Advertisement

SSM-Guided Research to Improve the Linkages between a Science Provider and their End-Users

  • Janet Reid
  • Terry Kelly
  • Ian Valentine

Abstract

People make sense of the world differently, some are guided by systems thinking and some are not. This has implications for systemic practitioners and the way they interact with others who do not see the world as they do. This paper describes the evolution of a process of inquiry to date that has been explicitly influenced by systemic researchers. The authors attempt to make sense of their experiences and to highlight some important aspects of the inquiry process to date. Highlighted in particular, are the stages and manner in which the client was involved in the process, and how the way information from the rich-description was conveyed to the client influencing the way in which the problem situation was viewed and action defined by the client.

Keywords

Inquiry Process Problem Situation Soft System Methodology Client Group Systemic Researcher 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brocklesby, J. (1995). “Using Soft Systems Methodology to Identify Competence Requirements in HRM”., Intemational Journal of Manpower, l6(5/6):70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Checkland, P.B. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  3. Checkland, P.B. (1985). “From Optimising to Learning: A Development of Systems Thinking for the 1990s”, Journal of Operational Research Society, 36(9):757–767.Google Scholar
  4. Checkland, P.B. and Scholes, J. (1990). Soft Systems Methodology in Action, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  5. Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative Data Analysis. A User-Friendly Guide for Social Scientists, Routledge, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. FoRST (Foundation of Research Science and Technology). (2001a). “Public Good Science and Technology”, [Online]. Available: http://www.frst.govt.nz/public/pgsf/pgsf2.htm [Retrieved October 8 2001].Google Scholar
  7. FoRST (Foundation of Research Science and Technology). (2001b). “PGS&T and NERF Funding Principles and Process 20001–2004”, University Presentation. September 2001.Google Scholar
  8. Midgley, G. (2000). Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology and Practice, Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, (2nd edition), Sage Publications, Newbury Park, USA.Google Scholar
  10. Reid, J.I., Gray, D.I., Kelly, T.C., and Kemp, E.A. (1999). “An Application of SSM in the On-Farm Labour Situation in the New Zealand Dairy Industry”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 16:341–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Wilson, K.K. and Morren, Jr. G.E.B. (1990). Systems Approaches For Improvement in Agriculture and Resource Management, Macmillan Publishing Company, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Janet Reid
    • 1
  • Terry Kelly
    • 1
  • Ian Valentine
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute Natural Resources, College of SciencesMassey UniversityPalmerston NorthNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations