Advertisement

The Wider Context Matters

  • Catherine HobbsEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Wider context? This chapter sets out the third stage of the five-stage Adaptive Learning Pathway for Systemic Leadership, focusing upon the importance of considering a wider context. Work is undertaken in a contextual and dynamic way, rather than being formulaic and static, with periods of interruption for change programmes. There are six suggested resources signposted for thinking about the wider context. These include Strategic Choice Approach, Strategic Options Development and Analysis, Causal Loop Mapping, Viable System Model, Fitness Landscapes and the Cynefin Framework. These approaches consider the importance of ‘stepping back’ from action alone and adopting a viewpoint which is broader and dynamic. The operational principle for considering the wider context is dynamic diagnostic: the chapter concludes with the associated key facet of systemic leadership for this principle.

Keyword

Wider context 

Bibliography

  1. Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2010). Strategic Options Development and Analysis. In M. Reynolds & S. Holwell (Eds.), Systems Approaches to Managing Change: A Practical Guide (pp. 135–190). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ackermann, F., Eden, C., & Brown, I. (Eds.). (2004). The Practice of Making Strategy: A Step-by-Step Guide (1st ed.). London, England: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Ashby, W. R. (1956). An Introduction to Cybernetics. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartunek, J. M. (1988). The Dynamics of Personal and Organizational Reframing. In R. E. Quinn & K. S. Cameron (Eds.), Paradox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization and Management. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  5. Bartunek, J. M., & Moch, M. K. (1987). First-Order, Second-Order, and Third-Order Change and Organization Development Interventions: A Cognitive Approach. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 23(4), 483–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.Google Scholar
  7. Bateson, G. (1979). Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  8. Beer, S. (1966). Diagnosing the System for Organisations. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Boisot, M. H. (1999). Knowledge Assets: Securing Competitive Advantage in the Information Economy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bovaird, T. (2008). Emergent Strategic Management and Planning Mechanisms in Complex Adaptive Systems. Public Management Review, 10(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bovaird, T., & Quirk, B. (2013). Risk and Resilence. In C. Staite (Ed.), Making Sense of the Future: Can We Develop a New Model for Public Services? Birmingham, UK: Institute of Local Government Studies, University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
  12. Bryson, J. M., Ackermann, F., Eden, C., & Finn, C. B. (2004). Visible Thinking: Unlocking Causal Mapping for Practical Business Results. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Coles, T., Dinan, C., & Hutchison, F. C. (2014). Tourism and the Public Sector in England Since 2010: A Disorderly Transition? Current Issues in Tourism, 17(3), 247–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eden, C. (2004). Analyzing Cognitive Maps to Help Structure Issues or Problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 159(3), 673–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2004). Cognitive Mapping Expert Views for Policy Analysis in the Public Sector. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 615–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2013). Making Strategy: The Journey of Strategic Management. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2014). ‘Joined-Up’ Policy-Making: Group Decision and Negotiation Practice. Group Decision and Negotiation, 23(6), 1385–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eden, C., Jones, S., & Sims, D. (1983). Messing About in Problems. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  19. Emery, F. E., & Trist, E. L. (2012). Towards a Social Ecology: Contextual Appreciations of the Future in the Present. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  20. Eppel, E. A., & Rhodes, M. L. (2017). Complexity Theory and Public Management: A ‘Becoming’ Field. Public Management Review, 20(7), 949–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Espejo, R., & Harnden, R. (1989). The Viable System Model: Interpretations and Applications of Stafford Beer’s VSM. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  22. Espejo, R., & Reyes, A. (2011). Organizational Systems: Managing Complexity with the Viable System Model. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  23. Espinosa, A., & Walker, J. (2011). A Complexity Approach to Sustainability: Theory and Application. London: Imperial College Press.Google Scholar
  24. Espinosa, A., & Walker, J. (2013). Complexity Management in Practice: A Viable System Model Intervention in an Irish Eco-community. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1), 118–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Forrester, J. W. (1971). World Dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Wright-Allen Press.Google Scholar
  26. Friend, J. K. (1984). Shaping Development Policies for an Island Off North-East Brazil (pp. 1–15). Birmingham: OR Society Document Repository: Operational Research Society.Google Scholar
  27. Friend, J. K. (1997). Connective Planning: From Practice to Theory and Back. In E. Trist, F. Emery, & H. Murray (Eds.), The Social Engagement of Social Science, Volume III: The Socio-ecological Perspective. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  28. Friend, J. K. (2014). Starting to Build a Useful Science of Public Policy Choice (pp. 1–40). Birmingham: OR Society Document Repository: Operational Research Society.Google Scholar
  29. Friend, J. K., & Hickling, A. (2005). Planning Under Pressure (3rd ed.). Oxford: Elsevier/Butterworth Heinemann.Google Scholar
  30. Geyer, R., & Pickering, S. (2011). Applying the Tools of Complexity to the International Realm: From Fitness Landscapes to Complexity Cascades. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24(1), 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Geyer, R., & Rihani, S. (2010). Complexity and Public Policy: A New Approach to 21st Century Politics, Policy and Society. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Hoverstadt, P. (2008). The Fractal Organisation: Creating Sustainable Organizations with the Viable System Model. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  33. Institute for Operational Research. (1970). The LOGIMP Experiment: A Collaborative Exercise in the Application of a New Approach to Local Planning Problems (pp. 1–61). Birmingham: OR Society Document Repository: OR Society.Google Scholar
  34. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Oxford, England: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  35. Jenkins, B. R. (2018). Water Management in New Zealand’s Canterbury Region: A Sustainability Framework. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. Jessop, W. N. (1962). Proposal for an Institute for Operational Research. Birmingham: OR Society Document Repository: OR Society.Google Scholar
  37. Kauffman, S. (1995). At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kelly, G. A. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  39. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. A. (1996). Procedural Justice and Managers’ In-Role and Extra-Role Behavior: The Case of the Multinational. Management Science, 42(4), 499–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. A. (1998). Procedural Justice, Strategic Decision Making, and the Knowledge Economy. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 323–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kurtz, C. F., & Snowden, D. J. (2003). The New Dynamics of Strategy: Sense-Making in a Complex and Complicated World. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 42(3), 462–483.Google Scholar
  42. Lane, D. C. (2006). IFORS’ Operational Research Hall of Fame Jay Wright Forrester. International Transactions in Operational Research, 13(5), 483–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lane, D. C., Munro, E., & Husemann, E. (2016). Blending Systems Thinking Approaches for Organisational Analysis: Reviewing Child Protection in England. European Journal of Operational Research, 251(2), 613–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lewin, K. (1946). Action Research and Minority Problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in Group Dynamics. Human Relations, 1(1), 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Midgley, G. (2000). Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology, and Practice. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Mischen, P. A., & Jackson, S. K. (2008). Connecting the Dots: Applying Complexity Theory, Knowledge Management and Social Network Analysis to Policy Implementation. Public Administration Quarterly, 32(3), 314–338.Google Scholar
  48. Morcol, G. (2008). Complexity of Public Policy and Administration: Introduction to the Special Issue. Public Administration Quarterly, 32(3), 305–313.Google Scholar
  49. Munro, E. (2011). The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report—A Child-Centred System. London: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  50. Pangaro, P. (2013). “Getting Started” Guide to Cybernetics. Retrieved October 12, 2017, from http://www.pangaro.com/definition-cybernetics.html.
  51. Pask, G. (1972). An Approach to Cybernetics (3rd ed.). London: Hutchinson and Company.Google Scholar
  52. Patton, M. Q. (2010). Developmental Evaluation. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  53. Revans, R. (2011). ABC of Action Learning. Farnham, Surrey, UK: Gower Publishing.Google Scholar
  54. Rhodes, M. L., & Dowling, C. (2018). What Insights Do Fitness Landscape Models Provide for Theory and Practice in Public Administration? Public Management Review, 20(7), 997–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rosenhead, J. (2006). IFORS’ Operational Research Hall of Fame: Stafford Beer. International Transactions in Operational Research, 13(6), 577–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rosenhead, J., & Mingers, J. (Eds.). (2001). Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited (2nd ed.), Ch. 7, pp. 151–180. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  57. Seibt, J. (2013). Process Philosophy. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved June 2014, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/process-philosophy/.
  58. Snowden, D. J. (2010). Summary Article on Origins of Cynefin. Retrieved October 26, 2017, from http://cognitive-edge.com/articles/summary-article-on-cynefin-origins/.
  59. Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making. Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76.Google Scholar
  60. Teisman, G., & Klijn, E. (2008). Complexity Theory and Public Management. Public Management Review, 10(3), 287–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Van Beurden, E. K., Kia, A. M., Zask, A., Dietrich, U., & Rose, L. (2013). Making Sense in a Complex Landscape: How the Cynefin Framework from Complex Adaptive Systems Theory Can Inform Health Promotion Practice. Health Promotion International, 28(1), 73–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. van Steenbergen, F. (1990). Rural Development Planning in Northern Sumatra (pp. 1–6). Birmingham: OR Society Document Repository: OR Society.Google Scholar
  63. Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics. Scientific American, 179(5), 14–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wiener, N. (1954). The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  65. Williams, B., & Hummelbrunner, R. (2010). Systems Concepts in Action: A Practitioner’s Toolkit. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Systems StudiesHull University Business SchoolCumbriaUK

Personalised recommendations