IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/syspar/v33y2020i5d10.1007_s11213-019-09502-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Conceptual Framework Based on Maturana’s Ontology of the Observer to Explore the Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Bruno Jerardino-Wiesenborn

    (Departamento de Ingeniería Informática, Universidad de Santiago de Chile)

  • Alberto Paucar-Caceres

    (Manchester Metropolitan University Business School)

  • Alejandro Ochoa-Arias

    (Escuela de Ingeniería Civil Industrial sede Puerto Montt, Universidad Austral de Chile
    Universidad de Los Andes)

Abstract

This paper explores Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) through the lenses of a theoretical framework that incorporates key concepts from Maturana’s Ontology of the Observer (OoO) with the view of complementing Checkland’s SSM application process. We outline and examine paradigmatic compatibility between: Checkland’s ontological position (reality is problematic/chaotic) together with his interpretivist epistemology (multiple perceptions enrich the ever-changing reality); and Maturana’s OoO (we are immersed in the praxis of living in an ontological multi-universe). We argue that OoO resonates with key SSM theoretical underpinnings. After establishing compatibility between these two influential systems thinkers, we advance a conceptual framework in which Checkland’s SSM learning process is re-visited through a the framework grounded on Maturana’s OoO. The proposed framework illustrates how key ideas drawn from Maturana’s OoO can shed light into the way in which some of the main SSM devices (i.e.: Root definitions, Conceptual model) are used in the SSM process. By doing that, SSM is enriched and becomes more flexible as the stakeholders involved are placed within the domain of constitutive ontologies from which, a deeper dialogue can be promoted in a domain of coexistence in mutual acceptance. We argue that this is a suitable way to have more flexible and holistic views for a SSM intervention in particular to promote the learning process and debating proposed changes amongst the stakeholders involved. The proposed framework, when applied, may enhance the power of SSM learning process and when adopted can have substantial implications to complement the SSM process.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruno Jerardino-Wiesenborn & Alberto Paucar-Caceres & Alejandro Ochoa-Arias, 2020. "A Conceptual Framework Based on Maturana’s Ontology of the Observer to Explore the Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 579-597, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:33:y:2020:i:5:d:10.1007_s11213-019-09502-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11213-019-09502-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11213-019-09502-y
    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/s11213-019-09502-y?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. 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.
    2. M C Jackson, 1999. "Towards coherent pluralism in management science," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(1), pages 12-22, January.
    3. A Paucar-Caceres & R Rodriguez-Ulloa, 2007. "An application of Soft Systems Dynamics Methodology (SSDM)," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(6), pages 701-713, June.
    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. Ricardi S. Adnan & Sonny Harry B. Harmadi & Sudarsono Hardjosoekarto & Nur Muhammaditya, 2023. "Institutional Reconstruction of Promoting and Maintaining the Level of Compliance with Health Protocols in Indonesia during the Pandemic," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 377-406, June.

    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. 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.
    2. J Mingers, 2003. "A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(6), pages 559-570, June.
    3. J Pollack, 2009. "Multimethodology in series and parallel: strategic planning using hard and soft OR," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 156-167, February.
    4. 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.
    5. A Paucar-Caceres & R Rodriguez-Ulloa, 2007. "An application of Soft Systems Dynamics Methodology (SSDM)," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(6), pages 701-713, June.
    6. K Kotiadis & J Mingers, 2006. "Combining PSMs with hard OR methods: the philosophical and practical challenges," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 856-867, July.
    7. S Howick & C Eden, 2011. "Supporting strategic conversations: the significance of a quantitative model building process," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(5), pages 868-878, May.
    8. J-R Córdoba & G Midgley, 2006. "Broadening the boundaries: an application of critical systems thinking to IS planning in Colombia," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(9), pages 1064-1080, September.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. E D Adamides & P Mitropoulos & I Giannikos & I Mitropoulos, 2009. "A multi-methodological approach to the development of a regional solid waste management system," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(6), pages 758-770, June.
    12. 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.
    13. Mark G. Edwards, 2014. "Misunderstanding Metatheorizing," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(6), pages 720-744, November.
    14. W Ulrich, 2007. "Philosophy for professionals: towards critical pragmatism," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(8), pages 1109-1113, August.
    15. Maurice W. Kirby, 2007. "Paradigm Change in Operations Research: Thirty Years of Debate," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 1-13, February.
    16. Sondoss Elsawah & Elena Bakhanova & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "A Competency Framework for Participatory Modeling," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 569-601, June.
    17. R Ormerod, 2006. "The history and ideas of pragmatism," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(8), pages 892-909, August.
    18. Harwood, Stephen A., 2019. "A question of interpretation: The Viable System Model (VSM)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(3), pages 1198-1201.
    19. Meinard, Y. & Tsoukiàs, A., 2019. "On the rationality of decision aiding processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1074-1084.
    20. Zhichang Zhu, 2022. "Paradigm, specialty, pragmatism: Kuhn's legacy to methodological pluralism," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 895-912, September.

    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:33:y:2020:i:5:d:10.1007_s11213-019-09502-y. 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.