Skip to main content

Understanding PSM Interventions Through Sense-Making and the Mangle of Practice Lens

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Outlooks and Insights on Group Decision and Negotiation (GDN 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 218))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1256 Accesses

Abstract

In this paper we seek to understand how individuals, as part of a group facilitated modelling setting, commit themselves to a set of actions, as a basis of sense-making, sense-giving and coordinated actions. For this we introduce Pickering’s Mangle of Practice to understand the practice of a group facilitated modelling setting. Using video data from a group modelling building exercise, we analyze how individual actors framed their circumstances in communication with one another and how through facilitated model building this affected their subsequent interpretation and decisions as the process unfolds. We show how, through the models as objects enhanced the interaction between verbal communication, expressed and felt emotion and material cues led to collective behavior within the group. With our study we extend prior research and elaborate on the role of objects and materiality as part of group decision making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Further details can be found at http://smartsteep.eu.

References

  1. Mingers, J., Rosenhead, J.: Problem structuring methods in action. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 152, 530–554 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Eden, C.: On evaluating the performance of “wide-band” GDSS’s. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 81, 302–311 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. White, L.: Evaluating problem-structuring methods: developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 57, 842–855 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ackermann, F.: Problem structuring methods “in the Dock”: arguing the case for Soft OR. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 219, 652–658 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Montibeller, G., Franco, A.: Decision and risk analysis for the evaluation of strategic options. In: O’Brien, F.A., Dyson, R.G. (eds.) Supporting Strategy: Frameworks, Methods and Models, pp. 251–284. Wiley, West Sussex (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ackermann, F., Eden, C.: Negotiation in strategy making teams: group support systems and the process of cognitive change. Group Decis. Negot. 20, 293–314 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fisher, R., Ury, W.: Getting to yes. Hutchinson, London (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ormerod, R.: The mangle of OR practice: towards more informative case studies of ‘technical’ projects. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 65, 1245–1260 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pickering, A.: The mangle of practice - agency and emergence in the sociology of science. Am. J. Sociology 99, 559–589 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pickering, A.: The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1995)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Weick, K.E., Roberts, K.H.: Collective mind in organizations: heedful interrelating on flight decks. Adm. Sci. Q. 38, 357–381 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Connell, N.A.D.: Evaluating Soft OR: some reflections on an apparently “Unsuccessful” implementation using a soft systems methodology (SSM) based approach. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 52, 150–160 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. White, L.: Understanding problem structuring methods interventions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 199, 823–833 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Yearworth, M., White, L.: The non-codified use of problem structuring methods and the need for a generic constitutive definition. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 237, 932–945 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Franco, L.A.: Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: a conceptual development. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 57, 813–821 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Franco, L.A., Meadows, M.: Exploring new directions for research in problem structuring methods: on the role of cognitive style. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 58, 1621–1629 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M., Obstfeld, D.: Organizing and the process of sense-making. Organ. Sci. 16, 409–421 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gioia, D.A., Chittipeddi, K.: Sense-making and sense-giving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Manage. J. 12, 433–448 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Maitlis, S., Lawrence, T.B.: Triggers and enablers of sense-giving in organizations. Acad. Manage. J. 50, 57–84 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Smircich, L., Morgan, G.: Leadership: the management of meaning. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 18, 257–273 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Fiske, S.T., Taylor, S.E.: Social Cognition, 2nd edn., Xviii, 717 pp. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Eden, C., Ackermann, F.: Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the public sector. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 152, 615–630 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Eden, C., Ackermann, F.: Group decision and negotiation in strategy making. Group Decis. Negot. 10, 119–140 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Latour, B.: Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rittel, H.W., Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci. 4, 155–169 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ackoff, R.L.: The art and science of mess management. Interfaces 11, 20–26 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. White, L.: Behavioural Issues in PSMs [WWW Document]. IFORS Conf. Present (2014). http://www.ifors2014.org/files2/program-ifors2014.pdf

  28. Checkland, P.: Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: Includes a 30-year Retrospective. Wiley, Chichester (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Geels, F.W.: Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Res. Policy 39, 495–510 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Checkland, P., Scholes, J.: Soft systems methodology: a 30-year retrospective (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Davis, J., MacDonald, A., White, L.: Problem-structuring methods and project management: an example of stakeholder involvement using Hierarchical Process Modelling methodology. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 61, 893–904 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yearworth, M., Schien, D., Burger, K.: D2.1 R1 Energy Master Plan Process Modelling STEEP PROJECT (314277) - Systems Thinking for Comprehensive City Efficient Energy Planning, p. 70. University of Bristol (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Yearworth, M., Schien, D., White, L., Burger, K.: Sustainable urban energy planning: a development of problem structuring methodology (2015) (in review)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hindle, G.A.: Case Article—Teaching soft systems methodology and a blueprint for a module. INFORMS Trans. Educ. 12, 31–42 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Marashi, E., Davis, J.P.: An argumentation-based method for managing complex issues in design of infrastructural systems. Reliab. Eng. Sys. Safe. 91, 1535–1545 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Emerson, R.: Working with ‘key incidents’. In: Seale, C., Gobo, G., Gubrium, J.F., Silverman, D. (eds.) Qualitative Research Practice, pp. 427–442. Sage, London (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Yearworth, M.: D2.5 Evaluation STEEP PROJECT (314277) - Systems Thinking for Comprehensive City Efficient Energy Planning, p. 56. University of Bristol (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Franco, A.: Rethinking Soft OR interventions: models as boundary objects. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 231, 720–733 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Bristol City Council: Bristol Smart City Programme [WWW Document] (2012). http://www.greendigitalcharter.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Smart-City-Bristol-Programme-April-2012-Briefing-Note.doc. Accessed on 27 November 2014

  40. Kemp, R., Loorbach, D., Rotmans, J.: Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development. Int. J. Sust. Dev. World. 14, 78–91 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the EU FP7-ENERGY-SMARTCITIES-2012 (314277) project STEEP (Systems Thinking for Comprehensive City Efficient Energy Planning).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leroy White .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

White, L., Yearworth, M., Burger, K. (2015). Understanding PSM Interventions Through Sense-Making and the Mangle of Practice Lens. In: Kamiński, B., Kersten, G., Szapiro, T. (eds) Outlooks and Insights on Group Decision and Negotiation. GDN 2015. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 218. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19515-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19515-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19514-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19515-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics