Skip to main content
Log in

A Systemic Action Learning Cycle as the Key Element of an Ongoing Spiral of Analyses

  • Published:
Systemic Practice and Action Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Systems movement in the United Kingdom, in addressing the task of enquiry, has created a surfeit of methodologies. Each, like some closely guarded religious sect, demands adherence to its own presentational rules and procedures, its own epistemological and ontological position. Much of the secondary literature of the U.K. Systems movement focuses on examining the strengths and weaknesses of these separate approaches, devises complex decision rules for when to use which methodology, and attempts to map particular methodologies onto "appropriate" scenarios. This paper attempts to present a generalized form of the cyclic activity of investigation and action which is encompassed by many of the methodologies. It is shown that this does not require the presentation of a "lowest common denominator" activity set, which is of no value, but rather draws on the underlying power of the approaches to present a robust and defensible cycle of activities which are continuously reenacted over time. The implications of this spiral model of Action Learning are examined, both in relation to the development of existing methodologies and in relation to the issues related to managing a complex analysis project. The paper concludes by showing how individual analysis cycles merge into a never-ending learning spiral in a complex, dynamic, real-world environment.

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

  • Bawden, R. J. (1985). Problem-based learning: An Australian perspective. In Bond, D. (ed.), Problem-Based Learning in Education for the Professions, HERDSA, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bawden, R. J., and Packham, R. G. (1993). Systemic practice in the education of the agricultural systems practitioner. Syst. Pract. 6, 7-19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1985). Diagnosing the System for Organisations, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brix, V. H. (1983). Action learning and control theory. Omega Int. J. Manage. Sci. 11, 491-500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. B. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. B., and Scholes, J. (1990). Soft Systems Methodology in Action, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espejo, R. (1993). Management of complexity in problem solving. In Espejo, R., and Schwaninger, M. (eds.), Organizational Fitness. Corporate Effectiveness Through Management Cybernetics, Campus Verlag, Frankfurt and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L. (1990). Liberating Systems Theory, Plenum, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L., (1995). Solving Problem Solving, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. C. (1991a). Creative Problem Solving: Total Systems Intervention, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L., and Jackson, M. C. (eds.) (1991b). Critical Systems Thinking: Directed Readings, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L., and Keys, P. (1989). Methodology choice, complexity texture, self-reflection. Cybernet. Syst. 20, 401-415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood, R. L., and Romm, N. R. A. (1966). Diversity Management: Triple Loop Learning, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francescato, D. (1992). A multi-dimensional perspective of organizational change. Syst. Pract. 5, 129-246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, W. J. (1990). Critical systems thinking and LST: How “liberating” are contemporary critical and liberating systems approaches? In Toward a Just Society for Future Generations. Vol. 1. Systems Design, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences, Portland, OR, July 8–13.

  • Kolb, D. A., Rubin, I. M., and McIntyre, J. M. (1974). Organizational Psychology: An Experiential Approach, 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNamara, M., and Weekes, W. H. (1982). The Action Learning model of experiential learning for developing managers. Hum. Relat. 35, 879-902.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNamara, M., Meyler, M., and Arnold, A. (1990). Management education and the challenge of Action Learning. High. Educ. 19, 419-433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsic, V. J., Cederholm, L., Turner, E., and Pearson, T. (1992). Action-reflection learning. Train. Dev. 46, 63-66.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, H., and Thorpe, R. (1993). Action Learning-a paradigm in emergence-the problems facing a challenge to traditional management education and development. Br. J. Manage. 4, 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, G. (1990). Creative methodology design. Systemist 12, 108-113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgeley, G. (1995). Mixing Methods: Developing Systemic Intervention, Research Memorandum 9, Centre for Systems Studies, University of Hull, Hull.

  • Midgley, G. (1997a). Developing the methodology of TSI: From the oblique use of methods to creative design. Syst. Pract. 10, 305-319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, G. (1997b). Mixing methods: Developing systemic intervention. In Mingers, J., and Gill, A. (eds.), Multimethodology: The Theory and Practice of Combining Management Science Methodologies, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., and Gill, A. (eds.) (1997). Multimethodology: The Theory and Practice of Combining Management Science Methodologies, Wiley, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G., and Ramirez, R. (1984). Action Learning-a holographic metaphor for guiding social change. Hum. Relat. 37, 1-28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, E. (1986). Using Computers for Business Success; the ETHICS Methods, Wrights, Sandbach, Cheshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ngwenyama, O. K. (1993). Developing end-users' systems-development competence-an exploratory study. Info. Manage. 25, 291-302.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Open University (1984). The hard systems approach. In Complexity, Management and Change: Applying a Systems Approach, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton, G. (1996). Systems analysis-an Action Learning perspective. In Jayaratna, N., and Fitzgerald, B. (eds.), Lessons Learned from the Use of Methodologies, Bristich Computer Society Information Systems Methodologies Specialist Group.

  • Pedlar, M. (ed.) (1992). Action Learning in Practice, 2nd ed., Gower, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Revans, R. W. (1980). The nature of Action Learning. Int. J. Manage. Sci. 9, 9-24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Revans, R. (1982). Action Learning, Chartwell-Bratt, Bromley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxberg, B. O. (1992). Book review of Action Learning in Practice (2nd ed.) by Pedlar M. Personnel Psychol. 45, 640-642.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Maurice Temple Smith, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. A. (1995). The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change 27, 16-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.K. Systems Society (1992). IS Special Edition. Systemist, ISSN 0961-8309.

  • Wang, H. (1995). The spiral propulsion principle. In Midgeley, G., and Wilby, J. (eds.), Systems Methodology: Possibilities for Cross-Cultural Learning and Integration, Centre for Systems Studies, University of Hull, Hull.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1990). Management development and academic staff development through Action learning and action research. Educ. Train. Tech. Int. 27, 437-447.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Paton, G. A Systemic Action Learning Cycle as the Key Element of an Ongoing Spiral of Analyses. Systemic Practice and Action Research 14, 95–111 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009539811800

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009539811800

Navigation