Operational research and critical systems thinking—an integrated perspective

On the basis of a review of the role of systems thinking in the history of OR, Part 1 of this essay proposed a systematic understanding of OR as applied systems thinking. Further, it identified the contribution of ‘critical’ systems thinking (CST) in a combined ability of its two strands, critical systems heuristics (CSH) and total systems intervention (TSI), to enhance the conceptual sophistication of OR. Part 2 aims to translate this understanding into a framework for good professional practice. How exactly can CST strengthen the competence profile of OR professionals? Drawing on three experience-based archetypes of professional service and some basic argumentation-theoretical considerations, a new understanding of OR and applied systems thinking as argumentative practice emerges. In this new understanding CST finds a systematic place and some exemplary uses of CSH and TSI can be located—an integrated perspective.     

An exploration of three emancipatory themes within OR and systems thinking

This paper pursues the current debate about emancipation as one of the principal tenets of critical OR. It highlights some conceptual ambiguities involved in the notion of emancipation and so attempts to multiply the possibilities for an emancipatory approach to OR. The paper will explore three different emancipatory themes, one which understands the concept of emancipation in terms of a democratic discourse, a second which views it in terms of the cultivation of different virtues and values, and a third which questions the very essence of ethics and emancipation. Central to this analysis is a concern for the methodological implications of these three themes, and the current neglect of emancipatory methodologies for OR practice.     

Recent Developments in Critical Management Science

For much of its history management science had a quantitative and technical emphasis. More recently, there has been a move towards more subjective approaches such as ‘soft OR’ and ‘soft systems’. Currently, there is interest in ‘critical management science’ drawing on critical theory, particularly the work of Habermas. This paper reviews developments in critical management science, in particular critiques of traditional and ‘soft’ management science; Jackson and Keys' system of systems methodology; critical management science methodologies and the problem of power in bringing about change; and the postmodernist critique.     

The development of management sciences/operational research discourses: surveying the trends in the US and the UK

This paper explores the trends in American and British management science/operational research (MS/OR) during the last 25 years. We argue that British MS/OR has developed a soft and systemic approach to MS/OR practice, which has resulted in the emergence of a number of interpretive and critical-oriented methodologies. American MS/OR practice has remained closed to the positivistic discourse. Using a set of keywords and authors’ names associated with the main features of the interpretive and critical MS discourses, we surveyed articles published in three major US MS/OR journals. We compare these results with trends in the UK MS/OR scene. Findings appear to confirm the different directions taken by the MS/OR practice across the Atlantic. The paper posits possible reasons underpinning these differences: firstly, the particular methodological path followed by the British MS/OR, from early ‘soft systems’ applications in the early 1970s to the now well-established ‘Problem Structuring Methods’; and secondly, continuous engagement between the systems and MS/OR British communities (a dialogue that seems not to have occurred in the US). The paper contributes to a reflection on the MS/OR historical developments and contrasts these developments in both countries, two areas of OR significantly under-researched.     

Management science methodologies in environmental management and sustainability: discourses and applications

This paper investigates and discusses the use of systemic methodologies (SMs) developed in management science/operational research (MS/OR), in particular, those SM that have been informing the complexity inherent in environmental management and sustainable (EM/S) practices. By surveying a sample of the top MS/OR and systems journals, we assess the extent to which systemic management science methodologies developed recently have been used in tackling EM/S problems. Titles and abstracts of EM/S applications published in MS/OR and systems journals between 1989 and 2009 were queried for the occurrence of typical keywords associated with a set of SMs (eg, complexity theory, systems dynamics, soft systems, critical systems, viable systems model). The survey identifies a set of articles representing the practice of either a particular methodology or of a mixture of various SMs in EM/S setting. By assembling and critically reviewing a sample of applications in EM/S the paper hopes to raise awareness among environmentalists, operational researchers and management scientists of the benefits of using systemic approaches developed in MS/OR and, in this way, to encourage further exchange and conversation between these fields of management.     

The use of multimethodology in practice—results of a survey of practitioners

There is now a vast range of techniques and methodologies, both hard and soft, available to the OR/MS practitioner. After a period of concern about methodology choice, ie ‘which method when’, we are now moving towards a pluralistic approach of combining together several methods within an intervention—multimethodology. This paper reports on a survey of OR/MS practitioners to discover the extent of multimethodology usage and which particular combinations are most commonly utilised.     

Rethinking tradeoffs and OR/MS methodology

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of a process known as the ‘evaporating cloud’ (EC) as a way of enhancing OR/MS modelling. While other authors have described the use of the EC process to explore the tradeoffs in a traditional Economic Order Quantity model, this paper demonstrates the use of the EC with a facilities location problem, which was originally solved via mixed integer programming. We relate our findings to OR/MS modelling in general, and argue that the EC could contribute effectively to different phases of the problem-solving process, for example, aiding the problem-structuring phase and helping to find better solutions in many OR/MS modelling situations. We demonstrate that the EC is a valuable tool to use in modelling practice as a problem-structuring tool, as a way of dealing specifically with tradeoffs, and that it can therefore be a useful complement to OR/MS methodology, and contribute to OR/MS practice and teaching.     

Systemic problem structuring applied to community involvement in water conservation

Many advocates of problem structuring approaches mix methods to enhance the flexibility and responsiveness of OR practice. A number of ‘multi-methodology’ approaches have been developed to support practitioners in doing this, and one of these is systemic intervention. A distinguishing feature of systemic intervention is boundary critique: a theory and set of methodological ideas for exploring the inclusion, exclusion and marginalization of both people and issues. This paper argues that boundary critique can enhance the choice and process of application of problem structuring methods. An application of boundary critique is presented to illustrate the argument, focusing on community participation in the management of ongoing water shortages in a small seaside town in New Zealand. The theory of boundary critique helped to reframe people's understanding of a 30-year conflict between the District Council and community. This led to the design of a participative problem structuring workshop, and a way forward was identified that both the District Council and community could accept. Feedback from the workshop participants suggested that the intervention generated valuable results for all the parties involved. The paper concludes with some brief reflections on how the research agenda on boundary critique and problem structuring methods can be progressed into the future.     

Soft with a hard centre: discrete-event simulation in facilitation

Discrete event simulation is normally described as a ‘hard’ OR technique. This may not, however, always be the case. An example of a simulation of a user support helpline is described which, it is argued, has many of the traits of a ‘soft’ OR intervention. In particular, the study involved a facilitated discussion around a simulation model about possible improvements to a problem situation. The nature of the intervention is considered from both a methodological and paradigmatic perspective, and conclusions are drawn about where the intervention lies on a ‘hard’ to ‘soft’ continuum. It is argued that ‘soft’ issues need to be subsumed into the prescribed methodology for discrete-event simulation.     

The Blackett Memorial Lecture 18 November 1997

It is argued that movement toward the ‘control’ aspects of management should be effected to expand OR/MS activities beyond their present (almost exclusive) emphasis on ‘planning’ functions. This will involve increasing the amount of empirical-inferential approaches to research (based on ex-post data) as one way to help bring this about. Examples of such empirical-inferential research activities in OR/MS are supplied by reference to the early (founding) work of PMS Blackett and others on high-level policy problems during World War II. Extensions to the control function are evidenced in the work of Robert Fetter and others in the development of Diagnostic Related Groups on which the Prospective Payment Systems are based with large and important impacts on the health care delivery systems in the USA as well as other countries. Other examples covered include the use of OR concepts in the early ‘turnaround’ of Federal Express from failure to success. Other new methods will nevertheless be needed to extend and improve presently available OR/MS approaches. Some of these possibilities are illustrated with Data Envelopment Analysis. Ways to combine DEA with commonly used statistical methods are described to show how new and old methods may be combined to further enhance their power and range. Similar relations of DEA to other OR/MS approaches are now being studied, some of which are presently occurring with ‘fuzzy sets’ and ‘multiple objective programming.’     

The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems

Many issues are under debate as to the philosophical nature of OR/MS: is it science or technology? Is it natural or social science? Can it be realist as well as being interpretivist? There are also many debates within the philosophy of science itself. This paper proposes that a particular account of the philosophy of science, known as ‘critical realism’, is especially suitable as an underpinning of OR/MS. The structure of the argument of this paper is to outline the main positions within the philosophy of science and highlight their problems, especially from the point of view of OR/MS; then to introduce critical realism and to show how it addresses these problems and how it is particularly appropriate for OR/MS; and finally to illustrate this by considering examples of various practical OR methods.     

On the nature of OR: taking stock

This paper argues that OR, having reached its maturity, must now play to its strengths. In strategic terms this means competing in those areas where OR's core competences can be brought to bear. Using a competence model it is suggested that OR's core products are (i) the development and implementation of the quantitative, algorithmic ‘smart bits’ and (ii) the ‘helpful ways’ of managing intervention processes. These core products are supported and sustained by three core competences labelled process, analytic, and context. Individuals and small groups of practitioners develop ‘strands of practice’ and larger groups ‘webs of practice’ on the basis of their core competences. It is argued that this is giving rise to the emergence of three archetypes of OR service, namely the OR technical consultancy, the OR process consultancy, and the full service OR consultancy. Both the technical and process consulting are built around ‘strands of practice’ of individuals and find their natural home in small service providers. The full service OR consulting practice, in the past located in internal OR groups, will in the future be located within the large management consultancies, which are capable of managing ‘webs of practice’. The implications for the worlds of OR practice and academia are examined.     

Supporting the strategy process: a survey of UK OR/MS practitioners

This paper reports the results of an online survey conducted with practitioner members of the UK Operational Research (OR) Society. The purpose of the survey was to explore the current practice of supporting the strategy process in terms of activities supported and tools used. The results of the survey are compared to those of previous surveys to explore developments in, inter alia, the use of management/strategy tools and ‘soft’ Operational Research/Management Science (OR/MS) tools. The survey results demonstrate that OR practitioners actively support the strategy process within their organisations. While a wide variety of tools, drawn from the OR/MS and management/strategy fields, are used to support the strategy process within organisations, the findings suggest that soft OR/MS tools are not regularly used. The findings also demonstrate that tools are combined to support the strategy process from both within and across the OR/MS and management/strategy fields. The paper ends by identifying a number of areas for further research.     

From Optimizing to Learning: A Development of Systems Thinking for the 1990s

In any subject concerned with rational intervention in human affairs, theory must lead to practice; but practice is the source of theory: neither theory nor practice is prime. We can examine this ‘groundless’ relation by asking what intellectual framework F is applied in what methodology M to what area of application A? If we do this for O.R., systems analysis, systems engineering etc., we see that F and M have changed dramatically between the 1950s and the 1980s, yielding the ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ traditions of systems thinking. The ‘hard’ tradition, based on goal seeking, is examined in the work of Simon and contrasted with the ‘soft’ tradition, based on learning, as exemplified in the work of Vickers and the development of soft systems methodology. The two are complementary, but the relation between them is that the ‘hard’ is a special case of ‘soft’ systems thinking. This analysis makes sense of the recent history of management science and helps to prepare us for the 1990s.     

Evaluating soft OR: some reflections on an apparently ‘unsuccessful’ implementation using a Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) based approach

This paper reflects on a case study in which a soft OR problem structuring approach, based on Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), was used to help in the design of an information system for health service users providing care in the community in a part of the South and West Health Region in the UK. The paper reflects on why an apparently ‘successful’ structuring led to an apparently ‘unsuccessful’ implementation. As part of this reflective process, the paper makes a contribution to the soft OR literature by reviewing some of the approaches taken in the literature to the evaluation of success of problem structuring using soft OR. This review reveals a lack of evaluative criteria, a lack of clarity over the identification of users, and a failure to differentiate criteria associated with ‘structuring’ and ‘implementation’ issues. An evaluative framework is proposed, which is applied retrospectively to the case study.     

Beyond a System of Systems Methodologies

This paper describes a research programme which used the idea that there is a ‘system of systems methodologies’ to analyse the relationship between OR and other systems-based, problem-solving approaches, and to relate different systems methodologies to appropriate problem-contexts. The results are promising for those who wish to broaden the theoretical basis of OR in order to extend its domain of effective application. Further progress, however, depends upon reconstituting the research programme on surer theoretical foundations. Unless this is done, both the potential of the original work and its initial intent risk being lost. It is now necessary to go beyond ‘a system of systems methodologies’ and to embed that work in an explicit proposal for a critical management science.     

A transdisciplinary approach for formalized integrated planning and decision-making in complex systems

Multi-sectoral systems, such as cities or regional economies, face strategic challenges of optimal development due to the complexity of interacting perspectives, interests, and preferences of decision-makers and stakeholders. In coping with these challenges, integrated approaches in strategic planning and decision support promise to generate more efficient and effective results than sectoral approaches. In this article, we follow the concept of operational research (OR) by applying a formalized approach to cross-sectoral integrated planning and decision-making in complex, i.e., multi-sectoral systems. The presented Transdisciplinary Integrated Planning and Synthesis (TIPS) approach relies on (soft) OR methods combined in a multi-methodological framework that is adapted to the cognitive skills and habits of the stakeholders and experts involved in mutual and joint learning processes (transdisciplinarity). This methodological contribution structures, formalizes, and empirically illustrates cross-sectoral integrated strategic planning step by step, and evaluates the TIPS methodology against requirements for integrated approaches derived from literature.     

Frameworks of Inquiry: OR Practice Across the Hard—Soft Divide

The growing interest in understanding the practice of OR has, not unnaturally, tended to concentrate upon experience with those ‘soft’ methodologies which address both process and content management issues. This paper uses a detailed account of one practitioner's work in a ‘traditional’ area of OR (linear programming) to demonstrate how process-related issues are handled there, and argues that more extensive reporting of such conventional practice is essential for the health of the discipline. In particular, it suggests that an emphasis on discussing the development of working relationships between OR practitioners and their clients might usefully supplant the contemporary emphasis on the ‘project’.     

On the Nature of OR — Entering the Fray

In 1980 a seminar of operational researchers and practitioners from a variety of different countries concluded that there was a remarkable consensus about the way that the process of operational research and systems analysis should be understood and practised. Since then the development of new methods has continued apace, stimulated by interaction with the social sciences and paradigms other than natural science. This paper enters the debate, started in this journal, about the nature of OR's status as science or technology. It recognizes the historic claims of science on OR, but it suggests that for ‘private’ consumption, technology will prove more fruitful, and for ‘public’ consumption practitioners will increasingly adopt the label ‘consultant’. Ackoff's original six-step method of OR is updated to reflect current OR practice. The process suggested acknowledges the importance of context, socio-political factors and the growing role of facilitation.     

Writing practitioner case studies to help behavioural OR researchers ground their theories: application of the mangle perspective

Behavioural research into the practice of OR needs to be grounded. Case studies written by practitioners can potentially help address this need but currently most do not. The paper explores a way of describing OR projects that place the emphasis on the ‘actors’ who provide the motivating force and the consequences of their actions. The ‘mangle’ perspective focuses on the dynamic intertwining of people, technology and concepts; this can provide the basis for an insightful narrative describing the reality of the project in terms of the planned approach, the problems met and the outcomes. Two examples are given, one of a conventional model building exercise, the second of a ‘soft OR’ intervention: both describe projects conducted by practitioners for commercial purposes. It is concluded that, by using the mangle perspective, the OR case writer can winnow the wheat from the chaff in order to write a succinct informative narrative, a narrative that could be utilized by behavioural OR (BOR) researchers. It is further concluded that BOR researchers should engage with ‘practice theory’ to deepen their understanding of what actually happens in projects.