ارائه چارچوبی برای ترکیب روش های مدل‌سازی سیستم های پیچیده فنی ـ اجتماعی با استفاده از فراترکیب تفسیری انتقادی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استاد، دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران.

2 دانشیار، دانشگاه تهران.

3 دانشجوی دکتری، دانشگاه تهران.

چکیده

امروزه ترکیب روش­ های مدل‌سازی برای غلبه بر پیچیدگی­ های مدل‌سازی سیستم­ های فنی ـ اجتماعی مورد‌توجه پژوهشگران قرار گرفته است؛ اما بسیاری از این ترکیب­ ها بدون توجه به سازگاری روش ­ها در سطوح مختلف نظری و ابزاری انجام می ­شود؛ از این ­رو هدف مطالعه حاضر ارائه یک چارچوب راهنما برای ترکیب روش ­های مدل‌سازی سیستم ­های فنی ـ اجتماعی است؛ بدین منظور از یک روش فراترکیب تفسیری انتقادی توسعه ­یافته استفاده شد. بر این اساس 12 تم توصیفی شناسایی و این تم ­ها در قالب پنج سازه ترکیبی دسته ­بندی شدند؛ سپس با تفسیر سازه ­های ترکیبی و جایگاه روش ­ها در این سازه ­ها، پنج سازه تحلیلی، سازه متضاد، سطح ترکیب، نوع ترکیب، علت موفقیت احتمالی ترکیب و علت شکست احتمالی ترکیب شناسایی و برای بررسی امکان ­پذیری و سطح ترکیب روش­ ها به‌کار رفتند. به‌منظور نشان­دادن چگونگی عملکرد چارچوب، امکان ترکیب رویکرد انتخاب استراتژیک با سایر روش ­ها به ­عنوان نمونه، بررسی شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


1. Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2010). Strategic options development and analysis. In Systems approaches to managing change: A practical guide: 135-190. London. U.K.: Springer.

2. Ashby, W. R. (1957). An introduction to cybernetics. Chapman and Hall, London.

3. Baxter, G., & Sommerville, I. (2011). Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering. Interacting with computers, 23(1), 4-17.

4. Bench, S., & Day, T. (2010). The user experience of critical care discharge: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research. International journal of nursing studies, 47(4), 487-499.

5. Bennet, P., Bryant, J. & Howard, N. (2001). Drama theory and confrontation analysis. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.

6. Bennett, P. (1985). On linking approaches to decision-aiding: issues and prospects. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36(8), 659-669.

7. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., Pinch, T., & Douglas, D. G. (2012). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. London, U.K.: MIT press.

8. Boardman, J., & Sauser, B. (2006). System of Systems-the meaning of of. In System of Systems Engineering, 2006 IEEE/SMC International Conference on: 6, Los Angeles, USA.

9. Borshchev, A., & Filippov, A. (2004). From system dynamics and discrete event to practical agent based modeling: reasons, techniques, tools. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference of the system dynamics society. Oxford, U.K.

10. Bukowski, L. (2016). System of systems dependability–Theoretical models and applications examples. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 151, 76-92.

11. Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for action: a short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use, for practitioners, teachers and students. New York, U.S.A.: John Wiley and Sons.

12. Creswell, J. (2002). Qualitative, Quantitative, and MixedMethods Approaches (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

13. Dixon-Woods, M., Cavers, D., Agarwal, S., Annandale, E., Arthur, A., Harvey, J., & Riley, R. (2006). Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC medical research methodology, 6(35), 1-13.

14. Edwards, J., & Kaimal, G. (2016). Using meta-synthesis to support application of qualitative methods findings in practice: A discussion of meta-ethnography, narrative synthesis, and critical interpretive synthesis. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 51, 30-35.

15. Epstein, J. M., & Axtell, R. (1996). Growing artificial societies: social science from the bottom up. , Washington D.C., U.S.A.: Brookings Institution Press.

16. Eusgeld, I., Nan, C., & Dietz, S. (2011). System-of-systems, approach for interdependent critical infrastructures. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 96(6), 679-686.

17. Flood, R. L., & Jackson, M. C. (1991). Total systems intervention: a practical face to critical systems thinking. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 4(3), 197-213.

18. Flood, R. L., & Romm, N. R. (1995). Enhancing the process of methodology choice in total systems intervention (TSI) and improving chances of tackling coercion. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 8(4), 377-408.

19. Friend, J. (2001). The Strategic Choice approach. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, U.S.A: John Wiley and Sons.

20. Friend, J. K., & Hickling, A. (2005). Planning under pressure: the strategic choice approach. Third edition. Oxford, U.K.: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

21. Gregoriades, A., & Sutcliffe, A. (2008). A socio-technical approach to business process simulation. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 1017-1030.

22. Gu, J., & Tang, X. (2005). Meta-synthesis approach to complex system modeling. European Journal of Operational Research, 166(3), 597-614.

23. Hashem Zadeh, G. & Bahrami, M. R. (2016). Simulation near Field Communication technology adoption using system dynamics approach, Industrial Management Perspective, 24, 181-204 (In Persian).

24. Herrmann, T., & Loser, K. U. (1999). Vagueness in models of socio-technical systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 18(5), 313-323.

25. Herrmann, T., Hoffmann, M., Kunau, G., & Loser, K. U. (2004). A modelling method for the development of groupware applications as socio-technical systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(2), 119-135.

26. Hickling, A. (2001). Gambling with frozen fire. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, U.S.A: John Wiley and Sons.

27. HosseinZadeh, M. & Mehregan, M. R. & Amiri, M. (2013). Designing a Multi-Methodology Framework for Operations Research using General Morphological Analysis. Industrial Management Perspective, 11, 63-87 (In Persian).  

28. HosseinZadeh, M. & Mehregan, M. R. )2016). Designing a Multi-Methodology Framework for Operations Research using Social Network Analysis. Modern research in decision making, 1(1), 1-26 (In Persian).

29. Howick, S., & Ackermann, F. (2011). Mixing OR methods in practice: Past, present and future directions. European Journal of Operational Research, 215(3): 503-511.

30. Jackson, M. C. (1999). Towards coherent pluralism in management science. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(1), 12-22.

31. Jackson, M. C. (2003). Systems thinking: Creative holism for managers: 378. Chichester, U.K: Wiley.

32. Keating, C. B. (2005). Research foundations for system of systems engineering. In Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 2005 IEEE International Conference on, 3, 2720-2725). IEEE. Waikoloa, USA.

33. Keating, C. B., Padilla, J. J., & Adams, K. (2008). System of systems engineering requirements: challenges and guidelines. Engineering Management Journal, 20(4), 24-31.

34. Keating, C. B. (2014). Governance implications for meeting challenges in the system of systems engineering field. In 2014 9th International Conference on System of Systems Engineering (SOSE), 154-159. Adelaide, Australia.

35. Kotiadis, K., & Mingers, J. (2006). Combining PSMs with hard OR methods: the philosophical and practical challenges. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(7), 856-867

36. Kowalczyk, R. (2004). The effectiveness of high-dependency care. In Systems modelling: Theory and practice. New York, John Wiley and Sons.

37. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd enl. ed. Chicago, U.S.A.: University of Chicago Press.

38. Mayer, M. W. (1998). Architecting principles for system of systems. Syst. Eng, 1(4), 267-274.

39. Meyers, T. J., Hester, P. T., & Pyne, J. C. (2014). Toward a Watershed-and System of Systems–Oriented Perspective of Stormwater Management Enterprise Performance. Public Works Management & Policy, 19(3), 235-254.

40. Midgley, G. (1997). Developing the methodology of TSI: From the oblique use of methods to creative design. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 10(3), 305-319.

41. Mingers, J. (2001). Multimethodology-mixing and matching methods. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, John Wiley and Sons.

42. Mohaghar, A. Hashemi Petrodi, S. H. & Talaei, H. R. (2016). Modeling the dynamics in supply chain of a new prodeuct based on system dynamics approach. Industrial Management Perspective, 24, 9-36 (In Persian).  

43. Mosleh Shirazi, A. N., Raenie, H., Iman, M. T. & Tajik, M. (2016). The Multi systemic methodology: new approach in management research. Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities Journal, 22(87): 7-32 (In Persian).  

44. Mostafavi, A., Abraham, D. M., DeLaurentis, D., & Sinfield, J. (2011). Exploring the dimensions of systems of innovation analysis: A system of systems framework. IEEE Systems Journal, 5(2), 256-265.

45. Mumford, E. (2000). A socio-technical approach to systems design. Requirements Engineering, 5(2): 125-133.

46. Nikolic, I. & Kasmire, J. (2013). Agent-Based Social Systems. New York, U.S.A.: Springer.

47. Noblit, G.W., Hare, R.D. (1988). Meta-Ethnography: synthesizingqualitative studies. Los Angeles, U.S.A.: Sage Publications.

48. Paterson, B. L., & Canam, C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. , Los Angeles, U.S.A: Sage Publications.

49. Pidd, M. (2004). Complementarity in systems modelling.  In Systems modelling: Theory and practice., New York, U.S.A.: John Wiley and Sons.

50. Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., Britten, N., Roen, K., & Duffy, S. (2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews, a Report from the ESRC methods programme Version, 1. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark_Rodgers4/publication

51. Pound, P., Britten, N., Morgan, M., Yardley, L., Pope, C., Daker-White, G., & Campbell, R. (2005). Resisting medicines: a synthesis of qualitative studies of medicine taking. Social science & medicine, 61(1), 133-155.

52. Qian, X., Jingyuan, Y., & Ruwei, D. A. I. (1993). A new discipline of science—the study of open complex giant system and its methodology. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 4(2), 2-12.

53. Rosenhead, J. & Mingers, J. (2001). Rational Analysis for a Problematic World: Problem Structuring Methods for Complexity, Uncertainty and Conflict. Chichester, U.K.: John Wiley & Sons.

54. Rosenhead, J. (2001). Robustness Analysis: keeping your options open. In Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited. New York, U.S.A.: John Wiley and Sons.

55. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2006). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. New York, U.S.A.: Springer.

56. Saunders, M., Philip, L., & Adrian, T. (2009). Research methods for business students. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

57. Schultz, M., & Hatch, M. J. (1996). Living with multiple paradigms the case of paradigm interplay in organizational culture studies. Academy of management review, 21(2), 529-557.

58. Sørensen, L., Vidal, R. V. V., & Engström, E. (2004). Using soft OR in a small company––The case of Kirby. European Journal of Operational Research, 152(3), 555-570.

59. Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. New York, U.S.A.: McGraw-Hill.

60. Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge university press.

61. Swinerd, C., & McNaught, K. R. (2012). Design classes for hybrid simulations involving agent-based and system dynamics models. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 25, 118-133.

62. Taket, A., & White, L. (1998). Experience in the practice of one tradition of multimethodology. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 11(2), 153-168.

63. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioural Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

64. Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 8(1), 45.

65. Trist, E., & Emery, F. (1960). Socio-technical systems theory. Oxford, U.K.: Pergamon.

66. Wu, P. P. Y., Fookes, C., Pitchforth, J., & Mengersen, K. (2015). A framework for model integration and holistic modelling of socio-technical systems. Decision Support Systems, 71, 14-27.