(Activity 3.10, 3.11, SAQ 3.3)
I think I mentioned elsewhere that I have come across Geoffrey Vickers work on “appreciation” a few times before but I have never had the opportunity to look at the source material and the writing of the man himself. From reading the relevant chapter (Blackmore (Ed), 2010, Chapter 2) I have gained the following understanding of key concepts.
I first posted my reflections on what I do when I do what I do in this post from 5 December. This was before I had the opportunity to learn about the juggler and use it as a heuristic to reflect on my practice. So I thought I would revisit the question in the light of material I have covered since then.
(Activity 3.7 based on Chapter 1, Blackmore (ed) (2010))
I have heard of Schön before. Mostly in connection with his work on reflective practice and also from his work with Argyris on learning (Ramage and Shipp, 2009). I had not really come across his work on change where he uses ideas connected with social learning. He is included in the course as one of the ‘early’ works on social learning systems – the chapter in the book was written in 1973.
After reading the Chapter, I come away with the following understanding of Schön’s key concepts
(Activity 3.1, 3.2 based on Introduction and Chapter 12 in Blackmore (2010))
So Part 3 of the course is about social learning – or to use the formal heading “Social learning, interaction and systemic change”.
From what I gather so far, this draws on some different traditions of research and practice around social learning.
I have now submitted my assignment and should be moving on from Part 2 to Part 3 of TU812, I’m quite reluctant to do so because I feel as if there is so much I haven’t got straight yet. There was so much to get a handle on in that part of the course and I kind of fear that it is all going to fade away.
But I also want to acknowledge the fact that I am leaving the part of the course that Ray Ison has been the lead author – not just the study guide but his course text too. I guess he is now a formal part of my Systems lineage and I want to take stock of what I ‘inherit’. I have covered all the big stuff – like the practice dynamic, the juggler and various academic concepts – in other posts in this blog. But there is something more I want to take with me – a few choice phrases that capture for me some of the spirit and principles of systems thinking and practice.
Something happened this week that I am ever so proud of. It is actually quite a small step – just like the first pawn you move at the beginning of a chess game, but it feels significant all the same.
(Activity 2.33)
Ison (2010, 260-262) describes the concept of a ‘design turn’. I am finding it one of the more difficult concepts to get a handle on so I will use this post to explore my understanding of the concept and apply it to my systems practice.
Before I do, I want to quote what is – to date – my biggest and most significant insight from studying TU812. Of course, I kind of knew it before but having it pointed out made me realise its significance:
The direct consequence of the profound changes in the character and role of organised knowledge is that the future most now be regarded as increasingly a human artefact – an art-in-fact. The future can no longer be regarded as a natural object, a fact already there or objectively determined by present trends. It must be chosen.
Hooker (1992) cited in Ison (2010, 261)
So this is why design is important. It is part of the way we choose the future. Every design will create ripples that becomes its legacy or artefact. So what is design?
(Activity 2.27, Table 2.3)
Back in early December, I identified my situation of concern and wrote a post giving an overview of the concern. In short, this is a concern about the lack of systems thinking and practice in my workplace. In that same earlier post I started exploring the situation through a meta-narrative.
I intend to use the process of TU812 to conduct a systemic inquiry into this situation of concern. To be honest, the heavy workload of the course material has meant this has disappeared to the back of my head. In fact, I have realised that I have not been very purposeful in that inquiry – it has been a bit purposive because the course suggested I did it rather than it being willed. I think it is time to revisit that now – the situation of concern is still alive and interesting at work and now I have more concepts and tools under my belt it’ll be interesting to see how they help me.
So, I need to become a little more purposeful – to help with that I have now explored and defined the purpose of the inquiry – just so there is something I can latch onto…
(Activity 2.7, ref. Table 2.3 in study guide)
It seems like ages ago when I wrote the post “An inquiry into my systems practice for managing change“. I am reminded now that this is a purposeful inquiry – the purpose I identified when writing that earlier post is to achieve a better level of ability to manage change systemically.
In this inquiry the situation is my current systems practice i.e. what I do when I do what I do. I am concerned with developing my understandings and practices associated with doing systems practice.
The juggler isophor is introduced in order to help make sense of what I do when I do what I do (and why I do when I do what I do). It is therefore a “system tool” that helps me make sense of the situation – a tool to use in my inquiry. Continue reading
Now that I have just finished working my way through the ball chapters in Ison’s book. I wanted to bring together my current perspective on the juggling that is systems practice. Can’t decide whether it is taking the imagery a little too far but nothing ventured….
I am a juggler.