Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
The 49th Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences had, as its
theme, the potential impacts of systemics on society. As my contribution to this, I want to
discuss why I think a critical systems approach called creative holism can help managers
address complex problem situations. As is frequently stated, managers today face
increasing complexity, change and diversity. Furthermore, the solutions they are offered
to help them cope in this situation rarely seem to work. In this paper, it is argued that those
solutions fail because they are not holistic or creative enough. The benets to be gained
from holism and creativity (in a systemic sense) are outlined, and a practical approach,
creative holism, is specied which aims to better equip managers to deal with complex
problem situations. If the argument is right then systemics has the potential to have both a
signicant and a benecial impact upon society in the years to come. Copyright # 2006
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Keywords complexity; systems thinking; holism; creativity; critical systems thinking; creative
holism
and practice in a learning cycle. As a result there The review conducted in the paper fulls the
is evidence that holism can help managers make research purpose of demonstrating what is
a success of their practice and address broad, required of systems thinking today if it is to
strategic issues as well as narrow, technical ones. make the greatest contribution to resolving the
Creativity, in a systemic sense, has become problems of modern society. Creative holism is
possible because of more recent developments in advanced as an original contribution to what is
systems methodology. Experiences immediately needed. Having discussed creative holism and
prior, during and after the Second World War, the way that it works, the paper concludes by
led the pioneers of applied systems thinking to returning to the big issues that systems thinking
conclude that important changes had to be made can help address. If the argument is correct,
to the traditional scientic method if it was to be creative holism is a vehicle that can enable
effective in tackling the real-world problems they systemics to have both a signicant and a
were interested in. They advocated, under labels benecial impact upon society in the years to
such as operational research, systems analysis come.
and systems engineering, methodologies that
were more holistic and interdisciplinary, and put
client and user objectives rst. The hard systems THE NEED FOR CREATIVE HOLISM
methodologies developed were, and still are,
efcient at tackling a particular range of problem Managers today are expected to cope with
situations. However, as society continued to increasing complexity, change and diversity.
become more complex, turbulent and hetero- Complexity stems from the nature of pro-
geneous, problem situations arose which proved blems. They rarely present themselves individu-
difcult to tame using even these methodologies. ally but come related to other problems, in richly
Fortunately, the systems community responded interconnected problem situations that are
with new approaches, methodologies and appropriately described by Ackoff (1999) as
models, better designed for the circumstances messes. As Dean of a business school, I
of the modern era. System dynamics, organis- recognise this characteristic in the higher edu-
ational cybernetics, complexity theory, soft cation system in the UK. There is a constant
systems thinking, emancipatory systems think- emphasis on improving the quality of learning
ing and postmodern systems methods were and teaching, pressure to do well in the research
developed. This advance in the competence of assessment exercise, and a requirement to
systems thinking and practice led to a new kind produce employable graduates. These issues
of problem: How can we understand the are cross-cut by government targets, concerning
strengths and weaknesses of these different for example the social class make-up of the
systems approaches and use them creatively, in intake, by increased parental involvement
combination? because of the fees that students now have to
Critical systems thinking tries to answer this pay, and by the need to do well in the various
question and to provide practical guidance about University leagues tables that are produced. All
how to use systems theories, methodologies and these factors interact of course. Too much
methods together in an intervention. One recent emphasis on learning and teaching can lead
set of guidelines goes under the name of creative research stars to disappear, leading to a poor
holism (Jackson, 2003). Creative holism seeks to performance in research assessment, a decline in
be multi-paradigm, multi-methodology and league table position, etc. As a result of these
multi-method in orientation. In this way it can interactions, once you examine them problems
provide managers with the joint benets of seem to get bigger and to involve more issues and
holism and creativity so that they can do their stakeholdersstudents, parents, employers,
jobs better. The four phases of creative holism research councils, government.
creativity, choice, implementation and reec- Change is a product of our era. Organisations if
tionare outlined. they are to remain viable, have to respond
Copyright 2006 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
frequently and quickly to constant shifts is their to recognise that optimising the performance of
environments. Customers change their prefer- one part may have consequences elsewhere that
ences over shorter time spans. Competition is are damaging for the whole. This fault is known
global and is often fuelled by the onward march as sub-optimisation. In its early days, as is now
of technological innovation. Governments admitted, process re-engineering concentrated
impose new regulations. Transformations in far too much on the things that can be engineered
society and in ways of thinking impose fresh at the expense of the people in organisations.
responsibilities on managers. People reacted and process re-engineering inter-
In a world of complexity and change, man- ventions failed in terms of securing overall
agers have to tackle a much greater diversity of improvement. Benchmarking encourages look-
problem situations. They have to continue to ing at the efciency of the different parts of the
ensure that organisational processes are efcient organisation separately against external com-
and that they are served by the latest develop- parators. It fails to see that, even if each part is
ments in technology. But this is hardly enough to optimised in this way, the performance of the
stay ahead of the game. Staff have to be inspired whole organisation will be disastrous if the parts
and the organisations stock of knowledge do not interact together well.
captured, distributed and enhanced, so that the Management fads also stie creativity. They
organisation learns faster than its competitors. pander to the notion that there is one best
This requires that managers put in place exible solution in all circumstances. Sometimes, if this
structures and demonstrate transformational solution tackles only one of the aspects of an
leadership qualities. Changes in the law and in organisation relevant to effective performance,
social expectations require managers to respond the result is to reinforce sub-optimisation.
positively to eliminate discrimination and to Quality management, for example, has done a
monitor the impact of their organisations lot to improve process design, but can be
activities on their communities and environ- criticized for ignoring wider structural issues
ments. and the politics of organizations (Flood, 1993). At
Faced with increasing complexity, change and other times, if more parts are considered, there is
diversity, it is not surprising that managers turn a danger that they are all viewed from the same
to advisers, consultants and academics for help. perspective. The balanced scorecard approach
So desperate have they become for enlight- (Kaplan and Norton, 1996) claims to embrace
enment that they have elevated a number of different viewpoints on organisational perform-
these to the status of management gurus. Too ance while actually requiring users to transfer a
often, however, managers have been peddled machine-like view of organisations to a wider
panaceas in the form of the latest management range of their activities. It looks at different
fad. We are now awash with quick-x things, but in the same way. This inhibits
solutionsbenchmarking, rightsizing, quality creativity. Japanese authors, such as Nonaka
management, process re-engineering, balanced and Takeuchi (see Jackson, 2005), regard Western
scorecard, knowledge management, customer approaches to knowledge management as impo-
relationship management, to name but a few. verished because they are dominated by the
Unfortunately, as so many managers have model of the organisation as an information-
discovered to the cost of themselves and their processing machine, derived from Taylor and
organisations, these apparently simple, off-the- Simon.
shelf solutions rarely work. Fundamentally, they If the reason for the failure of management
fail because they are not holistic or creative fads, in the face of complexity, change and
enough (Jackson, 1995; Ackoff, 1999). diversity, is that they are not holistic or
They are not holistic enough because they creative enough, then managers need to look
concentrate on the parts of the organisation elsewhere for helpto systems thinking. Sys-
rather than the whole. In doing so, they miss the tems thinking is holistic rather than reductionist
crucial interactions between the parts. They fail and, at least in the form of critical systems
Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
thinking, does everything possible to encourage 1954. The facility that systems thinkers have to
creativity. employ such analogies arises from their concern
with systems per se rather than with the particular
domainmechanical, biological or humanin
THE BENEFITS OF HOLISM which systems manifest themselves. So, for
example, von Bertalanffys (1950) conception of
Holism puts the study of wholes before that of organisms as open systems, developed to
the parts. It does not, therefore, try to break explain complexity in the biological domain,
organisations, or other entities, down into parts was seized upon by management thinkers (e.g.,
in order to understand them and intervene in Katz and Kahn, 1966) and readily transferred by
them. It concentrates its attention instead at the them to organisation theory to help conceptualise
organisational level and on ensuring that organisation-environment relationshipssome-
the parts are related properly together and are thing that had been impossible using the machine
functioning well to serve the purposes of the view of organisations that was dominant pre-
whole. viously. More recently, the concept of autopoi-
Holism, as an approach to gaining under- esis and ideas derived from chaos and
standing, has been around at least as long as complexity theory have been transferred from
reductionism. The ancient Greek philosopher the scientic elds in which they originated to
Aristotle, for example, reasoned that the parts of explain the behaviour of systems of different
the body only make sense in terms of the way types (see Mingers, 1995; Stacey, 1996).
they function to support the whole organism, and A second benet deriving from holism is the
used this biological analogy to consider how capacity to recognise the importance of both
individuals need to be related to the State. process and structure in system development
However, with the advent of the scientic and maintenance, and their interdependence.
revolution in the 17th century, premised on a Non-systemic thinking tends to emphasise either
method which endorsed reductionism, holism change and ow or permanence and stability; a
was pushed to the margins of scholarly debate, divide going back to the pre-Socratic philoso-
and left to the likes of romantic poets (Words- phers Heraclitus and Parmenides. Von Berta-
worth, Coleridge, Blake) to explore. Not until the lanffy was interested in the processes that give
middle of the 20th century, with von Bertalanf- rise to the steady state that biological organisms
fys (1968) general system theory and Wieners are capable of exhibiting. This is taken much
(1948) cybernetics, did systems ideas, and further in complexity theory which pictures
holism, regain a degree of scientic respectability. systems as arenas of dynamic process from
Today, as the world has grown more complex which stable structures are temporarily born.
and it proves impossible or counter-productive Order is, then, an emergent property of disorder
to try to break systems down into parts, holism and comes about through self-organising pro-
deserves a place as an equal and complementary cesses operating from within the system itself.
partner to reductionism. A number of signicant Maturana and Varelas distinction between
benets emerge for managers if they adopt structure and organisation adds further
holistic thinking. insight: Maturana (1986) dening a dynamic
We noted how Aristotle transferred what he composite unity as a composite unity in
learned from biology to inform his thinking continuous structural change with conservation
about politics. The ability to develop and make of organisation. In general terms, all the different
use of transdisciplinary analogies has been a systems methodologies are able to take
strength of systems thinking from its inception advantage of the ability to conceptualise struc-
and was enshrined in the original purposes of the ture and process as interrelated.
Society for General Systems Research (the fore- A third benet of holism is that it provides a
runner of the International Society for the good basis for critique. As Churchman (1979) and
Systems Sciences) when it was established in Ulrich (1983) have pointed out, the implication of
Copyright 2006 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
the systems message, that all the parts of a system but we should at least listen to Sir Geoffrey
are interconnected, is that you need to under- Vickers who, after a 40-year career in the world of
stand the whole system in order to know whether affairs, sat down to write about his experiences
a particular intervention, designed to improve it, (see Checkland and Holwell, 1998). He found
will actually improve it or not. Such complete little in social theory that could help him make
understanding, however, is reserved for a God. sense of them. In systems thinking, however, he
The only way forward therefore, for those who discovered much of immediate value and was
believe in and would practice systems thinking, able to develop his sophisticated theory of
is to constantly reect upon the necessary lack of appreciative systems as a result. It seems that
comprehensiveness in our understanding. When systems ideas have a resonance with real-world
we take action, as we have to do, we deal with practice which is sadly lacking in other dis-
this dilemma by drawing boundaries; taking ciplines.
account of some things and disregarding others. Holism also ensures that we keep in mind the
We should be ready to justify the boundaries we big issues. I shall return to this in the conclusion
draw and be willing to have them challenged by of the paper. Sufce to say here that it forces us to
others. Ulrichs critical systems heuristics pro- ask, with Drucker and Ackoff (1999), not only are
vides the means to critique boundary judge- we doing things right? but also are we doing the
ments. right things?
A fourth and nal benet of holism, that it is
worth mentioning here, is the theoretical aware-
ness to which it gives rise. When we distinguish
systems and identify their characteristics, we CREATIVITY IN APPLIED SYSTEMS
clearly do so from a particular world-view. Our THINKING
knowledge is, therefore, always partial. It
becomes necessary, therefore, to reect upon If holism is necessary to deal with increasing
the world-view we are adopting and to compare complexity, change and diversity so, we argue in
what it reveals to the knowledge we can get from this section, is creativity. Because of the growing
an alternative world-view. Doing so can also help popularity of holistic thinking, there is now a
us to develop a close link between theory and variety of different systems approaches to choose
practice (which is essential to the development of between. While these all employ holism, they do
applied systems thinking) because in acting in a not all encourage creativity. Some fall prey to the
particular way we can be clear what we are fault found with so many management fads
assuming about the system of concern. If the they encourage us to look at organizations from
action goes wrong, we can challenge those only one perspective. Increasingly, being
assumptions. Critical systems thinking (see systemic is also coming to mean being able to
Jackson, 2000, 2003) frequently asks what para- look at problem situations and knowing how to
digm is driving our world-view or what manage them from a variety of points of view
metaphors we are privileging in our world view, and using different systems approaches in
in order to progress theoretical awareness and combination. Critical systems thinking speci-
the critique to which it can give rise. This form of cally encourages this kind of creativity. Creativ-
critique is more fundamental than the boundary ity is made possible if we understand the range of
critique mentioned earlier because the world- systems approaches, their strengths and weak-
view or paradigm we adopt tends to determine nesses, and how to use them together.
how we see boundaries. In order to understand this further it is worth
The notion of holism itself, the concepts looking at how applied systems thinking devel-
associated with it, and the four benets I have oped, and why a variety of different systems
outlined, provide for systems thinking, I would methodologies emerged. Figure 1, based upon
suggest, advantages over reductionism when it Jackson and Keys (1984) system of systems
comes to practical action. This is difcult to prove methodologies, seeks to map this out.
Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
Copyright 2006 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
of the greater power possessed by some groups systems thinkers. Hard systems thinking is
over others. Ulrich (1983) and Beer (1994), to take functionalist/positivist in character; while sys-
two examples, have sought to formulate eman- tem dynamics, organizational cybernetics and
cipatory systems approaches which can help in complexity theory are all functionalist/structur-
these contexts. Ulrichs critical systems heuris- alist. Soft systems thinking is interpretive in
tics allows questions to be asked about who nature; while emancipatory and postmodern
benets from particular system designs and systems approaches are based on the emancipa-
seeks to empower those affected by management tory and postmodern sociological paradigms
decisions but not involved in them. Beers team respectively.
syntegrity seeks to specify an arena and However we analyse developments in applied
procedures that enable all stakeholders to debate systems thinking, the same conclusion emerges.
openly and democratically the issues with which The various types of systems approach, while
they are confronted. sharing a commitment to holism, emphasise
Finally there are those, for example Taket and different things and have different strengths and
White (2000), who worry about the claims of any weaknesses. The key to being creative, in applied
methodology to bring about generalised systems thinking, is to use the plurality of
improvement. They advocate postmodern prac- systems methodologies and methods, that now
tice and methods. Their contributions can be exist, in combination. Only multi-methodology
seen, therefore, as assuming the existence of and multi-method practice can cope with the
massive and impenetrable complexity and coer- increasing complexity, change and diversity that
cionthe conditions dened in the bottom right- managers encounter. Research into how this can
hand corner of Figure 1. be achieved goes under the name of critical
Figure 1 provides us with a way of seeing systems thinking and one variant of that is called
developments in applied systems thinking. There creative holism (see Jackson, 2000, 2003).
are other, equally legitimate tools that can
achieve much the same thingfor example,
metaphor analysis and paradigm analysis (see CREATIVE HOLISM
Jackson, 2000, 2003).
Metaphor analysis sees developments in The purpose of creative holism is to learn about
applied systems thinking as being about the and harness the various systems methodologies,
exploration and exploitation of different meta- methods and models so that they can best be used
phors closely linked to our understanding of by managers to respond to the complexity,
organisations. Hard systems thinking privileges turbulence and heterogeneity of the problem
the machine metaphor. System dynamics and situations they face today. It shares with critical
complexity theory favour the ux and trans- systems thinking, generally, a basic philosophy
formation metaphor; while organizational that can be described by three commitmentsto
cybernetics makes primary use of the organism critical awareness (of the strengths and weak-
and brain metaphors. Soft systems approaches nesses of different systems approaches), plural-
prefer the culture and political system meta- ism (the use in combination of different systems
phors; while emancipatory systems thinking methodologies and methods) and improve-
entertains the psychic prison and instruments ment. This philosophy will not be discussed
of domination metaphors. The carnival meta- further here. The critical systems practice it
phor seems appropriate for postmodern ap- embraces is an enhanced version of total systems
proaches. Carnivals are subversive of order, intervention (Flood and Jackson, 1991). It has
they allow diversity and creativity to be expres- four phasescreativity, choice, implementa-
sed, they encourage the exceptional to be seen, tion and reection. These phases will be
they are playful and engage peoples emotions. described in turn. Table 1 provides a summary.
Developments in applied systems thinking can In order to appreciate the complexity and
also be seen as opening up new paradigms to heterogeneity of problem situations, it is essential
Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
Copyright 2006 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
that are to be employed in the intervention. methodologies employed; the methods, models,
The existence of the generic methodologies techniques, etc. used; and about the real-world
ensures that the methods are not simply cut- problem situation investigated.
freethey can be evaluated as to their use- I have, elsewhere (Jackson, 2000), compared
fulness in support of methodology and related the critical systems practitioner with a holistic
theory. doctor. Confronted by a patient with pains in her
Implementation can then proceed by employ- stomach, the doctor might initially consider
ing the chosen dominant methodology and standard explanations, such as over-indulgence,
methods. As intervention progresses, the problems period pains or irritable bowel syndrome. If the
that earlier seemed to be crucial may fade into the patient failed to respond to the usual treatment
background and new ones emerge. This can prescribed on the basis of an initial diagnosis you
be catered for by continually cycling round the would expect the doctor to entertain the possib-
phases of creative holism, with different systems ility of some more deep-seated and dangerous
methodologies (and chosen methods) assuming malady. The patient might be sent for X-ray, body
the role of dominant and dependant in leading scan or other tests designed to search for such
the intervention at particular times. Whichever structural problems. If nothing was found, a
methodology is initially chosen as dominant, the thoughtful conversation with the patient might
way implementation proceeds will be continually suggest that the pains were a symptom of anxiety
critiqued through the lenses offered by alternative and depression. Various forms of counselling or
paradigms. Implementation should see highly psychological support could be offered. Or,
relevant and co-ordinated change effected, which perhaps, a knowledge of the patients domestic
secures improvement in the problem situation circumstances, and bruises elsewhere on the
according to the concerns of the different para- body, might reveal that the patient was suffering
digms. Switches in dominant methodology should at the hands of a violent partner. What should the
be common. doctor do in these circumstances? Finally,
Reection seeks to judge how successful the perhaps the patient just needs another inter-
intervention has been in bringing about improve- estsuch as painting or golfto take her mind
ment. It does this by taking into account what off worries at work.
each paradigm rates as most signicant. The We would expect a holistic doctor to be open
functionalist paradigm prioritises goal-seeking to all these possibilities and to have appropriate
and viability, judging in terms of efciency and responses and treatments available. To my
efcacy. The interpretive paradigm prioritises mind, the critical systems practitioner, probing
exploring purposes by enhancing mutual under- with his or her functionalist (positivist and
standing, judging in terms of effectiveness and structuralist), interpretive, emancipatory and
elegance. The emancipatory paradigm seeks to postmodern perspectives, is similarly taking a
ensure fairness, judging in terms of empower- holistic approach to organisational and societal
ment and emancipation. The postmodern para- problems.
digm values the promotion of diversity, judging
in terms of exception and emotion. A highly
successful intervention should be able to demon- CONCLUSION
strate progress on all these fronts. Reection also
seeks to ensure that research, and the generation Creative holism, a new development in systems
of new learning, receives the attention it thinking, wants to provide managers with the
deserves. Any use of creative holism is capable joint benets of holism and creativity so that they
of yielding research ndings about: how to can do their jobs better. Holism by itself confers
manage the relationships between different many advantages over traditional, reductionist
paradigms; the philosophy and theory that approaches in dealing with complexity, change
constitutes a paradigm underpinning any gen- and diversity. As systems thinking has devel-
eric methodology used; the generic systems oped it has discovered a variety of different ways
Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
of being holistic, based upon different paradigms of us will get the opportunity to practice our
and metaphors. We are now able, therefore, to be systems thinking on the world stage. Perhaps,
creative in the way we approach being holistic. though, if we pay attention to each and all
Creative holism enables us to use different of these things, as managers in organisations,
systems approaches, reecting alternative holis- our actions will have a resonance beyond our
tic perspectives, in combination. Perhaps we immediate environments and, in some way,
cannot use all the various systems approach at contribute to global improvement. This is a nice
once, but they can be employed creatively, over thought. Most managers, as well as doing a good
time, to promote together overall improvement job, would like to make things better rather than
in the problem situations managers face. This is worse for future generations.
the essence of creative holism.
No doubt creative holism will seem difcult. REFERENCES
But then, managerial work is becoming more
complex, turbulent and diverse. Most managers Ackoff RL. 1981. Creating the Corporate Future. Wiley:
are likely to nd themselves, on a regular New York.
basis, confronted by messes made up of Ackoff RL. 1999. Ackoffs Best: His Classic Writings on
Management. Wiley: New York.
interacting issues such as the need to increase Beer S. 1979. The Heart of Enterprise. Wiley: Chichester.
productivity, become more market-centred, Beer S. 1994. Beyond Dispute: the Invention of Team
improve communications, adopt fairer recruit- Syntegrity. Wiley: Chichester.
ment and promotion strategies, and motivate Checkland PB. 1981. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice.
a diverse workforce. They will also nd them- Wiley: Chichester.
Checkland PB. Holwell S. 1998. Information, Systems
selves having to prioritise between the demands and Information Systems. Wiley: Chichester.
made upon them because of lack of time Churchman CW. 1968. The Systems Approach. Dell: New
and resources. They cannot tackle them all York.
at once. This all seems like commonsense. Churchman CW. 1979. The Systems Approach and Its
Creative holism is in tune with this common- Enemies. Basic Books: New York.
Flood RL. 1993. Beyond Total Quality Management.
sense. It recognises that excellent organis- Wiley: Chichester.
ational performance depends on managers Flood RL, Jackson MC. 1991. Creative Problem Solving:
paying attention to improving goal-seeking Total Systems Intervention. Wiley: Chichester.
and viability, exploring purposes, ensuring fair- Forrester JW. 1969. Principles of Systems. Wright-Allan
ness and promoting diversity. And it offers Press: Cambridge, MA.
Jackson MC. 1995. Beyond the fads: systems thinking
critical systems practice, which provides for managers. Systems Research 12: 2542.
guidelines on how to tackle in an holistic and Jackson MC. 2000. Systems Approaches to Management.
balanced way, using various systems ap- Kluwer/Plenum: New York.
proaches, the messes that managers so often Jackson MC. 2003. Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for
confront. Creative holism responds to the every- Managers. Wiley: Chichester.
Jackson MC. 2005. Reections on knowledge
day problem situations that managers have to management from a critical systems perspective.
deal with. Knowledge Management Research and Practice 3: 187
It is one of the satisfactions of systems 196.
thinking that its insights translate between levels. Jackson MC, Keys P. 1984. Towards a system of sys-
If we move beyond the organisational to the tems methodologies. JORS 35: 473486.
Kaplan RS, Norton DP. 1996. The Balanced Scorecard:
societal and world levels, we nd that the Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Business
same imperatives for improvement, highlig- School Press: Boston.
hted by creative holism, continue to be crucial. Katz D, Kahn RL. 1966. The Social Psychology of Organ-
We are unlikely to improve things unless we izations. Wiley: New York.
pay attention to efciency and effectiveness, Maturana HR. 1986. The biological foundations of
self-consciousness and the physical domain of
mutual understanding, fairness and diversity. existence. In Physics of Cognitive Processes: Amal
And we need to understand the interactions 1986, Caianiello ER (ed.). World Scientic:
between these and treat them holistically. Few Singapore.
Copyright 2006 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres
Midgley G. 1997. Mixing methods: Developing Taket AR, White LA. 2000. Partnership and Participation.
systemic intervention. In Multimethodology: The Wiley: Chichester.
Theory and Practice of Combining Management Science Ulrich W. 1983. Critical Heuristics of Social Planning.
Methodologies, Mingers J, Gill J (eds). Wiley: Chiche- Haupt: Bern.
ster; 291332. von Bertalanffy L. 1950. The theory of open sys-
Mingers JC. 1995. Self-Producing Systems: Implications tems in physics and biology. In Systems Thinking,
and Applications of Autopoiesis. Plenum: New York. Emery FE (ed.). Penguin: Harmondsworth; 70
Senge PM. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of 85.
the Learning Organization. Random House: London. von Bertalanffy L. 1968. General System Theory.
Stacey RD. 1996, Complexity and Creativity in Organiz- Penguin: Harmondsworth.
ations. Berret-Kohler: San Francisco. Wiener N. 1948. Cybernetics. Wiley: New York.
Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Syst. Res. 23, 647^657 (2006)
DOI:10.1002/sres