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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Further details can be found at http://smartsteep.eu.
References
Mingers, J., Rosenhead, J.: Problem structuring methods in action. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 152, 530–554 (2004)
Eden, C.: On evaluating the performance of “wide-band” GDSS’s. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 81, 302–311 (1995)
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)
Ackermann, F.: Problem structuring methods “in the Dock”: arguing the case for Soft OR. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 219, 652–658 (2012)
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)
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)
Fisher, R., Ury, W.: Getting to yes. Hutchinson, London (1982)
Ormerod, R.: The mangle of OR practice: towards more informative case studies of ‘technical’ projects. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 65, 1245–1260 (2014)
Pickering, A.: The mangle of practice - agency and emergence in the sociology of science. Am. J. Sociology 99, 559–589 (1993)
Pickering, A.: The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1995)
Weick, K.E., Roberts, K.H.: Collective mind in organizations: heedful interrelating on flight decks. Adm. Sci. Q. 38, 357–381 (1993)
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)
White, L.: Understanding problem structuring methods interventions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 199, 823–833 (2009)
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)
Franco, L.A.: Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: a conceptual development. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 57, 813–821 (2006)
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)
Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M., Obstfeld, D.: Organizing and the process of sense-making. Organ. Sci. 16, 409–421 (2005)
Gioia, D.A., Chittipeddi, K.: Sense-making and sense-giving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Manage. J. 12, 433–448 (1991)
Maitlis, S., Lawrence, T.B.: Triggers and enablers of sense-giving in organizations. Acad. Manage. J. 50, 57–84 (2007)
Smircich, L., Morgan, G.: Leadership: the management of meaning. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 18, 257–273 (1982)
Fiske, S.T., Taylor, S.E.: Social Cognition, 2nd edn., Xviii, 717 pp. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1991)
Eden, C., Ackermann, F.: Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the public sector. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 152, 615–630 (2004)
Eden, C., Ackermann, F.: Group decision and negotiation in strategy making. Group Decis. Negot. 10, 119–140 (2001)
Latour, B.: Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)
Rittel, H.W., Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci. 4, 155–169 (1973)
Ackoff, R.L.: The art and science of mess management. Interfaces 11, 20–26 (1981)
White, L.: Behavioural Issues in PSMs [WWW Document]. IFORS Conf. Present (2014). http://www.ifors2014.org/files2/program-ifors2014.pdf
Checkland, P.: Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: Includes a 30-year Retrospective. Wiley, Chichester (1999)
Geels, F.W.: Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Res. Policy 39, 495–510 (2010)
Checkland, P., Scholes, J.: Soft systems methodology: a 30-year retrospective (1999)
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)
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)
Yearworth, M., Schien, D., White, L., Burger, K.: Sustainable urban energy planning: a development of problem structuring methodology (2015) (in review)
Hindle, G.A.: Case Article—Teaching soft systems methodology and a blueprint for a module. INFORMS Trans. Educ. 12, 31–42 (2011)
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)
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)
Yearworth, M.: D2.5 Evaluation STEEP PROJECT (314277) - Systems Thinking for Comprehensive City Efficient Energy Planning, p. 56. University of Bristol (2014)
Franco, A.: Rethinking Soft OR interventions: models as boundary objects. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 231, 720–733 (2013)
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
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)
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
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights 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)