so poorly supported by information from flood models? Environmental Modelling and Software, 53, 53–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesoume, J. (1990). OR and the social sciences. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 41, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J. (2000). The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51, 1256–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J. (2011). Soft OR comes of age-but not everywhere! Omega, 39(6), 729–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., & Rosenhead, J. (2004). Problem structuring methods in action. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 530–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nair, S., & Howlett, M. (2016). Meaning and power in the design and development of policy experiments. Futures, 76, 67–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Özesmi, U., & Özesmi, S. L. (2004). Ecological models based on people’s knowledge: A multi-step fuzzy cognitive mapping approach. Ecological Modelling, 176, 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, L.S., Cordery, I., Iacovides, I., (2009a). Coping with water scarcity: Addressing the challenges. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pluchinotta, I., Esposito, D., & Camarda, D. (2019b). Fuzzy cognitive mapping to support multi-agent decisions in development of urban policy-making. Sustainable Cities and Society, 46, 101402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pluchinotta, I., Kazakçi, A. O., Giordano, R., & Tsoukiàs, A. (2019a). Design theory for generating alternatives in public policy making. Group Decision and Negotiation, 28(2), 341–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pluchinotta, I., Pagano, A., Giordano, R., & Tsoukiàs, A. (2018). A system dynamics model for supporting decision-makers in irrigation water management. Journal of Environmental Management, 223, 815–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prell, C., Hubacek, K., Quinn, C., & Reed, M. (2008). ‘Whos in the network?’ When stakeholders influence data analysis. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 21(6), 443–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raitt, R. (1979). OR and science. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 30, 835–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, M. S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., et al. (2009). Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(5), 1933–1949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhead, J. (2006). Past, present and future of problem structuring methods. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 759–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouwette, E. (2017). The impact of group model building on behavior. In M. Kunc, J. Malpass, & L. White (Eds.), Behavioral Operational Research: Theory, Methodology and Practice (pp. 213–241). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, S., Pluchinotta, I., Pagano, A., Pengal, P., Cokan, B., & Giordano, R. (2019). Assessing stakeholders’ risk perception to promote nature based solutions as flood protection strategies: The case of the Glinščica river (Slovenia). Science of the Total Environment, 655, 188–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukiàs, A., Montibeller, G., Lucertini, G., & Belton, V. (2013). Policy analytics: An agenda for research and practice. EURO Journal on Decision Processes, 1(1–2), 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, L. (2016a). Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions. European Journal of Operational Research, 249(3), 827–841.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, L. (2016b). Behavior beyond the model. In M. Kunc, J. Malpass, & L. White. (Eds.), Behavioral Operational Research: Theory, Methodology and Practice (pp. 65–84). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, L., & Bourne, H. (2007). Voices and values: Linking values with participation in OR MS in public policy making. Omega, 35(5), 588–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, M., Kovacs, D., Bostrom, A., Bridges, T., & Linkov, I. (2012). Flood risk management: US army corps of engineers and layperson perceptions. Risk Analysis, 32(8), 1349–1368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yearworth, M., & White, L. (2013). The uses of qualitative data in multimethodology: Developing causal loop diagrams during the coding process. European Journal of Operational Research, 231(1), 151–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zikos, D., & Roggero, M. (2012). The patronage of thirst: Exploring institutional fit on a divided Cyprus. Ecology and Society, 18(2), 25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zikos, D., Sorman, A., & Lau, M. (2015). Beyond water security: Asecuritisation and identity in Cyprus. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law & Economics, 1(3), 309–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Water Research Institute, National Research Council, Rome, Italy

    Raffaele Giordano

  2. King’s Business School, King’s College London, London, UK

    Irene Pluchinotta

  3. IRI THESys, Humboldt Universität Zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Dimitrios Zikos & Tobias Krueger

  4. LAMSADE-CNRS, PSL Research University, Université Paris Dauphine, Paris, France

    Alexis Tsoukiàs

Authors
  1. Raffaele Giordano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Irene Pluchinotta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dimitrios Zikos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tobias Krueger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alexis Tsoukiàs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raffaele Giordano .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

    Leroy White

  2. Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

    Martin Kunc

  3. School of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

    Katharina Burger

  4. Applied Research, BT, Martlesham Heath, UK

    Jonathan Malpass

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Giordano, R., Pluchinotta, I., Zikos, D., Krueger, T., Tsoukiàs, A. (2020). How to Use Ambiguity in Problem Framing for Enabling Divergent Thinking: Integrating Problem Structuring Methods and Concept-Knowledge Theory. In: White, L., Kunc, M., Burger, K., Malpass, J. (eds) Behavioral Operational Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25405-6_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation