Abstract
This chapter explains why what is accepted, or not, as systems practice arises in a social dynamic. In this unfolding dynamic, connections are made by systems practitioners who apply key systems concepts and practise different Systems lineages for understanding and managing situations. Some of the concepts and lineages are introduced and described. What constitutes system practice is exemplified by a short reading – an article by Simon Caulkin. The distinction between systemic and systematic practice, a central theme of the book, is introduced and explored.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Here I am following positions espoused by John Shotter and Mary Douglass – see Shotter (1993, p. 4).
- 2.
As I cannot know where a reader may place themselves on a continuum from sensibility through literacy to STiP capability I am left with a dilemma as to how to pitch this book? Because my experience is that systemic sensibilities and systems literacy are not well developed in the Anglo-Saxon countries then my choice is to pitch the book for those who do not know they have a systemic sensibility and with limited systems literacy . Of course I hope there is also much of relevance here for those who would claim they already have some STiP capabilities.
- 3.
Much can be said on this point: My prejudice is that those who demand answers to these questions often do not make the same demands on what they currently do … or, to rephrase it slightly, the systemic effectiveness of what it is that they do. I would further claim that it is not possible to provide arguments for effectiveness in one way of thinking in terms of another way of thinking. Thus, to impose inappropriate evaluative frameworks is to risk paradigm incommensurability or to conflate explanations across different domains.
- 4.
Even when one cannot in a course DO the real world application, one can do experiential activities that are isophoric. I will explain later what an isophor is and how it works.
- 5.
My approach is limited by the format and structure of a book and the act of reading a text – your systems thinking and practice is something you have to ‘live’ i.e., do. What I write, and my references to other texts, needs to be understood as an invitation to experiment with your ways of doing – it is not a prescription or a demand to do as I say!
- 6.
When one is open to one’s circumstances (surrounding conditions) there are generative or innovative possibilities.
- 7.
Among human beings this is best demonstrated when a conversation starts in which mutual engagement and exploration happens. My perspective is captured in part by Benjamin Whorf who said: ‘it is not sufficiently realized that the ideal of world-wide fraternity and cooperation fails if it does not include ability to adjust intellectually as well as emotionally to our brethren in other countries’ (Carroll 1959, p. 21). To this I add future generations, other species and the inanimate, or biophysical, world.
- 8.
In making this claim it is important to note that I am not, in the process of legitimising others, granting them legitimacy . The ‘arise as’ means that we accept them to be already legitimate at the moment we become aware of them, it or circumstance. Legitimate does not mean you like or condone, its an acceptance of what appears as present as being what it is, without having to account for itself or justify itself to you.
- 9.
As I will outline later I understand experience as arising in a distinction we are able to make in relation to ourselves – thus without a distinction no experience arises. To experience a systems practitioner I would claim involves being able to distinguish a manner of acting (or living, or being) in a situation that we choose to describe as ‘systemic’. This is most apparent when we experience someone making a connection with lineages of ways of thinking and acting systemically in which congruence between what is said and what is done emerges. My claim does not preclude people acting systemically even though they may not distinguish it as such.
- 10.
Those interested in this question and its framing may find similarities with Wittgenstein when he said: ‘It is what human beings say that is true and false; and they agree in the language they use. That is not an agreement in opinions but in form of life’ (Wittgenstein 1953).
- 11.
Two forms of behaviour in relation to purpose have also been distinguished. One is purposeful behaviour , which can be described as behaviour that is willed – there is thus some sense of voluntary action. The other is purposive behaviour – behaviour to which an observer can attribute purpose.
- 12.
There is another dimension which I will address subsequently – that is the extent to which one experiences in one’s own actions, or those of others, a congruence or coherence between what is espoused and what is enacted. I will relate this to the notion of authenticity which as a word has roots in ‘self – doing’ and ‘accomplishment’ which I argue can be seen as related to praxis (theory informed action).
- 13.
John Shotter (1993) has similar concerns when he poses the question (p. 19): ‘why do we feel that our language works primarily by us using it accurately to represent and refer to things and states of affairs in the circumstances surrounding us, rather than by using it to influence each other’s and our own behaviour ?’
- 14.
When Simon speaks of ‘entities that are less than the sum of their parts’ he is referring to the systems concept of emergence ; Simon’s ‘why’ questions are associated with purpose and the systems notion of layered structure i.e., system, supra or sub-system (see Table 2.1).
- 15.
It is perhaps fair to say that the most obvious aspect of Caulkin’s article is him complaining about a lack, something missing, rather than offering an alternative. This raises the question: ‘what good did it do?’ My own response is to argue the following: (1) can a journalist do more than raise awareness ? (2) might it not be systemically undesirable to offer ‘alternatives’ developed out of context (i.e., without stakeholders etc.)? and (3) is not the alternative he offers, perhaps implicitly, the development of systems thinking and practice skills for more effective managing in similar situations? I will return to this issue in Part IV.
- 16.
Using DNA technology it is now easy to determine what geneticists call a ‘non-paternity event’. It is reported that in any project involving more than 20 or 30 people there is likely to be ‘an oops in it’ (Olson 2007, p. 9).
- 17.
Following Russell and Ison (2007) I use tradition-of-understanding to refer to what arises in our living – our thinking and acting in the moment – based on our individual development and the history of our evolving understanding (ontogeny of understanding) situated in, or coupled to, a cultural context. From the perspective of an observe r a culture can also be said to be evolving.
- 18.
Another term is that of ‘systemics’ which can be understood as an intellectual field – ‘an open set of concepts and practical tools useful for gaining a better understandings of and eventual management of complex situations’ (Francois 1997, p. 354).
- 19.
There is an argument that all people have some form of systemic awareness , that it is inherent in our nervous system and is just not always recognised as such. People will refer to it as ‘hunch’ or ‘gut feeling’ or ‘insight’ … or just act without noticing how they chose to do what they do. This raises an interesting point about my meaning. I mean awareness of one’s systemic thinking when I say ‘systemic awareness ’ – my concern is how we become better at, or use more of, systems thinking and practice in our climate-changing world. We cannot do this unless we can cultivate our abilities, however developed and to do so means bringing what systems thinking and practice is into awareness .
- 20.
I do not clam that this depiction is in any way definitive – a limitation is that it is not precise about many valid French, German and Spanish, and possibly other, contributions to contemporary systems approaches . This in itself also highlights how the different language communities give rise to intellectual silos. Many people have contacted me after seeing an earlier version of this figure to tell me that something, or someone, is missing. If this is the case then I am apologetic , to a certain extent; but in a way it also helps me to make the point that like all disciplinary fields Systems is not a homogeneous field – how it understands itself is contested. So, please feel free to take this figure and adapt it as you see fit.
- 21.
I expand on this issue in Chapter 3; some may have chosen to describe this in terms of positivist or constructivist commitments, respectively. My intention in this figure is not to label or classify any approach or practitioner – merely to organise, and reflect on, my experience. How others might order the various systems practitioners/approaches on these dimensions could produce an illuminating conversation. I also want to make it clear that placement along this spectrum is not an attempt to rank on my part.
- 22.
I will say more about how explanations arise in a social dynamic in Chapter 3.
References
Ackoff RL (1974) Redesigning the future. Wiley, New York
Beck U (1992) Risk society: towards a new modernity. Sage, London
Bertalanffy Lvon (1968 [1940]) The organism considered as a physical system. In: von Bertalanffy L (ed) General system theory. Braziller, New York, p 120–138
Boulton JG, Allen PM, Bowman C (2016) Embracing complexity: strategic perspectives for an age of turbulence. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Capra F (1996) The web of life. HarperCollins, London
Carroll JB (ed) (1959) Language thought and reality. Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. MIT Press, New York
Castells M (2004) Informationalism, networks, and the network society: a theoretical blueprint. In: Castells M (ed) The network society: a cross cultural perspective. Edward Elgar, Northampton, p 3–48
Caulkin, S., (2007) ‘Dyslexic management can’t read signs of failure’, The Observer, November 25th, 2007. Copyright (c) Guardian News & Media Ltd 2017
Checkland PB (1981) Systems thinking, systems practice. Wiley, Chichester
Deutsch M, Krauss RM (1965) Theories in social psychology. Basic Books, New York
Fell L, Russell DB (2000) The human quest for understanding and agreement. In: Ison RL, Russell DB (eds) Agricultural extension and rural development: breaking out of traditions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Flood RL (1999) Rethinking ‘The Fifth Discipline’: learning within the unknowable. Routledge, London
Flood RL (2001) The relationship of systems thinking to action research. In: Bradbury H, Reason P (eds) Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice. Sage Publications, London, p 133–144
Foster M (1972) An introduction to the theory and practice of action research in work organizations. Human Relations 25(6):529–556
Francois C (ed) (1997) International encyclopaedia of systems and cybernetics. K. Sauer, Munchen
Heims S (1991) Constructing a social science for postwar America: the Cybernetics Group 1946–1953. MIT Press, Cambridge
Ison RL, Shelley M (2016) Editorial. Governing in the anthropocene: contributions from systems thinking in practice? ISSS Yearbook Special Issue. Syst Res Behav Sci 33(5):589–594
Ison RL (2008) Systems thinking and practice for action research. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds) The Sage handbook of action research participative inquiry & practice, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, London, p 139–158
Ison RL (2016) Governing in the anthropocene: what future systems thinking in practice? Syst Res Behav Sci 33(5):595–613
Ison RL (2017) Transdisciplinarity as transformation: a systems thinking in practice perspective, In: Fam D, Palmer J, Mitchell C, and Riedy C. (eds) Transdisciplinary research and practice for sustainable outcomes. Routledge, London, pp 55–73
Ison RL, Röling N, Watson D (2007) Challenges to science and society in the sustainable management and use of water: investigating the role of social learning. Environ Sci Policy 10(6):499–511
Jackson M (2000) Systems approaches to management. Kluwer, New York
Maturana H, Poerkson B (2004) From being to doing: the origins of the biology of cognition. Carl-Auer, Heidelberg
Midgley G (2000) Systemic intervention: philosophy, methodology and practice. Kluwer/Plenum, New York
O’Malley MA, Dupré J (2005) Fundamental issues in systems biology. BioEssays 29:1270–1276
Olson S (2007) Who’s your daddy? Australian Financial Review. Friday, 31 August, p 9
Pearson CJ, Ison RL (1997) Agronomy of grassland systems, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Principia Cybernetica (2009) http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/DEFAULT.html. Accessed 17 May 2017
Ramage M, Shipp K (2009) Systems thinkers. Springer, London
Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169
Russell DB, Ison RL (2007) The research-development relationship in rural communities: an opportunity for contextual science. In: Ison RL, Russell DB (eds) Agricultural extension and rural development: breaking out of knowledge transfer traditions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 10–31
Schlindwein SL, Ison RL (2004) Human knowing and perceived complexity: implications for systems practice. Emergence Complexity Organization 6(3):19–24
Schön DA (1995) The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change, November/December, p 27–34
Shotter J (1993) Conversational realities: constructing life through language. Sage, London
Smuts JC (1926) Holism and evolution. Macmillan, London
Sofer C (1972) Organizations in theory and practice. Heinemann, London
Steirlin H (2004) The freedom to venture into the unknown. In: Poerkson B (ed) The certainty of uncertainty. Dialogues introducing constructivism. Imprint Academic, Exeter, p 153–172
van der Vijver G (1997) Who is galloping at a narrow path: conversation with Heinz von Foerster. Cybernetics Human Knowing 4(3):3–15
von Foerster H (1992) Ethics and second-order cybernetics. Cybernetics Human Knowing 1:9–19
von Foerster H, Poerkson B (2004) Understanding systems. Conversations on epistemology and ethics (IFSR International Series on Systems Science & Engineering, 17). Kluwer, New York
Wilson B (1984) Systems: concepts, methodologies and applications. Wiley, Chichester
Wittgenstein L (1953) Philosophical investigations. Basil Blackwell, Oxford
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Open University
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ison, R. (2017). Introducing Systems Practice. In: Systems Practice: How to Act. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7351-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7351-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-7350-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-7351-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)