Loading…
Registration open daily from 8am - 6pm.  Please join us for the #ISSS2015 #Roundtable at 7.45am each morning.

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

SIG Session [clear filter]
Monday, August 3
 

13:30 CEST

Discharging Complex Patients from an Acute Hospital for Interim Assessment Placements in South Gloucestershire, UK

If this is the Anthropocene era life can be understood as being primarily shaped by human intelligent design.  And if the early part of this era is characterised by destructive exploitation of the earth and its peoples by those with the power so to do, the ‘Upper Anthropocene’ perhaps offers the prospect of using power with rather than over, as a force for purposeful shaping of human society for the benefit of communities and the environment in a global perspective.

Guided by this philosophy and in the belief that collaborative action research can be applied to construct lasting improvements to human systems even at a small scale, our paper will describe our engagement as facilitators and co-researchers in a collaborative venture to improve one aspect of the health care of older people with complex health needs in South Gloucestershire in the UK.

The context of our work can be summed up as follows: a growing, ageing population; a monolithic National Health Service (NHS) with services free at the point of delivery; severe fiscal constraints; a sense of perpetual crisis as the dominant focus of management attention; little or no headroom at executive top level to re-imagine and re-engineer health services in communities; the NHS portrayed as a political battleground under constant media scrutiny; a dilemma at local level whether to manage within existing rules and systems designed nationally or to try to innovate, at least at the margins, to configure better services for patients and better system cost effectiveness.

Working as consultants and interim managers this paper will explore in case study format the insider/outsider perspectives of enabling complex patients often with multiple co-morbidities, to be assessed out of hospital for onward post-acute health care. These patients are often delayed from being discharged even after being declared medically able to leave owing to a number of factors. The result is that beds are ‘blocked’ further upstream at admissions, with serious consequences for admitting patients in need of an acute bed. This is an

Our story in particular concerns the process of reducing this problem through designing and enabling a system for discharging patients to an interim placement, thus enabling a faster turnover and availability of beds in the hospital and providing a better environment within which patients can recuperate and be assessed for eligibility for onward support.

We describe the emergent nature of getting to the starting line, taking the first steps to introduce a local change process that the various partners can agree on and support, in a context of risk aversion, financial restraint and a monolithic, highly politicised National Health Service (NHS). This stage is about building a shared understanding of the territory and building confidence to co-innovate

We then describe how alternative models were built and assessed, calibrated by an in-depth analysis of patient records which described typical patient journeys. 

Finally we show how working participatively we developed feasible models that not only offered patient benefits (although these remain unvalued in fiscal terms), but also resource savings by shifting the locus for patient assessment out of hospital and into interim placements, largely in care homes, and by generating savings through bringing in self-funder resources into the system earlier.

The health system are now in delivery phase having adopted one of the models we constructed and being monitored to facilitate further systemic learning.

 


Moderators
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Presenter / Artist
PJ

Paul James Pettigrew

Director, Waite Atkins Ltd.
ISSS Two Day
YC

Yvonne Christine Le Brun

Director, Waite Atkins Ltd.
ISSS Two Day


Monday August 3, 2015 13:30 - 14:00 CEST
Elk Scandic Berlin Potsdamer Platz, Gabriele-Tergit-Promenade 19, 10963 Berlin, Germany

14:00 CEST

Consciousness and the PAR Practitioner: Lessons from Peri-Urban Mexico
Moderators
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Presenter / Artist
PW

Patricia Wilson

Professor, patriciawilson@utexas.edu
Participatory action research Contemplative pedagogy for emergence Community development Latin America, Mexico Leadership for resilient systems


Monday August 3, 2015 14:00 - 14:30 CEST
Elk Scandic Berlin Potsdamer Platz, Gabriele-Tergit-Promenade 19, 10963 Berlin, Germany

14:30 CEST

Grounded Action Research: Systems Thinking Approach to Promoting CSR in Kazakhstan
Moderators
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Presenter / Artist
AB

Azhar Baisakalova

KIMEP University
ISSS One Day


Monday August 3, 2015 14:30 - 15:00 CEST
Elk Scandic Berlin Potsdamer Platz, Gabriele-Tergit-Promenade 19, 10963 Berlin, Germany
 
Tuesday, August 4
 

16:00 CEST

Action Research as a Research Method in Architecture and Design

This paper discusses the use of action research as a research method in architecture and design. It addresses the question of how academic work in the fields of architecture and design can pursue research through methods that are appropriate to the nature of design processes. This question is relevant to much research work done in architecture and design, which tends to revert to conventional research methods oriented either towards the sciences or to the humanities in order to be academically acceptable. Action research is introduced as a research method that has much in common with applied design processes, and which allows designers to develop research in the spirit of designing. This paper aims to inform those seeking to preserve the applied nature of designing and the involved nature of the observer/designer while pursuing a higher level of academic rigour.

 


Tuesday August 4, 2015 16:00 - 16:30 CEST
Elk Scandic Berlin Potsdamer Platz, Gabriele-Tergit-Promenade 19, 10963 Berlin, Germany
 
Wednesday, August 5
 

13:30 CEST

Action Research or Design Science Research As Methodology for the Development of a Historical Digital Graphical Novel? A Critical Systems Perspective.

The legacy of Nelson Mandela is part of the lives of most South Africans. His story inspires South Africans and people around the globe to forgive and work hard to achieve freedom from oppression and poverty. For this reason, we need to keep his story alive and teach young people about the sacrifices he made to achieve his goals. Funded by an international consortium, a project called Mandela27 was launched to educate people around the world on the life of Nelson Mandela. Part of the project involved the development of a digital graphical novel depicting life in the prison where he served a 27 year sentence.

This paper investigates action research and design science as design methodologies for the development of the digital graphical novel.  The development of the graphical digital novel was commissioned to the Serious Games Institute of South Africa (SGI-SA) based at the North-West University.  A serious game is a computer game that aims not only to provide entertainment but also to provide an educational experience to the user.  

The SGI-SA often uses design science research as research methodology when developing games. Design science research (DSR) is a methodology used mostly by engineers to develop artefacts.  It is currently receiving high scholarly attention in the field of information Systems (IS). An important journal in the IS field, Management Information Systems Quarterly, recently published guidelines for the use of DSR in IS.  DSR aims to provide scientific rigour in the process of designing, developing, and evaluating artefacts. Its epistemological stance is that knowledge is created through the making of an artefact and evaluating the success thereof.  Many different approaches are documented but most often the following cyclic phases are proposed:  Awareness of the problem, suggestion of possible solutions, development, evaluation of artefact, and conclusion.

Since these phases are comparable with typical AR phases (diagnosis, action planning, action taking, and specifying learning) the developers of the graphical digital novel had to reflect carefully on AR and DSR to select an appropriate methodology for the project. Both these methodologies use existing theory to guide the development process. Critical systems thinking promotes holistic thinking, pluralistic problem solving, emancipation, and reflection. This paper provides a reflection on the design of the digital graphical novel from an AR and DSR methodological perspective within the framework of critical systems thinking.

The paper starts with a discussion of the problem environment followed by a short literature review of theoretical concepts involved in the project.  It then proposes a DSR research plan as well as an AR research plan for the development of the artefact. These research plans are then reflected upon from the perspectives of critical systems thinking. The selection of an appropriate research methodology is then substantiated.


Moderators
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Speakers

Wednesday August 5, 2015 13:30 - 14:00 CEST
Elk Scandic Berlin Potsdamer Platz, Gabriele-Tergit-Promenade 19, 10963 Berlin, Germany

14:00 CEST

A Critical Systems Approach to Business Intelligence System Development

The quality, timeliness and availability of appropriate information to appropriate decision makers determine the quality of decisions; it therefore also determines the subsequent effect of these decisions on organisations.  Organisations that make better decisions quicker than their rivals are more agile and competitive.  Well-informed decisions improve organisations’ economic results and value; it improves planning processes and enables organisations to swiftly react to ever-changing business climates.  Business intelligence (BI) systems enable organisational leaders to make decisions more effectively and efficiently.  BI is a business differentiator in a world where organisations are becoming increasingly reliant on relevant, timeous, and intelligible information to improve their operational efficiency.

Business intelligence is built on the technological infrastructure of a data warehouse (DW).  There are various approaches available to develop a DW, i.e. the Kimball lifecycle approach, Inmon’s corporate information factory (CIF), and Linsted’s data vault method.  These traditional approaches are heavily influenced by the paradigm within which traditional software development approaches emerged, i.e. the hard systems thinking paradigm.  This paradigm is dominated by deterministic problem solving methodologies such as operational research and systems engineering; they focus on optimisation and design and are suitable for well-defined problem contexts. 

Traditional approaches enable the development of a technically good and robust DW.  However, a BI system is a social artefact as well as a technical artefact; it should aim to improve the organisational context of its users, rather than merely automate existing business processes.  Successful BI requires more than appropriate architecture and infrastructure; it requires more than a data infrastructure and platform built to access existing/known information better and faster.  Successful BI system development requires a critical reflective process that improves organisational decision making capabilities beyond what is imaginable, rather than merely automate what is easily observable.     

The critical systems thinking (CST) paradigm aims to explore relevant social dimensions of a problem context and provide richer, more meaningful solutions.  CST aims to facilitate social improvement.  CST is founded in critical and social awareness; methodological complementarism; and a dedication to human emancipation.  Critical systems thinkers aim to emancipate the oppressed by exploring and removing supressing societal structures.  This study views business users with unrealised business benefits as the oppressed; non-people oriented (traditional) BI system development approaches are viewed as the suppressing structures. 

The CST paradigm does not render other paradigms, such as the hard systems thinking paradigm where BI development approaches emerged, invalid.  Rather, within the CST paradigm the epistemological debate moved from the question of selection a single problem solving method, to recognising the value of combining different methods from different paradigms.  Therefore, CSH is consequently applied to complement a traditional BI system development approach to critically determine: what is relevant; who should assist to determine it; and how to handle conflicting views amongst relevant stakeholders pertaining to the BI system being developed. 

This paper describes an action research (AR) study whereby CST principles (operationalised by critical systems heuristics (CSH)) were developed and applied as part of a BI system development project.  CSH was applied during the business requirements analysis phase.  The application of CSH resulted in a BI system that are both technically feasible and realise business benefits in meeting users’ requirements. 

The paper starts with a discussion of the problem context followed by the theoretical underpinnings of the intervention. It then discusses the action research intervention in terms of: the diagnosis; action planning; intervention; specification of learning; and reflection on the learning.

 


Presenter / Artist
CV

Carin Venter

Senior Lecturer, North-West University
ISSS Student
avatar for Roelien Goede

Roelien Goede

SIG Chair Action Research, North West University South Africa, Potchefstroom
I stay in Potchefstroom, South Africa, it is about 90 min drive South-West of Johannesburg. I'm an associate professor in Computer Science and Information Systems. I have a passion for teaching and my formal training is in Computer Science. I teach advanced programming techniques... Read More →


Wednesday August 5, 2015 14:00 - 14:30 CEST
Elk Scandic Berlin Potsdamer Platz, Gabriele-Tergit-Promenade 19, 10963 Berlin, Germany

14:30 CEST

Building Interactive Learning Ground as Basis for Knowledge Co-Production: Reflection on a Collaborative Industrial Action Research Project

An important dimension of collaborative university-industry projects is the various learning which involved participants can co-generate, from personal insights to contribution to the answer of scientific research questions and instrumental knowledge of ways to improve industrial practices. Co-creation between academia and industry requires structures and processes of exchange so that learning is enhanced in the interface and interaction between the parties. It has less to do with ordinary project structure and more with the way learning can be enabled between involved parties through building interactive learning grounds linking the parties in an organization for learning. The paper is based on experience and reflection on a case involving collaboration between participants from ABB, Ericsson and Mälardalen University in studying and improving industrial service innovation management pursued through a collaborative action research oriented approach. (Reason &Bradbury, 2008, Lindhult, 2005).

The purpose of the paper is to clarify the character of such learning ground with groups of participants from different organization co-generating learning, and identify challenges in building a sustainable platform for learning. Challenges involve e.g. developing a common ground of visions, goals and commitments as well as norms for interaction, integrate and combine different learning interests and motivations to participate, finding and creating time and resources for interaction, space for reflection and developing mutual understanding and language, achieving fruitful exchange between diversity of professional experience and positions academic as well as industrial, adapting the processes to emerging changes in organizational contexts and conditions for participation, and create continuation of interaction beyond formal termination of projects. The theoretical background used is experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984) as well as of organizational learning and learning organization, and particularly pragmatic theory of inquiry (Dewey, 1938), collaborative inquiry (Heron, 1996), and participatory action research and interactive research (Reason&Bradbury, 2008, Aagaard Nielsen&Svensson, 2006, Svensson, Ellström&Brulin, 2007, Johannisson, Gunnarsson&Stjernberg, 2008). Methodologically the experiential and empirical basis is ongoing dialogue and reflection on organization of the collaboration and outcomes in terms of learning. Empirical material is both formative and summative, particularly follow up discussions at project meetings, and summing up learning experience in final project phases. A focus is on clarifying the various kinds of learning of participants, in what situations they occur, and how existing conditions are enabling or restricting learning. Additional cases of collaborative research and development projects of participants is used as enriching and comparative material. The result is a case description and reflection on various learning effects and in what way it has occurred, as well as a model of interactive learning platform including sources of challenges in enabling of such a platform. It is particularly contributing to a more systemic and emergent view of learning and knowledge generation in co-creation processes and the challenge of combining a plurality of experiences, participants and perspectives in achieving high quality, co-generative learning.


Presenter / Artist
avatar for Erik Lindhult

Erik Lindhult

Mälardalen University
ISSS Two Day


Wednesday August 5, 2015 14:30 - 15:00 CEST
Elk Scandic Berlin Potsdamer Platz, Gabriele-Tergit-Promenade 19, 10963 Berlin, Germany