Pedagogy and Process in 'Organisational Problem-Solving'

This paper outlines a case study in which a management development learning process was tightly coupled to organisational change and development objectives. The case discusses how a research and consulting team came together to develop highly reflexive pedagogy to support the work of internal managers who were organized into teams (learning sets) to undertake 'organisational problem solving'. These learning sets had as their objective, to become catalysts of organisational change and 'performance improvement' within a large organisation. In order to structure the discourse amongst learning set members, a range of principles and constructs were used. Central to these was a form of process modelling, (termed 'models of teleological human process'), derived from Systems Theory. These were carefully introduced to learning set members, and were used to provide a 'basis for a discourse' amongst set members about 'problematic' organisational processes and how to change them. Each learning set was considered a social process in which the principles and constructs had an intrinsic power role, in a process which was purposely designed to integrate the subjective understandings of complex organisational situations of the set members. The learning sets were operationalised in a 2-day workshop followed by a three month period which was supported by an e-learning technology infrastructure. During each phase, the learning sets were facilitated bylearning set advisers. The pedagogy, methods and learning outcomes are outlined in this paper. (Less)

[1]  J. R. Beaumont Diagnosing the System for Organizations , 1985 .

[2]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Rigor vs. relevance revisited: response to Benbasat and Zmud , 1999 .

[3]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Empirical research in information systems: on the relevance of practice in thinking of IS research , 1999 .

[4]  J. Aken Management Research as a Design Science: Articulating the Research Products of Mode 2 Knowledge Production in Management , 2005 .

[5]  Michael J. Bolton,et al.  Ties That Do Not Bind: Musings on the Specious Relevance of Academic Research. , 2003 .

[6]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Empirical Research in Information Systems: The Practice of Relevance , 1999, MIS Q..

[7]  Robert C. Serow,et al.  Research and teaching at a research university , 2000 .

[8]  Henry. Wasser,et al.  Changes in the European University: From Traditional to Entrepreneurial , 1990 .

[9]  Robert MacIntosh,et al.  One Process, Two Audiences;: On the Challenges of Management Research , 2002 .

[10]  A. Huff,et al.  Re‐Focusing the Business School Agenda , 2001 .

[11]  Richard C. Hoffman,et al.  The Relevance of Strategy Research: Practitioner and Academic Viewpoints* , 1995 .

[12]  Brian Wilson,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology: Conceptual Model Building and Its Contribution , 2001 .

[13]  C. Churchman The systems approach and its enemies , 1979 .

[14]  C. Churchman,et al.  The design of inquiring systems: basic concepts of systems and organization , 1971 .

[15]  D. Maclean,et al.  Mode 2 Management Research , 2002 .

[16]  L. Leydesdorff,et al.  The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and , 2000 .

[17]  Ewart R. Carson,et al.  Dealing with complexity: an introduction to the theory & applications of systemsscience , 1988 .

[18]  Ewart R. Carson,et al.  Dealing with Complexity , 1988, Springer US.

[19]  van Je Joan Aken,et al.  Mode 2 Knowledge Production in the field of Management , 2001 .

[20]  Daniel L. Sherrell,et al.  Communications of the Association for Information Systems , 1999 .

[21]  Amedeo Giorgi,et al.  Contemporary schools of metascience , 1968 .

[22]  D. Tranfield,et al.  The Nature, Social Organization and Promotion of Management Research: Towards Policy , 1998 .

[23]  Donald C. Hambrick,et al.  1993 presidential address: What if the academy actually mattered? , 1994 .

[24]  E. Geisler,et al.  When whales are cast ashore: the conversion to relevancy of American universities and basic science , 1995 .

[25]  A. Schutz The phenomenology of the social world , 1967 .

[26]  Russell L. Ackoff,et al.  Scientific Method: Optimizing Applied Research Decisions , 1963 .

[27]  Anne Sigismund Huff,et al.  Citigroup's John Reed and Stanford's James March on management research and practice , 2000 .

[28]  Eric Abrahamson,et al.  Why Management Scholars Must Intervene Strategically in the Management Knowledge Market , 2001 .

[29]  S. Schwartzman,et al.  The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies , 1994 .

[30]  Ken Starkey,et al.  Bridging the Relevance Gap: Aligning Stakeholders in the Future of Management Research , 2001 .

[31]  C. Churchman,et al.  Experience and Reflection , 1959 .

[32]  Neil Anderson,et al.  Re‐aligning the Stakeholders in Management Research: Lessons from Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology , 2001 .

[33]  Hugh J. Watson,et al.  Leaders Assess the Current State of the Academic IS Discipline , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[34]  Russell L. Ackoff,et al.  The art of problem solving : accompanied by Ackoff's fables , 1979 .

[35]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Systems Thinking, Systems Practice , 1981 .

[36]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology in Action , 1991 .

[37]  H. Smalley The systems approach. , 1972, Hospitals.

[38]  Oili-Helena Ylijoki,et al.  Entangled in academic capitalism? A case-study on changing ideals and practices of university research , 2003 .

[39]  Andrew Pettigrew,et al.  The determinants of research group performance: Towards Mode 2? , 2002 .

[40]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Diagnosing the system for organizations: S. BEER Wiley, Chichester, 1985, 152 + xiii pages, £7.50 , 1986 .

[41]  Imanol Ordorika,et al.  Institutional Adaptation : Demands for Management Reform and University Administration , 1999 .

[42]  M. Gibbons Mode 2 society and the emergence of context-sensitive science , 2000 .