Critical systems practice 1:Explore—Starting a multimethodological intervention

Abstract

This is the first of a series of papers on the stages of critical systems practice. Critical systems practice is a multimethodology that seeks to employ the ideas developed in critical systems thinking to intervene in and improve complex real‐world problem situations. It has four stages—Explore (the problem situation), Produce (an intervention strategy), Intervene (flexibly) and Check (on progress)—called to mind as EPIC. The aim is to set out where thinking has reached on the best way to carry out each of these stages and to invite comment on what more needs doing. The first stage, Explore, is concerned with how to start a multimethodological study. If this is done well, it can bring to the fore opportunities for a full and in‐depth systems intervention. If done badly, it can lead to practice that makes the problem situation worse.

Project schedule contingency planning: Building on von Bertalanffy's open systems theory and critical systems practice

“…Finally, in the check stage, managers can evaluate the improvements achieved, or spot problems before they affect the project, by monitoring the buffer consumption during the project progress and comparing this with the estimated buffer sizes obtained from Equation (1). This assists managers in discussing and agreeing on next steps (Jackson, 2020). In real-life projects, the 'green-yellowred' buffer monitoring chart (Goldratt, 1997) is widely employed to monitor buffer consumption in the execution phase.…”

“…CSP suggests a cycle of four stages: explore , produce , intervene and check (Jackson, 2020). Although it has become a key concept in systems thinking, the project management community has not engaged with this concept to date.…”

“…Although it has become a key concept in systems thinking, the project management community has not engaged with this concept to date. The available project management methodologies have been developed by drawing on a limited number of systemic perspectives (Jackson, 2020). This paper is among the first in project management research that pays simultaneous attention to parts, interactions between parts and the external environment in a project context.…”

“…However, ‘too often managers are sold simple solutions to complex problems’ (Jackson, 2006, p. 647). The method developed herein provides a holistic framework for ‘the big issues’ (Jackson, 2020, p. 840), in particular, when projects are exposed to disruptive events. It is in this spirit that this section aims to provide a guideline for the informed use of the proposed method in practice.…”

“…I contend that the shift of focus from closed to open systems increases the capacity to explain and predict the behaviour of projects in the face of disruptive events (as discussed in Section 3). To help bridge the third gap, this paper draws on the concept of critical systems practice (CSP), which insightfully suggests that methodological pluralism (Jackson, 2020) is necessary for schedule contingency planning.…”