IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v39y2022i2p241-257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A pathological analysis of challenges related to systems thinking studies in Iran

Author

Listed:
  • Omid Ali Kharazmi
  • Amirali Kharazmi

Abstract

The present study aimed at conducting a pathological analysis of challenges related to systems thinking studies in Iran. The data were obtained through 18 in‐depth interviews. These individuals were selected through snowball sampling. Results showed that among the major challenges of implementing this method are deficiencies of training and awareness raising about systems thinking in organizations and society, issues related to methodology and analytical tools, low degree of research consistency with the needs of the society and deficiencies in knowledge sharing and networking. Among the major recommendations for resolving the aforementioned challenges are defining the aim, scope, communication pattern and potential challenges related to interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary projects at the beginning, holding training workshops and forming knowledge networks on national and international levels, raising awareness and knowledge of employees about systems thinking at different levels of organizations and encouraging researchers to choose topics that are of interest to beneficiary organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Omid Ali Kharazmi & Amirali Kharazmi, 2022. "A pathological analysis of challenges related to systems thinking studies in Iran," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 241-257, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:39:y:2022:i:2:p:241-257
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2780
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2780
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2780?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. P. Kunsch & M. Theys & J. Brans, 2007. "The importance of systems thinking in ethical and sustainable decision-making," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 15(3), pages 253-269, September.
    2. Chin-Wen Chang & Cheng-Min Chuang, 2018. "Re-Interpreting Signaling with Systems Thinking: A Concept for Improving Decision-Making Quality," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 347-357, August.
    3. Trochim, W.M. & Cabrera, D.A. & Milstein, B. & Gallagher, R.S. & Leischow, S.J., 2006. "Practical challenges of systems thinking and modeling in public health," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(3), pages 538-546.
    4. Joseph Kasser & Derek Hitchins & Moti Frank & Yang Yang Zhao, 2013. "A framework for benchmarking competency assessment models," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 29-44, March.
    5. Richard J. Ormerod, 2016. "Critical Rationalism for Practice and its Relationship to Critical Systems Thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 4-23, January.
    6. Chen, Huey T., 2016. "Interfacing theories of program with theories of evaluation for advancing evaluation practice: Reductionism, systems thinking, and pragmatic synthesis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 109-118.
    7. Jaap Schaveling & Bill Bryan, 2018. "Making Better Decisions Using Systems Thinking," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-319-63880-5, March.
    8. Gandolfo Dominici, 2017. "Governing Business Systems. Theories and Challenges for Systems Thinking in Practice," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 310-312, May.
    9. Rajenlall Siriram, 2020. "Factors affecting the adoption of systems thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 235-254, March.
    10. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    11. Gábor Király & Péter Miskolczi, 2019. "Dynamics of participation: System dynamics and participation—An empirical review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 199-210, March.
    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. Mina Shoja & Omid Ali Kharazmi & Mohamad Ajza Shokouhi, 2023. "Systemic evaluation of human resources risks in the public sector," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(6), pages 924-944, November.

    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. Kim, Yongeun & Lee, Minyoung & Hong, Jinsol & Lee, Yun-Sik & Wee, June & Cho, Kijong, 2024. "Development of a fuzzy logic-embedded system dynamics model to simulate complex socio-ecological systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 493(C).
    2. Veldhuizen, Caroline, 2021. "Conceptualising the foundations of sustainability focused innovation policy: From constructivism to holism," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    3. L. Shakiyla Smith & Natalie J. Wilkins & Roderick J. McClure, 2021. "A systemic approach to achieving population‐level impact in injury and violence prevention," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 21-30, January.
    4. Ahsan Waqar & Abdul Hannan Qureshi & Wesam Salah Alaloul, 2023. "Barriers to Building Information Modeling (BIM) Deployment in Small Construction Projects: Malaysian Construction Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-30, January.
    5. Rahi Jain & Prashant Narnaware, 2020. "Application of Systems Thinking to Dent Child Malnutrition: A Palghar District, India Case Study," Millennial Asia, , vol. 11(1), pages 79-98, April.
    6. Goldman, Alyssa W. & Kane, Mary, 2014. "Concept mapping and network analysis: An analytic approach to measure ties among constructs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 9-17.
    7. Senier, Laura & Smollin, Leandra & Lee, Rachael & Nicoll, Lauren & Shields, Michael & Tan, Catherine, 2018. "Navigating the evidentiary turn in public health: Sensemaking strategies to integrate genomics into state-level chronic disease prevention programs," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 207-215.
    8. Kelley E. Dugan & Erika A. Mosyjowski & Shanna R. Daly & Lisa R. Lattuca, 2022. "Systems thinking assessments in engineering: A systematic literature review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 840-866, July.
    9. Kurt C. Stange & Anne Gaglioti & James Bindas, 2022. "Integrated, Personalized Care for Older People," Journal of Elder Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 23-78, September.
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/5035 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Jason M. Orr & Jonathon P. Leider & Margaret J. Gutilla, 2023. "System approaches in governmental public health: Findings from an analysis of the literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 159-169, January.
    12. Gabrielle Fletcher & Joshua Waters & Tyson Yunkaporta & Chels Marshall & John Davis & Jack Manning Bancroft, 2023. "Indigenous systems knowledge applied to protocols for governance and inquiry," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 757-760, July.
    13. Henry Amorocho‐Daza & Pieter van der Zaag & Janez Sušnik, 2024. "Ethical considerations of using system dynamics in participatory settings: a social‐ecological‐systems perspective," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 40(2), April.
    14. Aima Khan & Muhammad Azeem Qureshi & Pål Ingebrigt Davidsen, 2020. "How do oil prices and investments impact the dynamics of firm value?," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(1), pages 74-100, January.
    15. Kunsch, P.L. & Kavathatzopoulos, I. & Rauschmayer, F., 2009. "Modelling complex ethical decision problems with operations research," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1100-1108, December.
    16. Gerard Olivar-Tost & Johnny Valencia-Calvo & Julián Andrés Castrillón-Gómez, 2020. "Towards Decision-Making for the Assessment and Prioritization of Green Projects: An Integration between System Dynamics and Participatory Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-23, December.
    17. Rosas, Scott R. & Kane, Mary, 2012. "Quality and rigor of the concept mapping methodology: A pooled study analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 236-245.
    18. Penny R. Breeze & Hazel Squires & Kate Ennis & Petra Meier & Kate Hayes & Nik Lomax & Alan Shiell & Frank Kee & Frank de Vocht & Martin O’Flaherty & Nigel Gilbert & Robin Purshouse & Stewart Robinson , 2023. "Guidance on the use of complex systems models for economic evaluations of public health interventions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(7), pages 1603-1625, July.
    19. Rodrigo W. Dal Borgo & Pedro M. Sasia, 2021. "From Profit to Purpose: How Electric Utility Multinationals Visualize Systemic Change and Adaptation of Organizational Ethical Culture through Scenarios for 2040," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-34, October.
    20. Martin Kunc & Federico Barnabè & Maria Cleofe Giorgino, 2023. "Uncovering dynamic complexity in annual reports: a methodological approach using resource mapping," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 39(4), pages 299-335, October.
    21. repec:osf:socarx:2duk5_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Céline Bérard & L.M., Cloutier & Luc Cassivi, 2017. "The effects of using system dynamics-based decision support models: testing policy-makers’ boundaries in a complex situation," Post-Print hal-02128255, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:srbeha:v:39:y:2022:i:2:p:241-257. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    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.