IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v249y2016i3p968-982.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of interventionAuthor-Name: Velez-Castiblanco, Jorge

Author

Listed:
  • Brocklesby, John
  • Midgley, Gerald

Abstract

An operational research (OR) practitioner designing an intervention needs to engage in a practical process for choosing methods and implementing them. When a team of OR practitioners does this, and/or clients and stakeholders are involved, the social dynamics of designing the approach can be complex. So far, hardly any theory has been provided to support our understanding of these social dynamics. To this end, our paper offers a theory of ‘boundary games’. It is proposed that decision making on the configuration of the OR approach is shaped by communications concerning boundary judgements. These communications involve the OR practitioners in the team (and other participants, when relevant) ‘setting’, ‘following’, ‘enhancing’, ‘wandering outside’, ‘challenging’ and ‘probing’ boundaries concerning the nature of the context and the methods to be used. Empirical vignettes are provided of a project where three OR practitioners with different forms of methodological expertise collaborated on an intervention to support a Regional Council in New Zealand. In deciding how to approach a problem structuring workshop where the Regional Council employees would be participants, the OR team had to negotiate their methodological boundaries in some detail. The paper demonstrates that the theory of boundary games helps to analyse and describe the shifts in thinking that take place in this kind of team decision making. A number of implications for OR practitioners are discussed, including how this theory can contribute to reflective practice and improve awareness of what is happening during communications with OR colleagues, clients and participants.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:249:y:2016:i:3:p:968-982
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221715007237
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.006?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. 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.
    2. Franco, L. Alberto & Rouwette, Etienne A.J.A., 2011. "Decision development in facilitated modelling workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(1), pages 164-178, July.
    3. White, Leroy, 2009. "Understanding problem structuring methods interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 823-833, December.
    4. W J Gregory & G Midgley, 2000. "Planning for disaster: developing a multi-agency counselling service," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(3), pages 278-290, March.
    5. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    6. 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.
    7. Fran Ackermann & Colin Eden, 2011. "Negotiation in Strategy Making Teams: Group Support Systems and the Process of Cognitive Change," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 293-314, May.
    8. Keys, P., 1997. "Approaches to understanding the process of OR: Review, critique and extension," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-13, February.
    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. J L Foote & J E Gregor & M C Hepi & V E Baker & D J Houston & G Midgley, 2007. "Systemic problem structuring applied to community involvement in water conservation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 645-654, May.
    11. Eden, Colin, 1995. "On evaluating the performance of `wide-band' GDSS's," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 302-311, March.
    12. Brocklesby, John, 2009. "Ethics beyond the model: How social dynamics can interfere with ethical practice in operational research/management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1073-1082, December.
    13. A Taket, 2002. "Facilitation: some contributions to theorising the practice of operational research," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(2), pages 126-136, February.
    14. Derek Cabrera & Laura Cabrera & Erin Powers, 2015. "A Unifying Theory of Systems Thinking with Psychosocial Applications," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(5), pages 534-545, September.
    15. Jackson, MC, 1987. "Present positions and future prospects in management science," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 455-466.
    16. C. West Churchman, 1970. "Operations Research as a Profession," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 37-53, October.
    17. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    18. L White, 2006. "Evaluating problem-structuring methods: developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 842-855, July.
    19. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    20. Keys, Paul, 2000. "Creativity, design and style in MS/OR," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 303-312, June.
    21. Richard J Ormerod, 2014. "The mangle of OR practice: towards more informative case studies of ‘technical’ projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(8), pages 1245-1260, August.
    22. Z Zhu, 2002. "Towards user-friendly OR: a Chinese experience," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(2), pages 137-148, February.
    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. 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.
    2. Richard Ormerod, 2017. "Writing practitioner case studies to help behavioural OR researchers ground their theories: application of the mangle perspective," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(5), pages 507-520, May.
    3. Franco, L. Alberto & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A. & Leppänen, Ilkka, 2021. "Taking stock of behavioural OR: A review of behavioural studies with an intervention focus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 401-418.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Tavella, Elena & Papadopoulos, Thanos, 2017. "Applying OR to problem situations within community organisations: A case in a Danish non-profit, member-driven food cooperative," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 726-742.
    7. 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.
    8. Katharina Burger & Leroy White & Mike Yearworth, 2018. "Why so Serious? Theorising Playful Model-Driven Group Decision Support with Situated Affectivity," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 789-810, October.
    9. Richard John Ormerod, 2023. "The logic of semiotics applied to mathematical and social interaction in operational research consulting practice: Towards a foundational view," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 16-42, January.
    10. Daniel Ebakoleaneh Ufua, 2020. "Exploring the Effectiveness of Boundary Critique in an Intervention: a Case in the Niger Delta Region, Nigeria," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 485-499, October.
    11. Örsan Şenalp & Gerald Midgley, 2023. "Alexander Bogdanov and the question of unity: An emerging research agenda," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 328-348, March.
    12. Harper, Alison & Mustafee, Navonil & Yearworth, Mike, 2021. "Facets of trust in simulation studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 197-213.
    13. 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.
    14. Carayannis, Elias G. & Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Wurth, Bernd, 2022. "OR for entrepreneurial ecosystems: A problem-oriented review and agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 791-808.
    15. Ormerod, Richard & Yearworth, Mike & White, Leroy, 2023. "Understanding participant actions in OR interventions using practice theories: A research agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 810-827.
    16. Jorge Velez-Castiblanco & Diana Londono-Correa & Olandy Naranjo-Rivera, 2018. "The Structure of Problem Structuring Conversations: A Boundary Games Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 853-884, October.
    17. Franco, L. Alberto & Greiffenhagen, Christian, 2018. "Making OR practice visible: Using ethnomethodology to analyse facilitated modelling workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(2), pages 673-684.
    18. 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.
    19. Ksenia Ivanova & Sondoss Elsawah, 2022. "Iterative Refinement of Multi-Method OR Workshop Designs through Boundary Critique: An Analytical Framework and Case Studies in Technology Utilisation," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 345-374, June.
    20. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Franco, L. Alberto & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A. & Leppänen, Ilkka, 2021. "Taking stock of behavioural OR: A review of behavioural studies with an intervention focus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 401-418.
    3. White, Leroy & Burger, Katharina & Yearworth, Mike, 2016. "Understanding behaviour in problem structuring methods interventions with activity theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 983-1004.
    4. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    5. Franco, L. Alberto & Hämäläinen, Raimo P., 2016. "Behavioural operational research: Returning to the roots of the OR profession," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 791-795.
    6. Ormerod, Richard & Yearworth, Mike & White, Leroy, 2023. "Understanding participant actions in OR interventions using practice theories: A research agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 810-827.
    7. Franco, L. Alberto & Greiffenhagen, Christian, 2018. "Making OR practice visible: Using ethnomethodology to analyse facilitated modelling workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(2), pages 673-684.
    8. 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.
    9. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Edoardo Fregonese & Isabella M. Lami & Elena Todella, 2020. "Aesthetic Perspectives in Group Decision and Negotiation Practice," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(6), pages 993-1019, December.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Harper, Alison & Mustafee, Navonil & Yearworth, Mike, 2021. "Facets of trust in simulation studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 197-213.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.

    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:249:y:2016:i:3:p:968-982. 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.