Towards a framework for multiparadigm multimethodology (original) (raw)
Related papers
Towards a framework for multiparadigm multimethodologies in systems thinking and practice
2012
The multimethodological practice of systemic intervention has been described as 'theoretically contradictory eclecticism' because it lacks a grounding theory that can accept Burrell and Morgan's principle of incommensurable paradigms and avoids 'anything goes' relativism between them. As a way forward, a new ontology of process-structure is proposed. It is designed as a metaphysical interface to the onto-epistemological paradigms of critical systems thinking and practice (which are, in this paper, functionalist-structuralist, interpretivist, critical-emancipatory and postmodern-poststructuralist). Next, the ontology is realized by an epistemology that respects paradigm incommensurability and yet exploits the unique perspective they each afford. Then, a methodology wherein each of the paradigmatic approaches is critically deployed operationalizes and completes the foundation of this new framework. It directs a critically reflexive, axiologically transparent appreciation by the systemist in a multiparadigmatic, multimethodological engagement with the 'problem' situation in flux. The philosophy lays out foundational motives, rationale, intents and purposes and acts as a guide for its use in practice.
Because it still lacks adequate theory needed to ground its multiparadigm multimethodologies, critical systems practice has been derisively called "theoreticallycontradictory eclecticism". This paper is an introduction to and overview of the author's forthcoming Ph.D. dissertation which offers a new framework for research in critical systems thinking and proposes a new approach for the practice of critical systemic intervention. To underpin this framework an ontology of process-structure isomorphies is designed as a metaphysical interface through an abstraction called the critical moment to each of the conventional paradigms of critical systems thinking (functionalist, interpretivist, emancipatory and postmodern). The ontology is realised by a new epistemology (its raison d'être) that respects paradigm incommensurability and yet exploits all the advantages to be had from a multiparadigmatic perspectivity. The new methodology, (wherein each of the paradigmatic approaches is critically 'deployed') then operationalises and completes the new framework. This new approach calls for and directs the systemist's critically reflexive, axiologically transparent, multiparadigmatic appreciation of, and multimethodological engagement with, the problem situation and flux. The philosophy necessarily lays out the framework's foundational motives, rationale, intents and purposes and acts as a guide for its use. The principal advantage of this new approach is derived from its critically-grounded multiparadigmatic perspectivity and the consequent leveraging of the full gamut of existing systemic methodologies and best practices.
Developments in Critical Systems Theory: On Paradigms and Incommensurability
This paper describes an investigation of the body of systems theory around the still unresolved issue of incommensurability between theories of different onto-epistemological paradigms. It chronicles 19 developments in systems thinking which attempt to incorporate multimethodological approaches to systemic research and design into coherent theories with the aim of improving systemic practice. With the advantage of hindsight, this research explains how each newly developed theory helped to advance critical systems thinking, from the creation and evolution of the critical-emancipatory paradigm through the increase in our sophistication of understanding what it means to act multimethodologically, across paradigms. The paper concludes by describing yet another attempt to move toward the establishment of a coherent theory for pluralism in spite of the incommensurability problem. Our ultimate objective is to advance new theory which may lead in practical ways to improved outcomes for systemic practice.
Bowers 2014 ISSS Developments in Critical Systems Theory: On Paradigms and Incommensurability
This paper describes an investigation of the body of systems theory around the still unresolved issue of incommensurability between theories of different onto-epistemological paradigms. It chronicles 19 developments in systems thinking which attempt to incorporate multimethodological approaches to systemic research and design into coherent theories with the aim of improving systemic practice. With the advantage of hindsight, this research explains how each newly developed theory helped to advance critical systems thinking, from the creation and evolution of the critical-emancipatory paradigm through the increase in our sophistication of understanding what it means to act multimethodologically, across paradigms. The paper concludes by describing yet another attempt to move toward the establishment of a coherent theory for pluralism in spite of the incommensurability problem. Our ultimate objective is to advance new theory which may lead in practical ways to improved outcomes for systemic practice.
An ontology for a critical systems paradigm
This research identifies and focuses on two intractable problems in contemporary systems thinking: 1) That the fracturing of the systems community is a reflection of the fact that the underlying body of systems theory is itself fragmented by incommensurable paradigms. 2) That mixed methods, although they offer a powerful potential for precision and effectiveness in systemic intervention, have no legitimate systems theory to guide their informed use and from which they can be derived.
Towards a framework for multiparadigm multimethodologies
AbstractThe multimethodological practice of systemic intervention has been described as ‘theoretically contradictory eclecticism’ because it lacks a grounding theory that can accept Burrell and Morgan's principle of incommensurable paradigms and avoids ‘anything goes’ relativism between them. As a way forward, a new ontology of process–structure is proposed. It is designed as a metaphysical interface to the onto-epistemological paradigms of critical systems thinking and practice (which are, in this paper, functionalist–structuralist, interpretivist, critical–emancipatory and postmodern–poststructuralist). Next, the ontology is realized by an epistemology that respects paradigm incommensurability and yet exploits the unique perspective they each afford. Then, a methodology wherein each of the paradigmatic approaches is critically deployed operationalizes and completes the foundation of this new framework. It directs a critically reflexive, axiologically transparent appreciation by the systemist in a multiparadigmatic, multimethodological engagement with the ‘problem’ situation in flux. The philosophy lays out foundational motives, rationale, intents and purposes and acts as a guide for its use in practice. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Burrell and Morgan (2000) claimed that knowledge is paradigmatic, encompassing a distinct worldview and rationality governing research strategies and methods for which they identified four sociological paradigms to locate them based on “metatheoretical assumptions about the nature of reality, knowledge, and human behavior” (Cunliffe, 2010). They regard the competing theories developed from different paradigms as incommensurable—those working in one paradigm are not understood by those committed to another. Moreover, “there can be no measure, outside of the paradigms, which can be used as a basis for comparing and adjudicating between the claims to knowledge of theories produced from within different paradigms” (Jackson, 2000). This new theory states that because the problem of paradigm incommensurability begins at the level of ontology the solution lies there as well. Rather than supporting just one or a few paradigms, a different type of ontology is needed to explain ontological variety. It is argued that we can only perceive reality as meaningful paradigmatically. Solving the incommensurability issue is the theoretical key needed to properly underpin pluralist approaches to systems theory, design and intervention. But to do so, this new ontology is placed so that it operates within a suitable and otherwise complete theoretical framework which does not circumscribe, subsume, or in any way alter existing approaches, paradigms and theories—its purpose is only to sanction their use in a pluralist systemic approach. Such a framework is described in this thesis.
Bowers 2011 SRBS Towards a Framework for Multiparadigm Multimethodologies
The multimethodological practice of systemic intervention has been described as ‘theoretically contradictory eclecticism’ because it lacks a grounding theory that can accept Burrell and Morgan’s principle of incommensurable paradigms and avoids ‘anything goes’ relativism between them. As a way forward, a new ontology of process–structure is proposed. It is designed as a metaphysical interface to the onto-epistemological paradigms of critical systems thinking and practice (which are, in this paper, functionalist–structuralist, interpretivist, critical–emancipatory and postmodern–poststructuralist). Next, the ontology is realized by an epistemology that respects paradigm incommensurability and yet exploits the unique perspective they each afford. Then, a methodology wherein each of the paradigmatic approaches is critically deployed operationalizes and completes the foundation of this new framework. It directs a critically reflexive, axiologically transparent appreciation by the systemist in a multiparadigmatic, multimethodological engagement with the ‘problem’ situation in flux. The philosophy lays out foundational motives, rationale, intents and purposes and acts as a guide for its use in practice.