Systems practice

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 137–163 | Cite as

Systems thinking, systems practice, and practical philosophy: A program of research

  • Werner Ulrich
Papers

Abstract

IfSystems Practice is to serve the cause of socially rational decision making, its understanding of systems approach must open itself up to the communicative dimension of rational practice uncovered by contemporary practical philosophy. This programmatic paper argues that building the bridge between the two traditions of systems thinking and practical philosophy is a key challenge to be faced by the systems community. A three-level framework of rational systems practice is suggested as a point of departure for a program of research.

Key words

systems thinking systems practice practical philosophy critical heuristics strategic systems management normative systems management 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackoff, R. L. (1974).Redesigning the Future, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Ackoff, R. L. (1982). On the hard headedness and soft heartedness of M. C. Jackson.J. Appl. Sys. Anal. 9, 31–33.Google Scholar
  3. Ansoff, H. I. (1975). Managing strategic surprise by response to weak signals.Calif. Manage. Rev. 17, 126.Google Scholar
  4. Apel, K. O. (1976).Transformation der Philosophie, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, Germany.Google Scholar
  5. Ashby, W. R. (1956).An Introduction to Cybernetics, Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  6. Beer, S. (1972).Brain of the Firm, Penguin Press, Harmondsworth (2nd ed., Wiley, Chichester, 1981).Google Scholar
  7. Beer, S. (1983). A reply to Ulrich's “Critique of Pure Cybernetic Reason: The Chilean Experience With Cybernetics.”J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 10, 115–119.Google Scholar
  8. Beer, S. (1985).Diagnosing the System for Organisations, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  9. Bryer, R. A. (1979). The status of the systems approach.Omega Int. J. Manage. 7, 219–231.Google Scholar
  10. Bryer, R. A. (1980). Some comments on Churchman and Ulrich's “Reply” to “The Status of the Systems Approach.”Omega 8, 280.Google Scholar
  11. Bubner, R. (1975). Eine Renaissance der praktischen Philosophie.Philos. Rundschau 22, 1–34.Google Scholar
  12. Capra, F. (1982).The Turning Point, Simon & Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Checkland, P. B. (1972). Towards a system-based methodology for real-world problem solving.J. Syst. Eng. 3(2), 1–30.Google Scholar
  14. Checkland, P. B. (1978). The origins and nature of “hard” systems thinking.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 5, 99–110.Google Scholar
  15. Checkland, P. B. (1981).Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  16. Checkland, P. B. (1982). Soft systems methodology as process: a reply to M. C. Jackson.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 9, 34–36.Google Scholar
  17. Chestnut, H. (1967).Systems Engineering Methods, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Christenson, C. (1981). The systems approach and its enemies. Book Review.J. Enterprise Manage. 3, 197–199.Google Scholar
  19. Churchman, C. W. (1968a).Challenge to Reason, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Churchman, C. W. (1968b).The Systems Approach, Delacorte and Dell, New York (2nd ed., Dell, 1979).Google Scholar
  21. Churchman, C. W. (1971).The Design of Inquiring Systems, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Churchman, C. W. (1979).The Systems Approach and Its Enemies, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Churchman, C. W. (1981).Thought and Wisdom, Intersystems, Seaside, Calif.Google Scholar
  24. Churchman, C. W. (1982). Reply to M. C. Jackson.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 9, 37.Google Scholar
  25. Churchman, C. W., and Ulrich, W. (1981). The status of the systems approach, a reply to R. A. Bryer.Omega 8, 277–280.Google Scholar
  26. Churchman, C. W., Cowan, T. A., and Ulrich, W. (1981). Counterpoint of Christenson's critique—a dialogue.J. Enterprise Manage. 3, 200–202.Google Scholar
  27. Daenzer, W. F. (ed.) (1976).Systems Engineering, BWI, Zurich, Switzerland, and Hanstein, Cologne, Germany.Google Scholar
  28. de Neufville, R., and Stafford, J. H. (1971).Systems Analysis for Engineers and Managers, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  29. Emery, F. E. (ed.) (1969).Systems Thinking, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
  30. Emery, F. E., and Trist, E. L. (1965). The causal texture of organisational environment.Hum. Relat. 18, 21–32 [reprinted in Emery (1969, pp. 241–257)].Google Scholar
  31. Feibleman, J. K. (1954). Theory of integrative levels.Br. J. Philos. Sci. 5, 59–66.Google Scholar
  32. Forrester, J. W. (1971).World Dynamics, Wright-Allen, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  33. Goode, H. H., and Machol, R. E. (1957).Systems Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Gosling, W. (1962).The Design of Engineering Systems, Heywood, London.Google Scholar
  35. Habermas, J. (1971a).Knowledge and Human Interests, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar
  36. Habermas, J. (1971b).Towards a Rational Society, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar
  37. Habermas, J. (1973a).Theory and Practice, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar
  38. Habermas, J. (1973c). Wahrheitstheorien. In Fahrenbach, H. (ed.),Wirklichkeit und Reflexion, Neske, Pfullingen, Germany, pp. 211–265.Google Scholar
  39. Habermas, J. (1979a). What is universal pragmatics? InCommunication and the Evolution of Society, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass., pp. 1–68.Google Scholar
  40. Habermas, J. (1979b).Communication and the Evolution of Society, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar
  41. Habermas, J. (1981).Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, Germany.Google Scholar
  42. Hall, A. D. (1962).A Methodology for Systems Engineering, Van Nostrand, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  43. Höffe, O. (1979).Ethik and Politik, Grundmodelle und -probleme der praktischen Philosophie, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, Germany.Google Scholar
  44. Hoos, I. R. (1972).Systems Analysis in Public Policy: A Critique, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  45. Horkheimer, M. (1967).Zur Kritik der instrumentellen Vernunft, Fischer, Frankfurt, Germany.Google Scholar
  46. Jackson, M. C. (1982). The nature of “soft” systems thinking: The work of Churchman, Ackoff and Checkland.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 9, 17–29.Google Scholar
  47. Jackson, M. C. (1983). The nature of “soft” systems thinking: Comment on the three replies.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 10, 109–113.Google Scholar
  48. Jackson, M. C. (1985). Social systems theory and practice: The need for a critical approach.Int. J. Gen. Syst. 10, 135–151.Google Scholar
  49. Jackson, M. C. (1987). New directions in management science. In Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (eds.),New Directions in Management Science, Gower, Aldershot, Hants., pp. 133–164.Google Scholar
  50. Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (eds.) (1987).New Directions in Management Science, Gower, Aldershot, Hants.Google Scholar
  51. Jantsch, E. (1975).Design for Evolution, Braziller, New York.Google Scholar
  52. Jenkins, G. M. (1969). The systems approach.J. Syst. Eng. 1(1), 3–49.Google Scholar
  53. Kant, I. (1786).Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, 2nd ed., Harper Torchbooks, New York (1964).Google Scholar
  54. Kant, I. (1787).Critique of Pure Reason, 2nd ed., Macmillan, London (1929).Google Scholar
  55. Kant, I. (1788).Critique of Practical Reason and Other Writings in Moral Philosophy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1949).Google Scholar
  56. Keys, P. (1987). Traditional management science and the emerging critique. In Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (eds.),New Directions in Management Science, Gower, Aldershot, Hants., pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  57. Malik, F., and Probst, G. J. B. (1982). Evolutionary management.Cybernet. Syst. 13, 153–174.Google Scholar
  58. Marcuse, H. (1964).One-Dimensional Man, Beacon Press, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar
  59. Mason, R. D., and Mitroff, I. I. (1981).Challenging Strategic Planning Assumptions, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  60. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., and Behrens, W. W., III (1972).The Limits to Growth, A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the Predicament of Mankind, Universe Books, New York.Google Scholar
  61. Neumann, J. von, and Morgenstein, D. (1944).Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  62. Nikaranov, S. P. (1965). Systems analysis: A stage in the development of the methodology of problem solving in the USA. In Optner, S. L. (ed.),Systems Analysis, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, pp. 141–169.Google Scholar
  63. Optner, S. L. (ed.) (1973).Systems Analysis, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
  64. Quade, E. S., and Boucher, W. I. (1968).Systems Analysis and Policy Planning: Applications in Defence, Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
  65. Quade, E. S., Brown, K., Levien, R., Majone, G., and Rakhmankulov, V. (1978). Systems analysis: An outline for the IIASA international series of monographs.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 5, 91–98.Google Scholar
  66. Rapoport, A. (1960).Fights, Games and Debates, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  67. Rawls, J. (1971).A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  68. Riedel, M. (ed.) (1972–1974).Rehabilitierung der praktischen Philosophy, Rombach, Freiburg, Germany.Google Scholar
  69. Rosenhead, J. (1982). Why does management need management science? In Troncale, L. (ed.),A General Survey of Systems Methodology, Soc. Gen. Syst. Res., Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  70. Rosenhead, J. (1984). Debating systems methodology: Conflicting ideas about conflict and ideas.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 11 79–84.Google Scholar
  71. Rosenhead, J. (1987). From management science to workers' science. In Jackson, M. C., and Keys, P. (eds.),New Directions in Management Science, Gower, Aldershot, Hants., pp. 109–131.Google Scholar
  72. Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity.Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 106, 467–482.Google Scholar
  73. Simon, H. A. (1969).The Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  74. Smith, B. L. R. (1966).The RAND Corporation: Case Study of a Non-profit Advisory Corporation, Harvard University Press, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar
  75. Tinker, T., and Lowe, T. (1984). One-dimensional management science: The making of a technocratic consciousness.Interfaces 14, 40–49.Google Scholar
  76. Toulmin, S. (1964).The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  77. Ulrich, P. (1988). Betriebswirtschaftslehre als praktische Sozialökonomie. In Wunderer, R. (ed.),Betriebswirtschaftslehre als Management-und Führungslehre, 2nd ed. Haupt, Berne, Switzerland, pp. 151–175.Google Scholar
  78. Ulrich, W. (1981a). On blaming the messenger for the bad news: Reply to Bryer's comments.Omega Int. J. Manage. Sci. 9, 7.Google Scholar
  79. Ulrich, W. (1981b). A critique of pure cybernetic reason: The Chilean experience with cybernetics.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 8, 33–59.Google Scholar
  80. Ulrich, W. (1981c). Systemrationalität und praktische Vernunft-Gedonken zum Stand des Systemansatzes. Introduction to the German translation of Churchman (1979),Der Systemansatz und seine Feinde, Haupt, Berne, Switzerland, pp. 7–38.Google Scholar
  81. Ulrich, W., (1983).Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy, Haupt, Berne, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  82. Ulrich, W. (1984). Management oder die Kunst, Entscheidungen zu treffen, die andere betreffen.Die Unternehmung 38, 326–346.Google Scholar
  83. Ulrich, W. (1987a). The metaphysics of social systems design. In Van Gigch, J. P. (ed.),Decision Making About Decision Making: Metamodels and Metasystems, Abacus Press, Tunbridge Wells, England, pp. 219–226.Google Scholar
  84. Ulrich, W. (1987b). Critical heuristics of social systems design.Eur. J. Operation. Res. 31 276–283 (previously circulated as Working Paper No. 10, Department of Management Systems and Sciences, University of Hull, March 1986).Google Scholar
  85. Ulrich, W. (1988). Systemtheorie der Planung. In Szyperski, N. (ed.),Handwörterbuch der Planung, Poeschel, Stuttgart, Germany (in press).Google Scholar
  86. Vester, F., and Hesler, A. von (1980).The Sensitivity Model, Regionale Planungsgemeinschaft Untermain, Frankfurt, Germany.Google Scholar
  87. Vickers, G. (1983).Human Systems Are Different, Harper & Row, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Werner Ulrich
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Public Health & Social Services of the Canton of BerneOffice of Evaluation ResearchBerneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations