A Meta Synthesis of the Modeling Methods of Complex Socio-technical Systems with a Multi Paradigm-multi Methodology Approach

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Prof. of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Prof. in MBA, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Prof. of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

4 Ph.D. Student of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: Today,organizations are dealing with the systems which have structural, technological and social complexities named socio-technical systems. To capture this complexity and variety in modeling, we need methods which provide the researchers with similar level of variety. Despite developing a number of methods in different disciplines such as decision-making and systems theories, these methods are commonly one dimensional or they do not consider special aspects of socio-technical systems. Moreover, some methods do not propose a specific framework to model these systems. Therefore, the current study presents a meta-synthesis of the existing modeling methods and creates a new modeling method.
Methods: The current study tries to present a meta-synthesis of the modeling methods using critical interpretive synthesis and a multi paradigm-multi methodology approach considering strengths and applicable tools of the extant methods.
Results: Following the meta-synthesis, 12 descriptive themes were identified and used to analyze the methods. In addition, synthetic and analytic constructs were identified and used to propose the synthetic method.
Conclusion: The proposed method, which is a by-product of the meta-synthesis of modeling methods of socio-technical systems, is able to model the different aspects of socio-technical systems using diverse concepts and tools of extant approaches and methods. However, its applicability has to be evaluated through different case studies.
 

Keywords

References

References
Ackermann, F. (2012). Problem structuring methods ‘in the Dock’: Arguing the case for Soft OR. European Journal of Operational Research, 219(3), 652-658.
Ackoff, R. L. (2001). A brief guide to interactive planning and idealized design. Retrieved on March, 19, 2006.
Ackoff, R.L. (1981). Creating the Corporate Future. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Alizadeh, L., Noorossana, R., Raissi, S. (2015). Multi-objective optimization of criminal trial process using descrete event computer simulation and design of experiment. Industrial management Journal of university of Tehran, 7 (1), 65-82. (in Persian)
Ashby, W. R. (1957). An introduction to cybernetics. Chapman and Hall, London.
Azar, A., Saghalorzadeh, S., Rajabzadeh, A. (2013). Fuzzy Simulation in Uncertain Circumstances. Industrial management Journal of university of Tehran, 4 (2), 1-20.
(in Persian)
Baxter, G., & Sommerville, I. (2011). Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering. Interacting with computers, 23(1), 4-17.
Beer, S. (1984). The viable system model: Its provenance, development, methodology and pathology. Journal of the operational research society, 31(1), 7-25
Bench, S., & Day, T. (2010). The user experience of critical care discharge: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research. International journal of nursing studies, 47(4), 487-499.
Bennet, P., Bryant, J. & Howard, N. (2001). Drama theory and confrontation analysis. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Bukowski, L. (2016). System of systems dependability–Theoretical models and applications examples. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 151, 76-92.
Checkland, P. & Holwell, S. (2004). Classic’ OR and ‘soft’ OR - an asymmetric complementarity. In Systems modelling: Theory and practice. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Checkland, P. (2001). Soft system methodology. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for action: a short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use, for practitioners, teachers and students. John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
Dixon-Woods, M., Cavers, D., Agarwal, S., Annandale, E., Arthur, A., Harvey, J., ... & Riley, R. (2006). Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC medical research methodology, 6(1), 35.
Edwards, J., & Kaimal, G. (2016). Using meta-synthesis to support application of qualitative methods findings in practice: A discussion of meta-ethnography, narrative synthesis, and critical interpretive synthesis. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 51, 30-35.
Espinosa, A., & Walker, J. (2013). Complexity management in practice: A viable system model intervention in an Irish eco-community. European Journal of Operational Research, 225(1), 118-129.
Eusgeld, I., Nan, C., & Dietz, S. (2011). “System-of-systems” approach for interdependent critical infrastructures. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 96(6), 679-686.
Flood, R. L., & Jackson, M. C. (1991). Total systems intervention: a practical face to critical systems thinking. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 4(3), 197-213.
Flood, R. L., & Romm, N. R. (1995). Enhancing the process of methodology choice in total systems intervention (TSI) and improving chances of tackling coercion. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 8(4), 377-408.
Friend, J. (2001). The Strategic Choice approach. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Friend, J. K., & Hickling, A. (2005). Planning under pressure: the strategic choice approach. Third edition, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Oxford.
Gu, J. F., & Tang, X. J. (2003). A test on meta-synthesis system approach to forecasting the GDP growth rate in China. In Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences, Hersonissos, Crete (pp. 6-11).
Gu, J., & Tang, X. (2005). Meta-synthesis approach to complex system modeling. European Journal of Operational Research, 166(3), 597-614.
Haftor, D. M. (2011). An Evaluation of RL Ackoff’s Interactive Planning: A case-based approach. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 24(4), 355-377.
Herrmann, T., & Loser, K. U. (1999). Vagueness in models of socio-technical systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 18(5), 313-323.
Herrmann, T., Hoffmann, M., Kunau, G., & Loser, K. U. (2004). A modelling method for the development of groupware applications as socio-technical systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(2), 119-135.
Hickling, A. (2001). Gambling with frozen fire. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
HosseinZadeh, M. & Mehregan, M. R.)2016). Designing a Multi-Methodology Framework for Operations Research using Social Network Analysis. Modern research in decision making, 1 (1), 1-26. (in Persian)
Hosseinzadeh, M., Mehregan, M. R. & Amiri, M. (2016). Investigating the methodological foundations of Operations Research in the form of the categorical syllogism. Industrial management Journal of university of Tehran, 8 (4), 575-600. (in Persian)
Howard, N., Bennett, P., Bryant, J., & Bradley, M. (1993). Manifesto for a theory of drama and irrational choice. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 6(4), 429-434.
Howick, S., & Ackermann, F. (2011). Mixing OR methods in practice: Past, present and future directions. European Journal of Operational Research, 215(3), 503-511.
Howick, S., Ackermann, F., Walls, L., Quigley, J. & Houghton, T. (2016). Learning from mixed OR method practice: the nine case study. Omega, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.omega.2016.08.003.
Hughes, T. P. (1987). The evolution of large technological systems. The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, 51-82.
Jackson, M. C. (1999). Towards coherent pluralism in management science. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(1), 12-22.
Jackson, M. C. (2003). Systems thinking: Creative holism for managers (p. 378). Chichester: Wiley.
Jackson, M. C., & Keys, P. (1984). Towards a system of systems methodologies. Journal of the operational research society, 473-486.
Keating, C. B., Padilla, J. J., & Adams, K. (2008). System of systems engineering requirements: challenges and guidelines. Engineering Management Journal, 20(4), 24-31.
Kotiadis, K., & Mingers, J. (2006). Combining PSMs with hard OR methods: the philosophical and practical challenges. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 856-867.
Mayer, M. W. (1998). Architecting principles for system of systems. Syst. Eng, 1(4), 267-274.
McDermott, T., Rouse, W., Goodman, S., & Loper, M. (2013). Multi-level modeling of complex socio-technical systems. Procedia Computer Science, 16, 1132-1141.
Meyers, T. J., Hester, P. T., & Pyne, J. C. (2014). Toward a Watershed-and System of Systems–Oriented Perspective of Stormwater Management Enterprise Performance. Public Works Management & Policy, 19(3), 235-254.
Midgley, G. (1997). Developing the methodology of TSI: From the oblique use of methods to creative design. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 10(3), 305-319.
Midgley, G., Cavana, R. Y., Brocklesby, J., Foote, J. L., Wood, D. R., & Ahuriri-Driscoll, A. (2013). Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 229(1), 143-154.
Mingers, J. & Rosenhead, J. (2001). Diversity Unity: looking inward and outward. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Mingers, J. & White, L. (2009) A Review of the Recent Contribution of Systems Thinking to Operational Research and Management Science. Working paper. Kent Business School, Canterbury.
Mingers, J. (2001). Multimethodology-mixing and matching methods. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Mingers, J. (2003). A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods. Journal of the operational research society, 54(6), 559-570.
Mingers, J., & Brocklesby, J. (1997). Multimethodology: towards a framework for mixing methodologies. Omega, 25(5), 489-509.
Mingers, J., & Rosenhead, J. (2004). Problem structuring methods in action. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 530-554.
Mosleh Shirazi, A. N., Raenie, H., Iman, M. T. & Tajik, M. (2016). The Multi systemic methodology: new approach in management research. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities Journal, 22 (87), 7-32. (in Persian)
Mostafavi, A., Abraham, D. M., & Lee, J. (2012). System-of-systems approach for assessment of financial innovations in infrastructure. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 2(2), 250-265.
Munro, I., & Mingers, J. (2002). The use of multimethodology in practice—results of a survey of practitioners. Journal of the operational research society, 53(4), 369-378.
Najmaei, A. (2016). Using Mixed-Methods Designs to Capture the Essence of Complexity in the Entrepreneurship Research: An Introductory Essay and a Research Agenda. In Complexity in Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Technology Research (pp. 13-36). Springer International Publishing.
Nikolic, I. & Kasmire, J. (2013). Agent-Based Social Systems. H.Deguchi(Ed.). Springer, New York.
Nikolic, I. (2009). Co-evolutionary method for modelling large scale socio-technical systems evolution. TU Delft, Delft University of Technology. Next Generation Infrastructures Foundation.
Nikolic, I. Van Dam, K.H. & Kasmire, J. (2013). Agent-Based Social Systems. H.Deguchi(Ed.). Springer, New York.
Noblit, G.W., & Hare, R.D. (1988). Meta-Ethnography: synthesizingqualitative studies, Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Ottens, M., Franssen, M., Kroes, P., & Van De Poel, I. (2006). Modelling infrastructures as socio-technical systems. International journal of critical infrastructures, 2(2-3), 133-145.
Paterson, B. L., Dubouloz, C. J., Chevrier, J., Ashe, B., King, J., & Moldoveanu, M. (2009). Conducting qualitative metasynthesis research: Insights from a metasynthesis project. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 22-33.
Pidd, M. (2004). Complementarity in systems modelling. In Systems modelling: Theory and practice, 1-19. New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Preece, G., Shaw, D., & Hayashi, H. (2015). Application of the Viable System Model to analyse communications structures: A case study of disaster response in Japan. European Journal of Operational Research, 243(1), 312-322.
Ranyard, J. C., Fildes, R., & Hu, T. I. (2015). Reassessing the scope of OR practice: The influences of problem structuring methods and the analytics movement. European Journal of Operational Research, 245(1), 1-13.
Reynolds, M. (2007). Evaluation based on critical systems heuristics. In: Williams, B. and Imam, I. eds. Using Systems Concepts in Evaluation: An Expert Anthology. Point Reyes CA, USA: Edge Press, 101–122.
Sadeghi Moghadam, A. A., Khatami, A. & Rabbani, Y. (2011). Using Combined Method of SD and SSM for Solving Unstructured Social Problems. Industrial management Journal of university of Tehran, 3 (7), 55-76. (in Persian)
Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. (1996). Living with multiple paradigms the case of paradigm interplay in organizational culture studies. Academy of management review, 21(2), 529-557.
Sørensen, L., Vidal, R. V. V., & Engström, E. (2004). Using soft OR in a small company––The case of Kirby. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 555-570.
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. McGraw-Hill. New York.
Sushil, S. (1993). System dynamics: A practical approach for managerialproblems, Wiley Eastern publication, New Delhi, India.
Swinerd, C., & McNaught, K. R. (2012). Design classes for hybrid simulations involving agent-based and system dynamics models. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 25, 118-133.
Taket, A., & White, L. (1998). Experience in the practice of one tradition of multimethodology. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 11(2), 153-168.
Taket, A., & White, L. (2004). Playing with PANDA: The CybOrg and the rhizome. In Community Operational Research, 253-272. Springer US.
Tako, A. A., & Kotiadis, K. (2015). PartiSim: A multi-methodology framework to support facilitated simulation modelling in healthcare. European Journal of Operational Research, 244(2), 555-564.
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 8(1), 45.
Trist, E. R. I. C., & Emery, F. R. E. D. (1960). Socio-technical systems theory. vol. 2, Pergamon, Oxford, U.K.
Ulrich, W. & Reynolds, M. (2010). Critical systems heuristics. In: Reynolds, Martin and Holwell, Sue eds. Systems Approaches to Managing Change: A Practical Guide. London: Springer, 243–292.
Ulrich, W. (1993). Some difficulties of ecological thinking, considered from a critical systems perspective: a plea for critical holism. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 6(6), 583-611.
Ulrich, W. (2005). A brief introduction to critical systems heuristics (CSH). ECOSENSUS project website, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
White, L. (2006). Evaluating problem-structuring methods: Developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 842-855.
White, L., & Taket, A. (1997). Beyond appraisal: Participatory appraisal of needs and the development of action (PANDA). Omega, 25(5), 523-534.
Wu, P. P. Y., Fookes, C., Pitchforth, J., & Mengersen, K. (2015). A framework for model integration and holistic modelling of socio-technical systems. Decision Support Systems, 71, 14-27.
Yearworth, M., & White, L. (2014). The non-codified use of problem structuring methods and the need for a generic constitutive definition. European Journal of Operational Research, 237(3), 932-945.
 
Industrial Management Journal
Volume 10, Issue 2
2018
Pages 247-278

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics