Paul Keys

On becoming expert in the use of problem structuring methods

While much has been written about the theory and practice of using problem structuring methods (PSMs) there is little formal discussion of how individuals may effectively learn about their use. In this paper it is argued that a foundation for designing and providing a suitable learning environment lies in understanding the nature of being an expert user of PSMs and the knowledge that such experts hold and deploy. An analysis of how knowledge and expertise are grounded in the work involved in using PSMs is offered. This leads to some proposals for what is required if processes to support the acquisition of expertise in the use of PSMs are to be implemented.

Approaches to understanding the process of OR: Review, critique and extension

The Practitioners Dilemma draws attention to the distinction between the prescriptions for practice contained in the literature and the actuality of practice. In this paper a review of the current approaches to understanding the process of OR is carried out that identifies the source of the Dilemma to lie in the two types of explanation of practice that currently dominate the field. A third approach is identified that offers a different perspective on the process of OR that is not subject to the problems associated with the Dilemma.

Creativity, design and style in MS/OR

The place of creativity, design and style in MS/OR has never been doubted but there has not been a unified approach towards understanding the varied and significant roles they play. In this paper a means of examining creativity, design and style is presented that seeks to illuminate the key role that they play in explaining how practice in MS/OR goes beyond the application of technique and involves analysts in a rich mix of processes and activities.

System dynamics as a systems-based problem-solving methodology

Systems dynamics is concerned with using systems ideas to increase understanding of various types of phenomena and to aid in the decision-making which determines action upon the processes involved. Developments within system dynamics have occurred mainly independently of advances in the broader systems movement. In this paper an attempt is made to bring to bear on system dynamics some recent work which considers the character of systems-based problem-solving methodologies. System dynamics is placed within a framework which enables the relative strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to be identified. This leads to a deeper understanding of some of the critiques of system dynamics and enables some issues to be outlined which may help to strengthen the theoretical base of system dynamics methodology and hence improve its ability to tackle practical situations.

Part Special Issue Editorial: The process of OR

We came to be editing this part special issue of the Journal of the Operational Research Society (JORS) following an invitation from John Ranyard (the previous editor of JORS) who picked up on a point made by Gerald Midgley in a Viewpoint. Gerald argued that, to be worthy of publication, a practice paper should have some theoretical content—but this does not have to be ‘grand’ theory, making general claims about human nature or society, just theory about the application of OR methods in interventions. This is essentially theory about the process of OR: about how people can make meaningful value and boundary judgements, negotiate stakeholder participation, deal with power relationships, structure messy situations, engage with multiple viewpoints, address conflict, work on the choice of methods, develop strategies for the implementation of proposed solutions, etc. John asked Gerald if he would like to edit a part special issue on the process of OR, and then Gerald asked Paul Keys to share the honours as Paul had already produced a book on the subject.

MS/OR projects and their interaction

An integral part of the development of MS/OR is the interaction which takes place between theory and practice. In many areas of the discipline this interaction occurs regularly and its benefits can be readily seen in the short-term. One area where this is not the case is that which surrounds the issue of projects and their management. Reflection on project experiences and their implications for future practice, by its nature, can only take place over a period which includes several projects and leads to improved practice only slowly. This paper is based upon an opportunity to reflect upon a set of 14 project activities which have taken place over the past three years. These projects were carried out from the Centre for Community Operational Research at Hull University and represent the development of expertise and experience in dealing with a particular type of client organisation. The projects are described briefly and certain characteristics of their emergence identified. The existing literature is then reviewed in an attempt to provide an explanation of this experience. This is found to be available in two distinct themes in the literature. A model which integrates and expands this is developed and shown to yield new insights into the dynamics of projects and their management.

The organizational context of OR group management

There have been several attempts to identify the process by which OR groups can be successfully managed. These share a common underlying view that the important factor in this process is the creation of a satisfactory relationship between the members of a group and the management of the groups host organization. In this paper it is argued that whilst this is a key factor to concentrate upon this alone leads to a restrictive view of what it means for an OR group to belong to an organization. A means of developing a broader vision of the relationship between an OR group and its host organization is presented which has implications for the process of managing of OR groups.

Information System Development and Soft Systems Thinking: Towards an Improved Methodology

There has been considerable interest over the past five or six years in the use of Checkland’s soft systems methodology as an aid to the development of information systems. Wilson (1984) and Wood-Harper et al. (1985) in particular have shown how soft systems thinking and its associated tools and techniques can be integrated with other approaches to information system development. In this paper these attempts are considered with a view to assessing how well the philosophy behind Checkland’s original work has been continued in its application to the specifie arena of information system analysis and design. On the basis of the conclusions drawn some steps are being taken towards the construction of an improved methodology and associated software to facilitate this way of tackling information systems development. The principles behind this extension of current practice are outlined.

Social Science and OR Technology

This paper addresses some issues in the relationship between OR and the social sciences which are raised by accepting the view that OR is a technology. As such it is seen to be fundamentally different from the social sciences which seek to establish a body of understanding about certain phenomena whereas OR is more concerned with processes of practical value. The view that OR is a technology has a history dating back thirty years since when Lathrop (1959), Barish (1963), White (1970), Dando, Defrenne and Sharp (1977), Raitt (1979), Malin (1981) and Rosenhead (1986) have consistently reminded the OR community of this possibility. In the following the validity of the case for seeing OR as a technology is taken as given. What is of concern are the consequences for understanding OR and its relationship with the social sciences which follow from this perspective.

Beyond Hard Systems Thinking

The relationship discussed in Chapter 7 between OR and a set of hard systems methodologies places OR in a localized context by establishing a methodological connection between OR and a range of other systems-based problem-solving methodologies. The assumptions of this common methodological process provide a basis for identifying the boundaries within which hard systems methodologies can operate effectively. Outside these boundaries other methodologies are required which are able to overcome the restrictions present in the hard systems methodologies. It is the purpose of this chapter to present an overview of some systems-based approaches which can operate outside the boundaries of hard systems thinking.