IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v39y2022i5p895-912.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paradigm, specialty, pragmatism: Kuhn's legacy to methodological pluralism

Author

Listed:
  • Zhichang Zhu

Abstract

Alongside claims that ‘the methodological pluralism debate has been won’, worries grow just why the victory is not shared by the wider social sciences and applied disciplines. Remedies are sought but mainly tinkering on presentation tactics. Against this status quo, this article argues for a critical reflection on theoretic approaches to methodological pluralism. Seemingly convenient for legitimating diverse methodologies though, the Paradigm root metaphor has from the very beginning trapped methodological pluralism theorising in a no‐win battle. Drawing on Kuhn's later perspective of scientific change as ‘proliferation of specialties’, this article posits that the enhanced evolutionist metaphor fits better with methodological pluralism by depicting the increasing variety of methodologies as deepened division of labour and combined‐use of methodologies as enlarging human competence. In Kuhn's spirit, this article calls for a strongly pluralist, responsive approach, not so much in flexibly ‘managing paradigms’ or ‘living with incommensurability’ as in reflexively deliberating the comparative advantages of adopting different theoretic approaches in terms of efficacy in facilitating compelling theorising and sharing ideas with practitioners.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:39:y:2022:i:5:p:895-912
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2881
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2881
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2881?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. Michael C. Jackson, 2021. "Critical systems practice 2: Produce—Constructing a multimethodological intervention strategy," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 594-609, October.
    2. Jackson, MC, 1987. "Present positions and future prospects in management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 455-466.
    3. Lane, David C. & Oliva, Rogelio, 1998. "The greater whole: Towards a synthesis of system dynamics and soft systems methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 214-235, May.
    4. Fran Ackermann & Colin Eden & Terry Williams, 1997. "Modeling for Litigation: Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 48-65, April.
    5. Thomas C. Powell, 2001. "Competitive advantage: logical and philosophical considerations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(9), pages 875-888, September.
    6. 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.
    7. P Keys, 2006. "On becoming expert in the use of problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 822-829, July.
    8. Richard John Ormerod, 2021. "Pragmatism in professional practice," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 797-816, November.
    9. 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.
    10. Michael C. Jackson, 2022. "Critical systems practice 3: Intervene—Flexibly executing a multimethodological intervention," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1014-1023, November.
    11. Robert A. Burgelman, 1991. "Intraorganizational Ecology of Strategy Making and Organizational Adaptation: Theory and Field Research," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 239-262, August.
    12. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    13. W Ulrich, 2003. "Beyond methodology choice: critical systems thinking as critically systemic discourse," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(4), pages 325-342, April.
    14. 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.
    15. Z Zhu, 2011. "After paradim: why mixing-methodology theorising fails and how to make it work again," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 784-798, April.
    16. 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.
    17. Keys, P., 1997. "Approaches to understanding the process of OR: Review, critique and extension," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-13, February.
    18. J Mingers, 2000. "The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(11), pages 1256-1270, November.
    19. Michael C. Jackson, 2020. "Critical systems practice 1: Explore—Starting a multimethodological intervention," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 839-858, September.
    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. Zhichang Zhu, 2022. "WSR 2.0 (2): Wuli–shili–renli notions," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1076-1098, November.
    2. Fan Dongping & Liu Yiyu & Chen Linhao, 2022. "Yuan‐Sheng dialectical holism and systems thinking: A systemism research tradition that integrated Chinese and Western holism," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1047-1058, 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. Z Zhu, 2011. "After paradim: why mixing-methodology theorising fails and how to make it work again," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 784-798, April.
    2. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    3. Henao, Felipe & Franco, L. Alberto, 2016. "Unpacking multimethodology: Impacts of a community development intervention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 681-696.
    4. Yearworth, Mike & White, Leroy, 2014. "The non-codified use of problem structuring methods and the need for a generic constitutive definition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(3), pages 932-945.
    5. Michael C. Jackson, 2022. "Critical systems practice 3: Intervene—Flexibly executing a multimethodological intervention," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1014-1023, November.
    6. Brocklesby, John & Midgley, Gerald, 2016. "Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of interventionAuthor-Name: Velez-Castiblanco, Jorge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 968-982.
    7. R J Ormerod, 2008. "The transformation competence perspective," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(11), pages 1435-1448, November.
    8. 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.
    9. Yearworth, Mike & White, Leroy, 2013. "The uses of qualitative data in multimethodology: Developing causal loop diagrams during the coding process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 151-161.
    10. Franco, L. Alberto & Lord, Ewan, 2011. "Understanding multi-methodology: Evaluating the perceived impact of mixing methods for group budgetary decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 362-372, June.
    11. Howick, Susan & Ackermann, Fran & Walls, Lesley & Quigley, John & Houghton, Tom, 2017. "Learning from mixed OR method practice: The NINES case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 70-81.
    12. J Mingers, 2006. "A critique of statistical modelling in management science from a critical realist perspective: its role within multimethodology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(2), pages 202-219, February.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Michael C. Jackson, 2023. "Rebooting the systems approach by applying the thinking of Bogdanov and the pragmatists," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 349-365, March.
    16. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    17. 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.
    18. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.
    19. Meinard, Y. & Cailloux, O., 2020. "On justifying the norms underlying decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 1002-1010.
    20. 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.

    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:5:p:895-912. 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.