{"title":"The Art of Soft Systems Inquiry: Retracing the Footsteps of Churchman and Checkland","authors":"Frank Stowell","doi":"10.1007/s11213-024-09689-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this paper I reflect upon soft-systems inquiry. To do this I revisit Churchman’s discourse on the philosophical ideas underpinning inquiring systems and then discuss the practical application of soft inquiry pioneered by Checkland. This body of work suggested ontological models of organisational behavior were inappropriate and only by adopting an epistemological perspective would provide the basis for understanding complex systems that characterise human society. These ideas motivated a new way of addressing complexity. This work created a difficulty for action research since to be faithful to this discovery meant that any method of inquiry should be one that could cope with such complexity. One outcome was Soft Systems Methodology (SSM). Paradoxically the success of SSM has restrained further discussion of these ideas. The purpose of this paper is to revisit the ideas of Churchman and Checkland as a means of returning to first principles. In this paper I reassess their ideas and those of Husserl and Gadamer and suggest there is more to be gained from this rich seam of systems thinking.</p>","PeriodicalId":51694,"journal":{"name":"Systemic Practice and Action Research","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systemic Practice and Action Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-024-09689-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this paper I reflect upon soft-systems inquiry. To do this I revisit Churchman’s discourse on the philosophical ideas underpinning inquiring systems and then discuss the practical application of soft inquiry pioneered by Checkland. This body of work suggested ontological models of organisational behavior were inappropriate and only by adopting an epistemological perspective would provide the basis for understanding complex systems that characterise human society. These ideas motivated a new way of addressing complexity. This work created a difficulty for action research since to be faithful to this discovery meant that any method of inquiry should be one that could cope with such complexity. One outcome was Soft Systems Methodology (SSM). Paradoxically the success of SSM has restrained further discussion of these ideas. The purpose of this paper is to revisit the ideas of Churchman and Checkland as a means of returning to first principles. In this paper I reassess their ideas and those of Husserl and Gadamer and suggest there is more to be gained from this rich seam of systems thinking.
期刊介绍：
Systemic Practice and Action Research is dedicated to advancing deeper understandings of issues that confront the contemporary world, and better means for engaging with these issues for the benefit of individuals, organizations, communities and their natural environments. To this end, a fundamental rethink of the purposes and methods of science is needed, making it more systemic and action-orientated. The journal therefore seeks to make a substantial contribution to rethinking science as well as to the reflective application of systemic practice and action research in all types of organizational and social settings. This international journal is committed to nurturing wide-ranging conversations around both qualitative and technical approaches for the betterment of people''s lives and ways of working together. It seeks to influence policy and strategy in its advocacy of action research as a primary means to gain vision and leverage in wicked problem areas. All forms of investigation and reasoning are considered potentially suitable for publication, including personal experience. There are no priorities attached to settings for studies and no greater significance given to one methodological style over another - as long as the work demonstrates a reflective and systemic quality. The journal welcomes manuscripts that are original, are well written, and contain a vivid argument. Papers normally will demonstrate knowledge of existing literature. Full papers are normally between 5,000 – 10,000 words (although longer papers will not be excluded if the argument justifies the word count) and short papers are about 2,000 words. Notes and letters are welcomed for publication in the ''notes from the field'' and ''letters'' sections. A rigorous mentoring-based refereeing system is applied in all cases. Officially cited as: Syst Pract Action Res
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
