IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v61y2010i6d10.1057_jors.2008.188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Synthesis as conception shifting

Author

Listed:
  • L Houghton

    (Griffith University)

  • M Metcalfe

    (University of South Australia)

Abstract

John Dewey's work inspired Simon, Churchman and Ackoff. To encourage rigorous thinking, Dewey makes the rallying cry: Synthesize don't just analyse. Operational research does analysis well. However, our understanding of its conjoint twin, synthesis, may need some more pragmatic rationalization. Synthesis, often confused with systems thinking, is thought to be a process of engagement with alternative conceptions (interpretations) of the problem domain; conceptions that suggest a different solution set. Therefore, this paper explores the proposition that operational research needs to engage more synthesis to complement its skill at analysis. Why synthesis is required, what it is and how it works is explained. Two case studies are provided to demonstrate the mechanisms of synthesis as one part of strategic thinking.

Suggested Citation

  • L Houghton & M Metcalfe, 2010. "Synthesis as conception shifting," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(6), pages 953-963, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:61:y:2010:i:6:d:10.1057_jors.2008.188
    DOI: 10.1057/jors.2008.188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/jors.2008.188
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/jors.2008.188?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. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, April.
    2. L A Franco, 2006. "Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: a conceptual development," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 813-821, July.
    3. N. G. P. Krausz, 1958. "Corporate Organization of Family Farms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 40(5), pages 1624-1633.
    4. F Liebl, 2002. "The anatomy of complex societal problems and its implications for OR," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(2), pages 161-184, February.
    5. James G. March, 1978. "Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity, and the Engineering of Choice," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 587-608, Autumn.
    6. James, Camille H. & Minnis, William C., 2004. "Organizational storytelling: It makes sense," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 23-32.
    7. W Ulrich, 2003. "Beyond methodology choice: critical systems thinking as critically systemic discourse," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(4), pages 325-342, April.
    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. Luke Houghton, 2013. "Why Can't We All Just Accommodate: A Soft Systems Methodology Application on Disagreeing Stakeholders," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 430-443, July.
    2. Luke Houghton & Heather Stewart, 2017. "Using the ‘Engagement’ Model of Problem Solving to Assist Students in Capstone Learning," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 471-485, October.
    3. Luke Houghton & David Tuffley, 2015. "Towards a Methodology of Wicked Problem Exploration through Concept Shifting and Tension Point Analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 283-297, May.

    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. Luke Houghton, 2013. "Why Can't We All Just Accommodate: A Soft Systems Methodology Application on Disagreeing Stakeholders," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 430-443, July.
    2. Mie Augier & Thorbjørn Knudsen, 2012. "The Architecture and Management of Knowledge in Organizations," Chapters, in: Richard Arena & Agnès Festré & Nathalie Lazaric (ed.), Handbook of Knowledge and Economics, chapter 19, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Karén Hovhannisian, 2004. "Imperfect Local Search Strategies on Technology Landscapes: Satisficing, Deliberate Experimentation and Memory Dependence," Computational Economics 0405009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Sydelko, Pamela & Midgley, Gerald & Espinosa, Angela, 2021. "Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: Creating a common, cross-agency understanding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 250-263.
    5. Grove, Nico & Baumann, Oliver, 2012. "Complexity in the telecommunications industry: When integrating infrastructure and services backfires," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 40-50.
    6. Luke Houghton & David Tuffley, 2015. "Towards a Methodology of Wicked Problem Exploration through Concept Shifting and Tension Point Analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 283-297, May.
    7. Hannah Josepha Rachel Altman & Morris Altman & Benno Torgler & Stephen Whyte, 2021. "Beauty and Preferences Formation Exemplified in the Sports Market," CREMA Working Paper Series 2021-10, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    8. Oliver Alexy, 2022. "How flat can it get? From better at flatter to the promise of the decentralized, boundaryless organization," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(1), pages 31-36, March.
    9. Thunström, Linda & Nordström, Jonas & Shogren, Jason F., 2015. "Certainty and overconfidence in future preferences for food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 101-113.
    10. Alan Hevner & Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau & Jacky Akoka & Nicolas Prat, 2018. "A pragmatic approach for identifying and managing design science research goals and evaluation criteria," Post-Print hal-02283783, HAL.
    11. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    12. Freeman, Steven F., 1997. "Good decisions : reconciling human rationality, evolution, and ethics," Working papers WP 3962-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    13. van Riel, A.C.R. & Lievens, A., 2003. "New service development in high tech sectors: a decision making perspective," Research Memorandum 013, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    14. Pascale Amans & Sylvie Rascol-Boutard, 2006. "Controlling Complex Organizations on the Basis of an Operational Performance Measure," Post-Print hal-01659071, HAL.
    15. Sunder Shyam, 2011. "Imagined Worlds of Accounting," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-14, January.
    16. Moore, Don A., 1999. "Order Effects in Preference Judgments: Evidence for Context Dependence in the Generation of Preferences, ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 146-165, May.
    17. Fiori Stefano, 2005. "The emergence of instructions : some open problems in Hayek's theory," CESMEP Working Papers 200504, University of Turin.
    18. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    19. Jin P. Gerlach & Ronald T. Cenfetelli, 2022. "Overcoming the Single-IS Paradigm in Individual-Level IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 476-488, June.
    20. Kieran Donaghy, 2011. "Models of travel demand with endogenous preference change and heterogeneous agents," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 17-30, March.

    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:pal:jorsoc:v:61:y:2010:i:6:d:10.1057_jors.2008.188. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.