Abstract
The case is made that: (1) we are always in situations, never outside them; (2) we have choices that can be made about how we see and relate to situations; and (3) there are implications which follow from the choices we make. Importantly, one of the choices that can be made is to see a situation as a system, but as is explained, there are many implications in making this choice that can trap the unwary or uninformed. Through the means of a conceptual model of practice that enables exploration of the question: What do we do when we do what we do?, and a reading that exemplifies the Open University (UK) approach to systems practice, a case is built to see systems practice as a process and a means of bringing forth systems of interest or relevance in any situation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The word situation has roots in the Latin, situare, to place or locate. From situs, place, position. It can also be understood as ‘to set down’ or ‘to leave off’ (Barnhart 2001). From this comes the ‘act of setting or positioning’ and the ‘extended sense of a state or condition’ – in conceptual terms the act of distinguishing a situation could be seen as part of the dynamics of ‘bringing forth’ a distinction such as ‘system’.
- 2.
The East Anglia region in the UK which includes the city of Cambridge.
- 3.
The concepts of recursion and circularity are not always well understood – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursion#Recursion_in_plain_English.
- 4.
This material is based on a talk given as the Schumacher Lecture to GreenChoices, Cambridge and published as Morris (2005).
- 5.
Some will argue against the notion that components interacting ‘cause’ change, but few would dispute that through their interaction change happens. Of contention here is the nature of causality. Likewise it will be of concern to some that all systems are conceptualised ‘to do something’. They may suggest that whilst this is appropriate for designed systems, it is not adequate, for example, for an ecosystem . This is a significant conceptual point with practical implications which I will address later in the book. For the moment the difficulty can be overcome by saying ‘doing something’ rather than ‘to do something’.
- 6.
I have this figure prepared as a process animation which starts with the practitioner in a situation where something is of interest or concern. All the other elements like boundaries and names then appear in sequence. This static depiction is, I am afraid, rather inadequate as it hides the process of bringing forth a system in a situation of concern by making a boundary judgement.
- 7.
The position depicted at the top in Fig. 3.4 is described theoretically as giving an ontological status to systems – i.e. proponents of this position, implicitly or explicitly ‘see’ systems as existing in the world. They may thus claim that the world is populated with systems! The position depicted at the bottom is described as recognising ‘a system’ as an epistemological device – i.e. a way or means of engaging with a situation so as to better know or inquire systemically.
- 8.
My own interpretation of the conceptual issues at stake in Fig. 3.4 differ from what I understand Checkland’s position to be, though perhaps not greatly. It is likely that Checkland would see Fig. 3.3 as depicting a practitioner who sees systems in the world; in contrast I claim it depends on the awareness of the practitioner. If the practitioner acts with awareness that the act of distinguishing a system of interest brings forth an epistemological device then I would claim the end result is similar to that which Checkland claims for the enactment of Soft Systems Methodology as a learning system . Further it makes sense not to assume another’s epistemological commitments – but to explore them, as through conversation.
- 9.
I will expand on this point below – some of these ‘neologisms ’ are described in Table 2.1.
- 10.
John Shotter (1993, p. 6) writes of this dynamic relation as the ‘formative uses to which ‘words in their speaking’ are put and upon the nature of relational situations’.
- 11.
Some refer to this as a ‘real world’ situation to distinguish it from a conceptual or abstract situation but this is an artificial separation though one that is often useful to help make sense of what is happening. The inverted commas around ‘real world’ thus denote Checkland ’s (1981) original distinctions between situation and the ‘conceptual world’ of the researcher/practitioner – this is a distinction to aid praxis , not a commitment, on my part, to a ‘reality’ independent of an observe r. If one is to use the phrase ‘real world situation ’ at all, then my preference is to understand it as all that exists within the large thought bubble, i.e. the practitioner, situation dynamic.
- 12.
I owe this anecdote to Peter Checkland , though I cannot verify its source. On the other hand I can point to Keynes’ claim that ‘Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist’ (Keynes 2017).
- 13.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor-Network_Theory (Accessed 18 January 2009).
- 14.
On the other hand some researchers, engineer s, doctors, etc. who are epistemologically naive empiricists may argue, or imagine, that they come to situations as if they were theory free. Equally, social researchers who are theoretically adept may forget that the purposeful choice of any particular theory does not negate the understanding that as human beings with a history they too have traditions of understanding which they bring forth in the moment, and that these, as embodied understandings, may be different to the theories they espouse in moments of rational reflection (Ison 2008a).
- 15.
In some areas of practice the idea of ‘methodology’ is associated with rational choice and with this choice a range of methods and techniques become deployed. A choice to use a street directory could also be seen as example of rational choice of a method and might contrast with some who were native to a locale who had an innate sense of direction or ability to read a landscape. I will explain why this line of argument is important in Chapter 7.
- 16.
When engaging with systems approaches it is easy to focus on method rather than methodology. I argue that methodology rather than being simply the logos, or logic of method , is something that has to be experienced where the key experience is that of the degree of coherence, or congruence between espoused theory and practice (see Ison and Russell 2000); in my example of a Street Directory it might be used methodically (i.e. as method ) or methodologically (i.e. as methodology). An example of the latter would be if in response to experiencing the Directory as poorly designed a more effective one was developed based on a redeployment of the underlying concepts or the invention of new ones.
- 17.
In this book I will use the terms ‘meta’ and second-order. Sometimes as in this case I will use them interchangeably because whilst similar they convey slightly different meanings and have different histories as terms. ‘Meta’ means ‘beyond, or transcending’ i.e., at a higher conceptual level which theoretically relates to the systemic notion of levels, i.e. a system is meta to a sub-system. ‘Second order’ has a history of use in mathematics and logic (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-order_logic. Accessed 5 April 2009) but my usage can be traced to second-order cybernetics or, the cybernetics of cybernetics. Within this conception it has a different operational dynamic – something applied to itself which attains a higher or different conception. Within this framing second and first order phenomena are understood as different but operating as part of a whole, a duality , or totality.
- 18.
I use the verb distinguish but need to make clear that the ‘system of interest ’ does not pre-exist the act of making a distinction – in a sense it is a process of bringing forth, like getting a bright idea. Other verbs are possible – formulate, create, invent, generate.
- 19.
I will say more about the act of making distinctions in later parts of the text – for now I mean the action of distinguishing or discriminating, the noting or making of a difference, the result of which is a difference made or appreciated (following The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary 1993).
- 20.
Tansley (1935) who did most to establish the concept ecosystem said: ‘… the whole method of science… is to isolate systems mentally for the purposes of study, so that the series of isolates we make become the actual objects of our study, whether the isolate be a solar system, a planet, a climatic region, a plant or animal community, an individual organism, an organic molecule or an atom. Actually, the systems we isolate mentally are not only included as parts of larger ones, but they also overlap, interlock and interact with one another. The isolation is partly artificial, but is the only possible way in which we can proceed’ (pp. 299–300).
- 21.
Most people give answers in terms of development of the young human, or in terms of motivation. Common to most answers is that walking arises because of some internal human cause, rather than as a relational dynamic.
- 22.
I raise this point again because I do not want to lose sight of it – but I need several chapters to present what systems practice might be, before addressing this question.
- 23.
‘Ideal type , also known as pure type, or Idealtyp in the original German, is a term most closely associated with sociologist Max Weber (1864–1920). An ideal type is formed from characteristics and elements of the given phenomena, but it is not meant to correspond to all of the characteristics of any one particular case. It is not meant to refer to perfect things, moral ideals nor to statistical averages but rather to stress certain elements common to most cases of the given phenomena’. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_type. Accessed 19 January 2009)
- 24.
I would like to think that the trap which currently seems to exist, of no, or little, institutionalised ‘demand pull ’ for systems thinking and practice skills, might be soon overcome.
- 25.
In this book the idea of practice, or practising, is a general one in that it is something everyone does. The dictionary definition of practice is ‘to carry out or perform habitually or constantly… to carry out an action’ (The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 1993). Almost everyone has some role in which they practise. Most people occupy a number of roles, in their work or in their community. In these roles it is usual to encounter a number of issues that need dealing with, improving, resolving, or obviating. For example I am a practising father as well as a practising academic.
- 26.
The median age of students at the Open University UK is 32.
References
Barnhart R (2001) Chambers Dictionary of Etymology. Chambers, USA
Blackmore CP, Ison RL, Jiggins J (2007) Social learning: an alternative policy instrument for managing in the context of Europe’s water. Environ Sci Policy 10:493–498
Checkland PB (1981) Systems thinking, systems practice. Wiley, Chichester
Checkland PB (1985) From optimizing to learning: a development of systems thinking for the 1990s. J Oper Res Soc 36:757–767
Checkland PB (1999) Soft systems methodology: a 30 year retrospective. Wiley, Chichester
Checkland PB, Poulter J (2006) Learning for action. A short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use for practitioners, teachers and students. Wiley, Chichester
Frantzeskakia N, de Haanb H (2009) Transitions: two steps from theory to policy. Futures 41(9):593–606
Ison RL (2001) Systems practice at the United Kingdom’s Open University. In: Wilby J, Ragsdell G (eds) Understanding complexity. Kluwer/Plenum, New York, p 45–54
Ison RL (2002) Some reflections on a knowledge transfer strategy: a systemic inquiry. In Farming and Rural Systems Research and Extension, Proceedings Fifth IFSA European Symposium, Florence, April
Ison RL (2008a) Methodological challenges of trans-disciplinary research: some systemic reflections. Nat Sci Soc 16:241–251
Ison RL (2008b) Reprising “wicked problems”: social learning, climate change adaptation and the sustainable management of water. Proc. ANZSYS (Australia NZ Systems Society) Conference, Perth, 1–2 December
Ison RL, Russell DB (2000) Exploring some distinctions for the design of learning systems. Cybernetics Human Knowing 7(4):43–56
Keynes M. The General theory of employment, interest and money, Book VI, pp 383–384. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employment,_Interest_and_Money. Accessed 17 May 2017
Kövecses Z (2000) Metaphor and emotion. Language, culture and body in human feeling. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Krippendorff K (1995) Redesigning design: an invitation to a responsible future. In: Tahkokallio P, Vihma S (eds) Design – pleasure or responsibility? University of Art and Design, Helsinki, p 138–162
Morris RM (2005) Thinking about systems for sustainable lifestyles. Open University Systems Society (OUSys) Newsletter No 39 (Autumn), 15–19
Shotter J (1993) Conversational realities: constructing life through language. Sage, London
Tansley AG (1935) The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology 16:284–307
The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993) Oxford University Press
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Open University
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ison, R. (2017). Making Choices About Situations and Systems. In: Systems Practice: How to Act. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7351-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7351-9_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-7350-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-7351-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)