Systems practice

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 7–29 | Cite as

Testament to conversations on critical systems thinking between two systems practitioners

  • Robert L. Flood
  • Werner Ulrich
Papers Conversations

Abstract

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.

Key words

Critical Systems Theory systems rationality social rationality pluralism Liberating Systems Theory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bertalanffy, L. Von (1968).General Systems Theory: Foundations, Development and Applications, Braziller, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Checkland, P. B. (1978). The origins and nature of hard systems thinking.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 5, 99–110.Google Scholar
  3. Checkland, P. B. (1981).Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  4. Fay, B. (1975).Social Theory and Political Practice, George Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
  5. Flood, R. L. (1988). The need for a substantive soft systems language.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 15.Google Scholar
  6. Flood, R. L. (1990a). Liberating Systems Theory: Toward critical systems thinking.Hum. Relat. 43, 49–76.Google Scholar
  7. Flood, R. L. (1989a). Six scenarios for the future of systems “problem solving.”Syst. Pract. 2, 75–99.Google Scholar
  8. Flood, R. L. (1989b). Archaeology of (systems) inquiry.Syst. Pract. 2, 117–124.Google Scholar
  9. Flood, R. L. (1990b).Liberating Systems Theory on Systems and Inquiry, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Flood, R. L., and Carson, E. R. (1988).Dealing with Complexity: An Introduction to the Theory and Application of Systems Science, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. C. (1989). Editorial.Syst. Pract. 2, 151–154.Google Scholar
  12. Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. C. (1990a).Creative Problem Solving Total Systems Intervention, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  13. Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. C. (1990b).Critical Systems Thinking: Directed Readings, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  14. Flood, R. L., and Robinson, S. A. (1989a). Analogy and metaphor and systems and cybernetic methodologies.Cybernet. Syst. 20, 501–520.Google Scholar
  15. Flood, R. L., and Robinson, S. A. (1989b). Thimbles and hope: An essay on metaphor and systems theory.Cybernet. Syst. 20, 201–214.Google Scholar
  16. Habermas, J. (1971a).Knowledge and Human Interests, Bacon, Boston, Mass. (German orig. 1968).Google Scholar
  17. Habermas, J. (1971b).Toward a Rational Society, Bacon, Boston, Mass. (German orig. 1968).Google Scholar
  18. Jackson, M. C. (1985). The itinerary of a critical approach... “Critical Heuristics of Social Planning”:.Ulrich (book review).J. Op. Res. Soc. 36, 878–888.Google Scholar
  19. Jackson, M. C. (1990). Beyond a system of systems methodologies, (under review).Google Scholar
  20. Jackson, M. C. (1991).Systems Methodologies, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Lowi, T. J. (1969).The End of Liberalism, Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Oliga, J. (1988). Methodological foundations of systems methodologies.Syst. Pract. 1, 87–112.Google Scholar
  23. Ulrich, W. (1977). The design of problem-solving systems.Manage. Sci. 23, 1099–1108.Google Scholar
  24. Ulrich, W. (1980). The metaphysics of design: A Simon-Churchman “debate”.Interfaces 10(2), 35–40.Google Scholar
  25. Reprinted and slightly expanded in van Gigch, J. P. (ed.) (1987).Decision Making About Decision Making: Metamodels and Metasystems, Abacus Press, Turnbridge Wells, England, 1987, pp. 219–226.Google Scholar
  26. Ulrich, W. (1981a). SystemrationalitÄt ind praktische Vernunft-Gedanken zum Stand des Systemansatzes. Introduction to Churchman, C. W.,Der Systemansatz und seine “Feinde”, Haupt, Berne, Switzerland pp. 7–38.Google Scholar
  27. Ulrich, W. (1981b). A critique of pure cybernetic reason: The Chilean experience with cybernetics.J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 8, 33–59.Google Scholar
  28. Ulrich, W. (1983).Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy, Haupt, Berne, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  29. Ulrich, W. (1984). Management oder die Kunst, Entscheidungen zu treffen, die andere betreffen.Die Unternehmung 38, 326–346.Google Scholar
  30. Ulrich, W. (1987). Critical heuristics of social systems design.Eur. J. Op. Res. 31, 276–283.Google Scholar
  31. Ulrich, W. (1988a). Systems thinking, systems practice, and practical philosophy: A program of research.Syst. Pract. 1, 137–163.Google Scholar
  32. Ulrich, W. (1988b). Churchman's “process of unfolding”-its significance for policy analysis and evaluation.Syst. Pract. 1, 415–428.Google Scholar
  33. Ulrich, W. (1989). Systemtheorie der Planung. In Szyperski, N. (ed.),Handwörterbuch der Planung, Poeschel, Stuttgart, Germany, columns 1971–1978.Google Scholar
  34. Ulrich, W. (1991). Toward emancipatory systems practice. In Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. C. (eds.),Critical Systems Thinking: Directed Readings, Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar
  35. Weber, M. (1949). “Objectivity” in social science and social policy. In Shills, E. A., and Fincfa, H. A. (eds.),The Methodology of the Social Sciencer, Free Press, New York, pp. 72–111.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert L. Flood
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Werner Ulrich
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Sir Q. W. Lee Chair in Management ScienceUniversity of HullHullUK
  2. 2.Systems Intervention Ltd.NewburyUK
  3. 3.PA Consultancy GroupLondonUK
  4. 4.Department of Public Health and Social Services of the Canton of BerneBerneSwitzerland
  5. 5.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations