Skip to main content
Log in

The enterprise design framework meets the system for systems methodologies

  • Papers
  • Published:
Systems practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the first part of the paper a framework is outlined which models organisational process from a learning perspective. This framework is known as the Enterprise Design Framework (EDF) and it was developed over a number of years to support work in the area of general management consultancy. The EDF is then computed with the system for systems methodologies. The complementarity of the two models is discussed and ways are identified in which each suggests refinements to the other. The use of the refined EDF is illustrated by applying it to a number of issues relevant to the systems community.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackoff, R. (1979). The future of operational research is past.J. Op. Res. Soc. 30, 93–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1983). An interactive view of rationality.J. Op. Res. Soc. 34, 719–722.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1989). Dangerous dichotomies.Syst. Pract. 2, 155–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackoff, R. L., and Emergy, F. E. (1972).On Purposeful Systems, Aldine Atherton, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amson, J. (1985). BI-OUROBOUROS: A recursive hierarchy construction. In Noyes, H. P. (ed).,Proc. 7th Conf. ANPA.

  • Argyris, C. (1977). Double loop learning in organisations.Harvard Bus. Rev. 55, 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., and Schon, D. (1978).Organisational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. (1978).Steps on an Ecology of Mind, Granada.

  • Beach, L. R. (1990).Image Theory: Decision-making in Personal and Organizational Contexts, Wiley, Chischester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1966).Decision and Control, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1983). The will of the people.J. Op. Res. Soc. 34, 797–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. (1986).Actual Minds Possible Worlds, Harvard Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, K., and Martin (1976). R&D organisations as learning systems.Sloane Manage. Rev. 17, 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, C. B. (1992). My two cents worth on how OR should develop.J. Op. Res. Soc. 43, 647–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (1992). Systems and scholarship: The need to do better.J. Op. Res. Soc. 43, 1023–1030.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. I., and Jackson, M. C. (1991).Creative Problem Solving, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fripp, J. W. (1982). Problem-solving styles.J. Op. Res. Soc. 33, 77–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagnè, R. M. (1970).The Conditions of Learning, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garratt, R. (1987).The Learning Organization, Fonatana, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, R. A. (1987). A qualitative model of human interaction with complex dynamic systems.IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 17, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huczynski, A. (1987).Encyclopedia of Organizational Change Methods, Gower, Aldershot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. (1990). Beyond a systems methodologies.J. Op. Res. Soc. 41, 7657–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. (1992). With friends like this....J. Op. Res. Soc. 43, 729–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juch, A. H. (1980).A General Model for Personal Development, Ph.D. disseration, University of Bath, Bath, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, C. G. (1923).Psychological Types, Pantheon Books, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. A. (1955).The Psychology of Personal Constructs, Norton, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. A., and Fry (1975). Towards an applied theory of experiential learning. In Copper, C. (ed.),Theories of Group Processes, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1951).Field Theory in the Social Sciences, Harper Bros, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. A. (1963). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits in our capacity for processing information.Psychol. Rev. 81–97.

  • Mingers, J. (1992). Recent developments in critical management science.J. Op. Res. Soc. 43, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J. (1993). The system of systems methodologies—a reply to Schecter.J. Op. Res. Soc. 44, 206–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Keefe, R. M. (1989). The implication of cognitive style findings for operational research.J. Op. Res. Soc. 40, 415–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliga, J. C. (1988). Methodological foundations of Systems Methodologies.Syst. Pract. 1, 87–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orman, I. (1991). Gradnularity as a determinant of system architecture.Syst. Pract. 4, 237–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pask, G. (1975).The Cybernetics of Human Learning and Performance, Hutchinson, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepper, S. C. (1966).World Hypotheses, University of California Press.

  • Piaget, J. (1954).The Construction of Reality in the Child, Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickards, T. (1975).Problem Solving Through Creative Analysis, Gower, Epping.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenhead, J. (1992). Into the swamp: The analysis of social issues.J. Op. Res. Soc. 43, 293–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schecter, D. (1993). In defence of the system of systems methodologies: Some comments on the Mingers/Jackson debate.J. Op. Res. Soc. 44, 205–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spenser-Brown, G. (1977).The Laws of Form, Julian, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, D. C. (1987a). Models for developing managers.R&D Manage. 17, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, D. C. (1987b). Cognitive transactional analysis—Towards a calculus of belief?Systemist 9, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, D. C. (1989). Avoiding communication pitfalls in technical and business issues. In Rickardset al. (ed.),Learning from Practice, European Conference on Creativity and Innovation, The Innovation Consulting Group TNO, Delft, The Netherlands, pp. 135–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, D. C. (1990). Cognitive transaction analysis in practice. In Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. (eds.),Systems Prospects, Plenum, New York, pp. 335–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taket, A., and White, L. (1993). After OR; An agenda for postomernism and poststructuralism in OR.J. Op. Res. Soc. 44, 867–882.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talbot, R. (1983). Learning styles in different situations.Creativ. Innov. Network,9, 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, R., and Idama, A. (1986). The personality of OR workers—Are they different?J. Op. Res. Soc. 37, 1039–1045.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, W. (1988). Systems thinking, systems practice, and practical philosophy: A program of research.Syst. Pract. 1, 137–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watzlawick, Weakland, and Fisch (1974).Change, Norton, London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sutton, D.C. The enterprise design framework meets the system for systems methodologies. Systems Practice 8, 409–439 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02253394

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02253394

Key words

Navigation