IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v301y2022i3p1072-1087.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structured dialogical design as a problem structuring method illustrated in a Re-invent democracy project

Author

Listed:
  • Laouris, Yiannis
  • Romm, Norma RA

Abstract

This article proposes the importance of admitting into the repertoire of Problem Structuring Methods for (Community) Operational Research, the methodology called Structured Dialogical Design (SDD). Problem Structuring Methods are described in the literature as facilitating transparent and participative ways of formulating and systemically modelling problems with a view to participants’ co-defining alternative futures. We reflect upon the contribution of SDD as lying in its appreciation of “third phase science” and discuss links to other deliberative processes. We indicate why SDD can be classed as “problem structuring” despite the near absence of publicisation in the Operational Research (OR) literature to date. We discuss distinct contributions that the SDD offers to the OR world and indicate how it strengthens and extends Community OR, contributes to Critical Systems Thinking in OR, and offers new mathematical approaches that the Community OR practitioners may wish to consider using. By way of illustration, we showcase the “European Initiative” as an aspect of a large-scale project across five geographical regions funded by the United Nations Democracy Fund, in conjunction with the Future Worlds centre (2016–2018). It engaged as stakeholders five cohorts of youth pioneers concerned with formulating options for Re-inventing democracy in the digital age.

Suggested Citation

  • Laouris, Yiannis & Romm, Norma RA, 2022. "Structured dialogical design as a problem structuring method illustrated in a Re-invent democracy project," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 301(3), pages 1072-1087.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:301:y:2022:i:3:p:1072-1087
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2021.11.046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221721009978
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.11.046?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. 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.
    2. J Rosenhead, 2006. "Past, present and future of problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 759-765, July.
    3. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    4. M C Jackson, 2006. "Beyond problem structuring methods: reinventing the future of OR/MS," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 868-878, July.
    5. 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.
    6. Laouris, Yiannis & Michaelides, Marios, 2018. "Structured Democratic Dialogue: An application of a mathematical problem structuring method to facilitate reforms with local authorities in Cyprus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 918-931.
    7. Midgley, Gerald & Ochoa-Arias, Alejandro E, 1999. "Visions of community for community OR," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 259-274, April.
    8. N. Romm, 1998. "Caricaturing and Categorising in Processes of Argument," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 3(2), pages 79-82, June.
    9. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    10. Ken Bausch, 2008. "The ethics of emergence," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 271-276, March.
    11. Jean-Pierre Brans & Giorgio Gallo, 2007. "Ethics in OR/MS: past, present and future," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 165-178, September.
    12. Yiannis Laouris & Marios Michaelides & Mustafa Damdelen & Romina Laouri & Derya Beyatli & Aleco Christakis, 2009. "A Systemic Evaluation of the State of Affairs Following the Negative Outcome of the Referendum in Cyprus Using the Structured Dialogic Design Process," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 45-75, February.
    13. Midgley, Gerald & Johnson, Michael P. & Chichirau, George, 2018. "What is Community Operational Research?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 771-783.
    14. Gregory, Amanda J. & Atkins, Jonathan P., 2018. "Community Operational Research and Citizen Science: Two icons in need of each other?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1111-1124.
    15. L White, 2002. "Size matters: large group methods and the process of operational research," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(2), pages 149-160, February.
    16. Burns, Danny, 2018. "Deepening and scaling participatory research with the poorest and most marginalised," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 865-874.
    17. Gerald Midgley & Raghav Rajagopalan, 2021. "Critical Systems Thinking, Systemic Intervention, and Beyond," Springer Books, in: Gary S. Metcalf & Kyoichi Kijima & Hiroshi Deguchi (ed.), Handbook of Systems Sciences, chapter 5, pages 107-157, Springer.
    18. Kenneth C. Bausch & Thomas R. Flanagan, 2013. "A Confluence of Third‐Phase Science and Dialogic Design Science," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 414-429, July.
    19. Konsti-Laakso, Suvi & Rantala, Tero, 2018. "Managing community engagement: A process model for urban planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1040-1049.
    20. P Checkland & M Winter, 2006. "Process and content: two ways of using SSM," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(12), pages 1435-1441, December.
    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. Mahajan, Aseem & Pongou, Roland & Tondji, Jean-Baptiste, 2023. "Supermajority politics: Equilibrium range, policy diversity, utilitarian welfare, and political compromise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 963-974.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Foote, J. & Midgley, G. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, A. & Hepi, M. & Earl-Goulet, J., 2021. "Systemic evaluation of community environmental management programmes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 207-224.
    4. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    5. 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.
    6. Johnson, Michael P. & Midgley, Gerald & Chichirau, George, 2018. "Emerging trends and new frontiers in community operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1178-1191.
    7. Gregory, Amanda J. & Atkins, Jonathan P., 2018. "Community Operational Research and Citizen Science: Two icons in need of each other?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1111-1124.
    8. Ion Georgiou & Joaquim Heck, 2021. "The emergence of problem structuring methods, 1950s–1989: An atlas of the journal literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 756-796, November.
    9. Pinzon-Salcedo, Luis Arturo & Torres-Cuello, Maria Alejandra, 2018. "Community Operational Research: Developing a systemic peace education programme involving urban and rural communities in Colombia," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 946-959.
    10. White, Leroy, 2016. "Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 827-841.
    11. Killemsetty, Namesh & Johnson, Michael & Patel, Amit, 2022. "Understanding housing preferences of slum dwellers in India: A community-based operations research approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(2), pages 699-713.
    12. Laouris, Yiannis & Michaelides, Marios, 2018. "Structured Democratic Dialogue: An application of a mathematical problem structuring method to facilitate reforms with local authorities in Cyprus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 918-931.
    13. Elena Bakhanova & Jaime A. Garcia & William L. Raffe & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "Gamification Framework for Participatory Modeling: A Proposal," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 1167-1182, October.
    14. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm, 2023. "Problem Structuring Methods in Social-Ecological Systems," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 461-478, June.
    15. White, Leroy, 2018. "A Cook's tour: Towards a framework for measuring the social impact of social purpose organisations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 784-797.
    16. Konsti-Laakso, Suvi & Rantala, Tero, 2018. "Managing community engagement: A process model for urban planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1040-1049.
    17. Romm, Norma R.A., 2018. "Reflections on a multi-layered intervention in the South African public education system: Some ethical implications for Community Operational Research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 971-983.
    18. 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.
    19. Cronin, Karen & Midgley, Gerald & Jackson, Laurie Skuba, 2014. "Issues Mapping: A problem structuring method for addressing science and technology conflicts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(1), pages 145-158.
    20. Brocklesby, John & Beall, Elizabeth, 2018. "Processes of engagement and methodology design in Community Operational Research – Insights from the indigenous peoples sector," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 996-1005.

    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:eee:ejores:v:301:y:2022:i:3:p:1072-1087. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.