• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
1
Viable Boundary Critique
Maurice YollesLiverpool Business School, John Moores University,
 Journal of Operational Research Society
. 2001, January,
51
,1-12
Abstract:
Issue-based problem situations can often be seen as conflicts that must be managedor resolved. Boundary critique theory, developed by Midgley as part of critical systems think-ing, can be used to model conflicts. However, its utility can be enhanced when it is linked to thecybernetic theory of viable systems, thus creating viable boundary critique analysis. Boundarycritique can provide an ethical analysis that can explore the meanings and processes associatedwith conflicts. Viable boundary critique enables differentiable social pluralities to be better explored, and provides a broader space for the consideration of political and ideological attrib-utes of conflict that develops beyond Midgley's ethical analysis. It also provides for a new wayof defining and measuring power. It also provides for new ways of defining and measuring power. A number of characteristics of boundary critique are considered in the context of a casestudy relating to the recent Liverpool dock strike.
Keywords:
Boundary critique, critical systems thinking, cybernetics, viable systems, conflict
The Purpose of the Paper
Many issue-based complex problem situations that arise between individuals or groups of ac-tors in organisations are addressed through consensus approaches like Soft Systems Methodol-ogy
1,2
or Organisational Development
1,3
. There is an argument that consensus approaches are afiction that actually involves attitude or position engineering. An alternative to consensus is toview situations in terms of socially plural conflict suprasystems of autonomous actors. Attemptsmay then be made to manage or resolve them. Boundary critique analysis enables us to do this.In pursuing this view, this paper will link Midgley's theory of boundary critique with viablesystems theory to form what we shall call
viable boundary critique
. In doing this, new boundarycritique theory will result that is able to explore the conflict process of most issue-based prob-lem situations. Boundary critique is concerned with issues and the boundaries that differentiatetheir elements. Boundaries define what is part of the system of consideration, and the choice of a boundary has consequences for analysis. Alter a given boundary, and the nature of an analysiswill change. Given that a plurality of boundaries exists, then the boundary critique problem as itis currently represented
4
, is that of exploring the selection of boundaries. This reflects on whatinformation should be considered appropriate to an analysis. However, this process is condi-tioned by attributes like ethics
4
. If a social plurality of autonomous actors (each with their own perceptions and purposes) exist in a suprasystem within which they interact, the boundary prob-lem can generate ethical tensions. The tensions can be elaborated into conflicts, which occurs because the differences embedded in the distinct choice of boundaries are contested. Here weare referring to
realistic
conflicts, that is those in which struggles occur against collective op- ponents for the acquisition of scarce values
5
(that is those values that relate to the domination of a given boundary). In the formative work of Midgley
4
, plural boundaries are embedded onewithin another.Viable boundary critique enables the boundary critique model to be extended to intersecting boundaries representing more complex situations, and provides for a fuller cognitive, ideologi-cal, ethical and behavioural analysis. Conflicts can normally be expressed in terms of ideologi-
 
2
cal and ethical tensions, and so viable boundary critique always has the possibility of beingused in situation analysis. Core to the approach is the notion of marginalisation, which leads toa new definition of power, and a novel way of measuring it. The ideas embedded in the theoryof viable boundary critique will be explored in a case study concerning the recent Liverpooldock strike.
Viability Systems Theory
Viable systems theory is implicitly concerned with complexity. It derives from a base of work  by Beer 
6
and Schwarz
7
, and Yolles
1
has developed the form in which we are interested. It is part of management systems - explaining how organisations, seen as (social) purposeful adap-tive activity systems, are able to survive. Such organisations, when described in terms of their externally related activities, are called actors.A viable organisation is able to support adaptability and change while maintaining stability inits behaviour. In particular an organisation is viable if it can maintain stable states of behaviour as it adapts to perturbations from its
environment 
. This environment can be differentiated into asuprasystem of interacting autonomous/independent actors, and the environment of the supra-system. The nature of actor independence is a matter of practical requirement that enables, for instance, data about a given actor to be collected without conceptually complicating it with datafrom other organisations. The question of whether one organisation in a suprasystem of them isindeed autonomous, is one of estimating its degree of interactivity with the other organisations.It is ultimately axiomatic, and perspective driven.It is possible to model any coherent social organisation as a viable system. Such an organisationis able to survive, and in doing so can respond to expected or unforeseen changes. Such asystem can generate sufficient variety through self-organisation to deal with that variety thataffects it from its environment (called requisite variety). Conflict and cooperation conditionvariety. Cooperation is essential for the creation of variety and therefore viability, while conflictcan compromise it. Cooperative approaches can lead to more stable and harmonious relational processes and thus a more directed future. Conflicts are related to tensions
8,9
.
Tension
is aninherent and essential feature of complex adaptive systems and provides the ‘go’ of the systemand the ‘force’ behind its ability to change
10
. However, a high level of tension (reduciblethrough homeostasis
6
) stresses and overloads actors. When tensions are elaborated through thecontesting of differences, conflict ensues.Viable systems theory encompasses the notions of paradigm incommensurability
1,11
that hasimportance in the critical systems theory associated with the mixing of methods
12
. Therefore,central to it is the notion of worldview, a literal translation from the German
weltanschauung 
13
.Weltanschauungen are relative to the institutions that individuals are attached to in a givensociety, and they change as the institutional realities change
14
. More recently
15
it has taken onthe meaning of a view or perspective of the “real” world that is determined by cultural and other attributes of the viewers. They may be individual, or shared by a group of people. In groupweltanschauung, individuals each retain their own realities while using common models toshare meaning. They have boundaries created by a belief system that supports the assumptions,concepts and ideas of the viewholders.Weltanschauung may be seen as a worldview of an individual or a shared worldview of a groupthat is more or less visible to its viewholders, but not to others who are not viewholders. It isseen by some to be something that is personal (to the individual or group) and indescribable,
 
3
informal, and not visible to others. With peer group support weltanschauung can become for-malised through language, enabling a set of explicit statements (propositions and their corollar-ies) to be made about their beliefs and knowledge. In this form, it can become a
paradigm
whensupported by a peer group. Paradigms maintain a set of explicit statements about their embed-ded beliefs and other attributes that enable everything that might be expressed about the world-view, to be expressed. They are thus more or less transparent to others who are not viewholders.The formalisation process uses language that (more or less) enables everything that must beexpressed, to be expressed, in a self-consistent way. The idea of a worldview
1
is that it is: agenerator of knowledge; culture centred; has cognitive organisation (beliefs, values, and atti-tudes) that are its attributes; has normative and cognitive control of behaviour (or action) thatcan be differentiated from each other; and has a cognitive space of concepts, knowledge andmeaning that is strongly linked to culture.The interrelationship between the two forms of worldview (weltanschauung and paradigm) isillustrated in figure 1
1
, where they have been collected together into a cognitive domain. Thesehave been differentiated from the behavioural domain within which resides the perceived behavioural world. In order to distinguish between these two domains and the transformationsthat occur between them, we have also introduced the organising domain. This has also beencalled a
transmogrifying 
domain because it represents organising transformations that aresubject to surprises. The behavioural and cognitive domains are analytically and empiricallyindependent. The former is composed of structures and actions that define the behaviouralworld, and these have been created within a frame of reference formulated within the cognitivedomain. We perceive the behavioural world through our cognitive models as we interact with itthrough them. It is through the process of cognitive formalisation that weltanschauung becomesmanifested as a paradigm that itself changes through a process of cognitive challenge. The behavioural world is represented within the paradigm in a way that conforms to its belief system.
Organising domain Behavioural domain
Paradigmrepresentation (formal world view)organisation of development/ formation/
Cognitive
Behavioural world intervention learning consolidation
domain
interpretationWeltanschauung(informal world view)reflection/creation
Figure 1: Tridomain model defining relationship between types of worldview and be-haviour Therefore, the cognitive basis of the paradigm is applid to the perceived behavioural worldaccording to some formalised regime that involves a transforming organising process. Thiseffectively defines logical relationships that become manifested as structures with associated
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...