IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v276y2019i2p723-735.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Brexit to Article 50: Applying Critical Realism to the design and analysis of a longitudinal causal mapping study

Author

Listed:
  • Shaw, Duncan
  • Smith, Chris M.
  • Scully, Judy

Abstract

The UK's journey from the Brexit referendum on 24th June 2016 until activating Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon on 29th March 2017 was turbulent. Through applying soft Operational Research (OR) tools within a Critical Realist (CR) philosophy we analyse 86 televised interviews with leading politicians conducted during these nine months, this study uses causal mapping to theorise the changing national narrative. We theorise that, compared to pre-referendum debates, the period was characterised by an inconsistent national narrative where the large volume of information shared did not create a clear message. The study used the philosophy and methodological creativity of CR to justify our development and analysis of causal maps without recourse to interviewees. We apply CR principles of DREI(C) to describe (D) the Brexit and data context, explain the causal mapping process and identify (I) causal generative mechanisms through a process of retroduction (R) to facilitate thematic analysis and develop our theory of the Brexit journey. This combination provides the framework to eliminate (E) and identify corrections (C) to the emerging theory through iterative abstraction. The contribution to soft OR is threefold. First, it shows how CR can justify a soft OR study where researcher creativity is central, thereby differing from interpretivist causal mapping where respondents are central. Second, it shows how DREI(C) can help conceptualise the process of analysing causal maps. Third, it shows how CR can provide a consistent philosophy for OR studies such as those which use researcher creativity to bridge hard and soft OR.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaw, Duncan & Smith, Chris M. & Scully, Judy, 2019. "From Brexit to Article 50: Applying Critical Realism to the design and analysis of a longitudinal causal mapping study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 723-735.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:276:y:2019:i:2:p:723-735
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2019.01.030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221719300657
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.01.030?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    2. Eden, Colin, 2004. "Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 673-686, December.
    3. Gregory, Amanda J. & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Burdon, Daryl & Elliott, Michael, 2013. "A problem structuring method for ecosystem-based management: The DPSIR modelling process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 227(3), pages 558-569.
    4. Shaw, Duncan & Smith, Chris M. & Scully, Judy, 2017. "Why did Brexit happen? Using causal mapping to analyse secondary, longitudinal data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 1019-1032.
    5. Eden, Colin & Ackermann, Fran, 2004. "Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the public sector," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 615-630, February.
    6. Eden, Colin & Sims, David, 1979. "On the nature of problems in consulting practice," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 119-127.
    7. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    8. J Mingers, 2000. "The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(11), pages 1256-1270, November.
    9. Olga Volkoff & Diane M. Strong & Michael B. Elmes, 2007. "Technological Embeddedness and Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 832-848, October.
    10. Giles A. Hindle, 2011. "Case Article ---Teaching Soft Systems Methodology and a Blueprint for a Module," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 31-40, September.
    11. Philip J. Dobson, 2001. "The Philosophy of Critical Realism—An Opportunity for Information Systems Research," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 199-210, June.
    12. Jackson, MC, 1987. "Present positions and future prospects in management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 455-466.
    13. D Champion & J M Wilson, 2010. "The impact of contingency factors on validation of problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(9), pages 1420-1431, September.
    14. John Mingers, 2001. "Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 240-259, September.
    15. Shaw, Duncan & Blundell, Neil, 2010. "WASAN: The development of a facilitated methodology for structuring a waste minimisation problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 350-362, November.
    16. Mingers, John, 2015. "Helping business schools engage with real problems: The contribution of critical realism and systems thinking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 316-331.
    17. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    18. Adri Smaling, 1994. "The pragmatic dimension," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 233-249, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Karol Tucki & Olga Orynycz & Mateusz Mitoraj-Wojtanek, 2020. "Perspectives for Mitigation of CO 2 Emission due to Development of Electromobility in Several Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-24, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shaw, Duncan & Smith, Chris M. & Scully, Judy, 2017. "Why did Brexit happen? Using causal mapping to analyse secondary, longitudinal data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 1019-1032.
    2. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    3. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    4. Ion Georgiou & Joaquim Heck, 2021. "The emergence of problem structuring methods, 1950s–1989: An atlas of the journal literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 756-796, November.
    5. Abuabara, Leila & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2021. "Surveying applications of Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) from 1989 to 2018," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1051-1065.
    6. J Mingers, 2006. "A critique of statistical modelling in management science from a critical realist perspective: its role within multimethodology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(2), pages 202-219, February.
    7. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    8. Z Zhu, 2011. "After paradim: why mixing-methodology theorising fails and how to make it work again," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 784-798, April.
    9. Small, Adrian & Wainwright, David, 2018. "Privacy and security of electronic patient records – Tailoring multimethodology to explore the socio-political problems associated with Role Based Access Control systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 344-360.
    10. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    11. Durugbo, Christopher M., 2020. "Affordance-based problem structuring for workplace innovation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(2), pages 617-631.
    12. Spanellis, Agnessa & MacBryde, Jillian & Dӧrfler, Viktor, 2021. "A dynamic model of knowledge management in innovative technology companies: A case from the energy sector," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(2), pages 784-797.
    13. Franco, L. Alberto & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A. & Leppänen, Ilkka, 2021. "Taking stock of behavioural OR: A review of behavioural studies with an intervention focus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 401-418.
    14. J Mingers, 2005. "‘More dangerous than an unanswered question is an unquestioned answer’: a contribution to the Ulrich debate," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(4), pages 468-474, April.
    15. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    16. Mirani, Rajesh, 2013. "A case study of morphogenetic change in long-term offshoring," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 663-673.
    17. Lowe, David & Espinosa, Angela & Yearworth, Mike, 2020. "Constitutive rules for guiding the use of the viable system model: Reflections on practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1014-1035.
    18. Zhichang Zhu, 2022. "Paradigm, specialty, pragmatism: Kuhn's legacy to methodological pluralism," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 895-912, September.
    19. Brocklesby, John & Midgley, Gerald, 2016. "Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of interventionAuthor-Name: Velez-Castiblanco, Jorge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 968-982.
    20. Igor Pyrko & Colin Eden & Susan Howick, 2019. "Knowledge Acquisition Using Group Support Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 233-253, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:276:y:2019:i:2:p:723-735. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.