What Is This Thing Called CRITICAL Systems Thinking?

  • Gerald Midgley

Abstract

This paper is about Critical Systems Thinking (CST), a research perspective which is said to embrace three fundamental commitments. These are commitments to:
  • critical awareness—examining and re-examining taken-for-granted assumptions, along with the conditions which give rise to them;

  • emancipation—ensuring that research is focused upon ‘improvement’, defined temporarily and locally, taking issues of power (which may affect the definition) into account; and

  • methodological pluralism—using a variety of research methods in a theoretically coherent manner, becoming aware of their strengths and weaknesses, to address a corresponding variety of issues.

Keywords

Critical System Critical Awareness System Methodology System Practice Ethical Critique 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Babüroglu, O., 1992, Tracking the development of the Emery-Trist systems paradigm, Syst. Pract. 5: 263–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chalmers, A.F., 1982, “What is this thing called Science? An Assessment of the Nature and Status of Science and its Methods,” 2nd ed., Open University Press, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
  3. Churchman, C.W., 1968(a), “Challenge to Reason,” McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Churchman, C.W., 1968(b), “The Systems Approach,” Dell, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Churchman, C.W., 1970, Operations research as a profession. Man. Sci. 17: B37–B53.Google Scholar
  6. Churchman, C.W., 1971, “The Design of Inquiring Systems,” Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Churchman, C.W., 1979, “The Systems Approach and its Enemies,” Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, C. and Midgley, G., 1994, “The North Humberside Diversion from Custody Project for Mentally Disordered Offenders: Research Report,” Centre for Systems Studies, University of Hull, Hull.Google Scholar
  9. Eckersley, R., 1992, “Environmentalism and Political Theory: Toward an Ecocentric Approach,” UCL Press, London.Google Scholar
  10. Flood, R.L., 1989, Six scenarios for the future of systems ‘problem solving’, Syst. Pract. 2: 75–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Flood, R.L., 1990, “Liberating Systems Theory,” Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Flood, R.L., 1995, “Solving Problem Solving,” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  13. Flood, R.L. and Jackson, M.C., 1991 (a), “Critical Systems Thinking: Directed Readings,” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  14. Flood, R.L. and Jackson, M.C., 1991(b), “Creative Problem Solving: Total Systems Intervention,” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  15. Flood, R.L. and Romm, N.R.A., 1995, Enhancing the process of choice in TSI, Syst. Pract. 8:in press.Google Scholar
  16. Gregory, W.J., 1992, “Critical Systems Thinking and Pluralism: A New Constellation,” Ph.D. Thesis, City University, London.Google Scholar
  17. Gregory, W.J. and Midgley, G., 1994, Planning for disaster: developing a multi-agency, post-disaster counselling service, in: “Community Works: 26 Case studies showing Community Operational Research in Action,” J. Bryant, C. Ritchie and A. Taket, eds., Pavic Press, Sheffield.Google Scholar
  18. Gregory, W.J., Romm, N.R.A. and Walsh, M.P., 1994, “The Trent Quality Initiative: A Multi-Agency Evaluation of Quality Standards in the National Health Service,” Centre for Systems Studies, University of Hull, Hull.Google Scholar
  19. Habermas, J., 1972, “Knowledge and Human Interests,” Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
  20. Habermas, J., 1976, “Communication and the Evolution of Society,” English edition, 1979, Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
  21. Habermas, J., 1984, “The Theory of Communicative Action, Volumes I and II” Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  22. Jackson, M.C., 1982, The nature of soft systems thinking: the work of Churchman, Ackoff and Checkland. J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 9:17–29.Google Scholar
  23. Jackson, M.C., 1985, Systems inquiring competence and organisational analysis, in: “Proceedings of the 1985 Meeting of the Society for General Systems Research,” 522-530.Google Scholar
  24. Jackson, M.C., 1987(a), Present positions and future prospects in management science, Omega 15: 455–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jackson, M.C., 1987(b), New directions in management science, in: “New Directions in Management Science,” M.C. Jackson and P. Keys, eds., Gower, Aldershot.Google Scholar
  26. Jackson, M.C. 1990, Beyond a system of systems methodologies, J. Op. Res. Soc. 41:657–668.Google Scholar
  27. Jackson, M.C., 1991, The origins and nature of critical systems thinking, Syst. Pract. 4: 131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jackson, M.C. and Keys, P., 1984, Towards a system of systems methodologies, J. Op. Res. Soc. 35: 473–486.Google Scholar
  29. Midgley, G., 1989(a). Critical systems and the problem of pluralism, Cyb. & Syst. 20:219–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Midgley, G., 1989(b), Critical systems: the theory and practice of partitioning methodologies, in “Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences,” held in Edinburgh, Scotland, on 2–7 July 1989.Google Scholar
  31. Midgley, G., 1992(a), “Unity and Pluralism,” Ph.D. Thesis, City University, London.Google Scholar
  32. Midgley, G., 1992(b), Pluralism and the legitimation of systems science, Syst. Pract. 5: 147–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Midgley, G., 1994, Ecology and the poverty of humanism: a critical systems perspective, Syst. Res. 11: 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Midgley. G., Kadiri, Y. and Vahl, M., 1995, Managing stones about quality, Int. J. Technol. Man. 10:in press.Google Scholar
  35. Midgley, G. and Milne, A., 1995. Creating employment opportunities for people with mental health problems: a feasibility study for new initiatives, J. Op. Res. Soc. 46:35–42.Google Scholar
  36. Romm, N.R.A., 1995, Some anomalies in Ulrich’s critical inquiry and problem-solving approach, in: “Critical Issues in Systems Theory and Practice,” K. Ellis, A. Gregory, B. Mears-Young and G. Ragsdell. eds., Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  37. Rorty, R., 1989, “Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tsoukas, H., 1993, The road to emancipation is through organizational development: a critical evaluation of total systems intervention, Syst. Pract. 6: 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ulrich, W., 1983, “Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy,” Haupt, Berne.Google Scholar
  40. Ulrich, W., 1988(a). C. West Churchman—75 years, Syst. Pract. 1:341–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ulrich, W., 1988(b), Churchman’s “process of unfolding”—its significance for policy analysis and evaluation, Syst. Pract. 1:415–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ulrich, W., 1993. Some difficulties of ecological thinking, considered from a critical systems perspective: a plea for critical holism, Syst. Pract. 6: 583–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerald Midgley
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Systems Studies, Department of Management Systems and SciencesUniversity of HullHullUK

Personalised recommendations