IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/syspar/v36y2023i1d10.1007_s11213-022-09597-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological Flexibility in Systems Thinking: Musings from the Standpoint of a Systems Consultant

Author

Listed:
  • Rajneesh Chowdhury

    (University of Hull)

Abstract

Systems thinking is armored with a range of methodologies to aid practitioners work in complex situations. However, systems methodologies are often associated with a niche research group in operations research, management science and systems engineering (OR/MS/SE) thereby making their popularity and acceptance in general management and engineering challenging. In such a situation, methodological flexibility can offer greater liberty to a practitioner to use systems methodologies in a more flexible and creative manner without having to be bound by the rigor of the methodology itself. This paper presents a discussion on methodological flexibility in systems thinking highlighting two consultancy case studies. An orientation to the development of systems thinking in OR/MS/SE is provided leading to the presentation of Holistic Flexibility, a recently developed conceptual lens in systems thinking that calls for a more egalitarian and democratic stance for the discipline. The case-studies presented are analyzed in light of Holistic Flexibility to articulate the benefits and practitioner limitations of methodological flexibility. Recommendations to address the limitations are provided. This paper has two main contributions: First, it presents the proposition that methodological flexibility can also mean that systems methodologies can influence the design and deployment of interventions in management consultancy, without directly deploying such methodologies. Second, the practitioner experience, drawing from the journey of the projects presented in the case-studies, will substantiate recent arguments that call for systems thinking to be a cognitive discipline without having to be methodologically bounded.

Suggested Citation

  • Rajneesh Chowdhury, 2023. "Methodological Flexibility in Systems Thinking: Musings from the Standpoint of a Systems Consultant," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 59-86, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:36:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11213-022-09597-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s11213-022-09597-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11213-022-09597-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11213-022-09597-w?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. Kevin MacG. Adams & Patrick T. Hester & Joseph M. Bradley & Thomas J. Meyers & Charles B. Keating, 2014. "Systems Theory as the Foundation for Understanding Systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 112-123, March.
    2. S Bell & S Morse, 2013. "Groups and facilitators within problem structuring processes," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 64(7), pages 959-972, July.
    3. Gregory, Amanda J. & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Midgley, Gerald & Hodgson, Anthony M., 2020. "Stakeholder identification and engagement in problem structuring interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(1), pages 321-340.
    4. Jim Kitay & Christopher Wright, 2004. "Take the money and run? Organisational boundaries and consultants' roles," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Werner Ulrich, 1994. "Can We Secure Future-Responsive Management Through Systems Thinking and Design?," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 26-37, August.
    6. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    7. I Munro & J Mingers, 2002. "The use of multimethodology in practice—results of a survey of practitioners," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(4), pages 369-378, April.
    8. Alvesson, Mats & Kärreman, Dan & Sturdy, Andrew & Handley, Karen, 2009. "Unpacking the client(s): Constructions, positions and client-consultant dynamics," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 253-263, September.
    9. Ulrich, Werner, 1987. "Critical heuristics of social systems design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 276-283, September.
    10. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gerald Midgley & Erik Lindhult, 2021. "A systems perspective on systemic innovation," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 635-670, October.
    2. Rajneesh Chowdhury, 2023. "Holistic Flexibility for Deploying Systems Thinking as a Cognitive Skill," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(5), pages 803-825, October.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. I Georgiou, 2003. "The idea of emergent property," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(3), pages 239-247, March.
    6. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    7. Zlatanović, Dejana, 2015. "Combined Use of Systems Methodologies in Creative Managing the Problem Situations: Key Features, Benefits and Challenges," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2015), Kotor, Montengero, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Kotor, Montengero, 10-11 September 2015, pages 19-26, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    8. 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.
    9. Durugbo, Christopher M., 2020. "Affordance-based problem structuring for workplace innovation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(2), pages 617-631.
    10. Ksenia Ivanova & Sondoss Elsawah, 2022. "Iterative Refinement of Multi-Method OR Workshop Designs through Boundary Critique: An Analytical Framework and Case Studies in Technology Utilisation," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 345-374, June.
    11. John Mingers, 2006. "Response from the author: Intelligence and realism in OR," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(11), pages 1375-1379, November.
    12. Helfgott, Ariella & Midgley, Gerald & Chaudhury, Abrar & Vervoort, Joost & Sova, Chase & Ryan, Alex, 2023. "Multi-level participation in integrative, systemic planning: The case of climate adaptation in Ghana," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(3), pages 1201-1217.
    13. Howick, Susan & Ackermann, Fran & Walls, Lesley & Quigley, John & Houghton, Tom, 2017. "Learning from mixed OR method practice: The NINES case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 70-81.
    14. David Matthews, 2008. "Metadecision making: rehabilitating interdisciplinarity in the decision sciences," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 157-179, March.
    15. Santos, Sérgio P. & Belton, Valerie & Howick, Susan & Pilkington, Martin, 2018. "Measuring organisational performance using a mix of OR methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 18-30.
    16. Diane Hart & Alberto Paucar‐Caceres, 2014. "Using Critical Systems Heuristics to Guide Second‐Order Critique of Systemic Practice: Exploring the Environmental Impact of Mining Operations in Southern Peru," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 197-214, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Amin Vahidi & Alireza Aliahmad & Ebrahim Teimouri, 2019. "Evolution of Management Cybernetics and Viable System Model," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 297-314, June.
    19. Maria Franca Norese & Diana Rolando & Rocco Curto, 2023. "DIKEDOC: a multicriteria methodology to organise and communicate knowledge," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1049-1082, June.
    20. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.

    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:spr:syspar:v:36:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11213-022-09597-w. 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.springer.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.