The paradigm that changed the work place : annals of the STSD
Citation for published version (APA): Eijnatten, van, F. M. (1992). The paradigm that changed the work place : annals of the STSD. (TU Eindhoven. Fac. TBDK, Vakgroep T&A : monografie; Vol. 010). Eindhoven University of Technology.
Document status and date: Published: 01/01/1992
Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers)
Please check the document version of this publication:
• A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication
General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.
If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement: www.tue.nl/taverne
Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at: [email protected] providing details and we will investigate your claim.
Download date: 04. Oct. 2021 The Paradigm that Changed the Work. Place Annals of STSD
DR. FRANS M. VAN EIJNA TTEN
Associate Professor at the Graduate School of Industrial Engineering and Management Science Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Manuscript Draft BDK/T&AOIO
This manuscript contains a broad outline of the history of the Socio-Technical Systems Design paradigm from 1951 up until the present time (1992). An effort is made to cover the wide range of ideas and elaborations in this field, using original papers and sources of different kinds. The author has expressly avoided to produce yet another review along established lines, but rather to give a personal and additional contribution to this subject area, which is based on the literature. The manuscript is a synthesis of more than 10 years of researching the paradigm by the author, and resulted from editing, compiling and expansion of earlier (unpublished) papers, discussions with colleagues and some field work in industry. This monograph, designed as an anthology of Socio-Technical Systems Design, is not only specifying concepts, methods and projects, but is also explaining the epistemological and methodological foundations of the paradigm. And last but not least, sound and constructive criticism is presented, which is as much as possible corrected for pre-judgements or 'second source' myths, and is solidly based on facts and analyses of the paradigm.
© August 1992 The Paradigm that Changed the Work Place Annals of STSD
Dr. Frans M. van Eijnatten Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Manuscript/Draft
© August 1992
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
Abstract 0 1 STSD: A Personal Reconstruction 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Some Initial Statements to Explore the Field of STSD 2 1.3 Chapters' Outline 3 2 STSD: Towards Some Root Definitions of the Paradigm 5 2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 STSD: Brief Characteristics of Content 5 2.3 STSD Message: Goals, Mission and Metaphor 8 2.4 STSD Research: Some Methodological Considerations 9 2.5 STSD Images: Milestones and Development Trajectories 11 3 STSD: Initial Formulations of the Paradigm 16 3.1 Introduction 16 3.2 The Pioneering Role of Tavistock 17 3.2.1 Ken Bamforth's Re-Discovery of a Work Tradition 17 3.2.2 Action Research as the Mere Context of Discovery 19 3.2.3 Latent STSD and the Spreading and Adoption of an Open-Systems View 21 3.2.4 STSD-Specific Concept Development to Support the Next Phase 23 3.3 Classical STSD 26 3.3.1 The Inspiration of the Norwegian Industrial Democracy Programme 26 3.3.2 The Spreading of Industrial Democracy: Idiom versus Replica 28 3.3.3 The Methodical Approach towards Industrial Democracy 29 3.3.4 An Outline of Basic Concepts in Classical STSD 31 3.3.5 An Impression of Projects as Reported in the Literature 36 4 STSD: Modern Variants of the Paradigm 38 4.1 Introduction 38 4.2 Variant A: Participative Design 39 4.2.1 The Australian Solution to the Problem of Diffusion 39 4.2.2 PO and the Educational Approach towards Learning 43 4.2.3 Further Spreading of the Diffusion Model 47 4.3 Variant B: Integral Organizational Renewal 49 4.3.1 The Dutch Solution to the Problem of Integral Design 49 4.3.2 lOR and the Balance Model Based on Social Interaction 52 4.3.3 The Participative Process of Organizational Renewal of the Firm 56
page Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Draft - August 1992 ii Continuation of Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
4.4 Variant C: Democratic Dialogue 59 4.4.1 The Scandinavian Solution to the Problem of Diffusion 59 4.4.2 The Concept of Democratic Dialogue and the Theory of Integrating 61 Language and Practice 4.4.3 The DD Trajectory: Creating Scope by Engaging in a Broad Ecological Process 63 4.5 Modem STSD in North America 67 5 Epistemological and Methodological Foundations of the STSD-Paradigm 70 5.1 Introduction 71 5.2 Scientific-Philosophical Points and the Nature of Explanatory Diagrams 75 5.3 The Problem of the 'Openness' of Systems and Von Bertalanffy's Leap 78 5.4 The Development of Systems Concepts and its Influence on STSD Modelling 78 5.5 STSD Methods and the Evolution of Models for Analysis and Design 84 5.6 STSD Practice and the Controversy on Design Content versus Process 96 6 A Critical Evaluation of the STSD Paradigm 98 6.1 Introduction 98 6.2 Constructive Criticism versus Widespread Pre-Judgements and Knowledge Gaps 99 6.3 Further analysis of the STSD Paradigm 102 6.3.1 A Systematic Comparison of Development Tracks and Variants 102 6.3.2 A Tentative Classification of STSD Approaches 111 6.4 Starting the Debate 114 6.4.1 Methodological Renewal of the STSD Paradigm 114 6.4.2 Degree of Elaboration in Terms of an (Open) Systems Approach 116 6.4.3 A Further Examination of Basic Concepts and Theory Formation 120 6.4.4 Some Closer Look at the Diversity of Socio-technical Methods 126 6.4.5 A Concise Critique of STSD Practice 127 7 The Future of the Socio-Technical Systems Design Paradigm 133 8. References
This theoretical study, which was also made possible through a contribution of the Dutch Research Stimulation Programme TAO (Technology, Work and Organization), Industrial Sector, is dedicated to Eric Trist, the nestor of STSD. The author would like to extend special thanks to Fred Emery, Hans van Beinum, Friso den Hertog, Oguz Baburoglu, Bjorn Gustavsen and Ulbo de Sitter for their useful suggestions and additions to earlier versions and variants of this monograph.
Correspondence address: Eindhoven University of Technology Graduate School of Industrial Engineering and Management Science Department of Technology and Work aU. Dr. Frans M. van Eijnatten Paviljoen U-10, T&A P.O. Box 513 5600 MB EINDHOVEN (NETHERLANDS) Phone: (31) 40472469/472493 Fax: (31) 40 451275
Draft © August 1992 by the author The Paradigm that Changed the Work Place Annals of STSD
Dr. Frans M. van Eijnatten Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Abstract
This monograph contains an anthology of the Socio-Technical Systems Design (STSD) paradigm, documenting the period from 1951 until 1992. The study is designed as an historic account. It presents a shaded picture of the plural istic development of different approaches, carefully reconstructed on the basis of the available literature, and where possible corrected for distortions caused by information from secondary sources. An effort is made to cover the wide range of ideas and elaborations in this field, using original papers and sources of dif ferent kinds. The author has expressly avoided to produce yet another review along established lines, but rather to give a personal and additional contribution to this subject area. After introducing some root definitions to explore the field, the actual reconstruction starts with a detailed portrayal of the well-known initial formu lations of the paradigm, dearly demonstrating the pioneering role of Tavistock. Next, the first Norwegian Industrial Democracy programme marks the period of what is called Classical STSD. Additionally there is a broad discussion of four modern variants: Participative Design, Integral Organizational Renewal, De mocratic Dialogue and North American consultancy. This study is not only specifying concepts, methods and projects, but also is explaining the main epistemological and methodological foundations. And last but not least, sound and constructive criticism is presented which is solidly based on facts and analyses on the STSD paradigm. An attempt is made to present a (further) introduction into the substantial and specialised domain of Socio Technical Systems Design. A full english-language bibliography accompanies this monograph.
About the author: Dr. Frans M. van Eijnatten (40) is an associate professor (UHD) at the Graduate School of Industrial Engineering and Management Science at Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands. For years now he is researching the history of the Socio-Technical Systems Design Paradigm. He produced several english-language review articles on the subject as well as a comprehensive bibliography of the paradigm. Dr. Van Eijnatten assisted in editing a documentation of the Dutch Sociotechnical Variant which was presented to the international scientific forum. In Holland he co-edited a book on the management of technological innovation and was invited to contribute to a polemic discussion about STSD organized by a Dutch journal. He also published about methodological aspects of the paradigm. Dr. Frans M. van Eijnatten is a member of the Dutch Research Stimulation Programme TAO (Technology, Work and Organiz ation). Chapter One A Personal Reconstruction
Table of contents Page
1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Some Initial Statements to Explore the Field 2 1.3 Chapters' Outline 3
1.1 Introduction
This study documents the Socio-Technical Systems Design (STSD) para digm. A broad outline is given of the history of STSD that does justice to the wide range of ideas and elaborations in this field. For the author, not belonging to the first generation of developers of the paradigm, this has not appeared a simple task. In order to succeed in such a delicate attempt, there had to be some striving for completeness. But because of the overwhelming amount of details, such an endeavour is of course doomed to failure. This has placed the author in some sort of a dilemma. Looking back at the development of the manuscript, the notion of a 'personal reconstruction' seems most appropriate to characterize the way out of this unfavourable situation. Some relevant aspects of the history of STSD are reconstructed on the basis of the available literature. Because STSD has in fact always operated at the crossroads of different disciplines and practices, writers from various backgrounds will be included. In this study issues regarding methodology and conceptualisation will receive particular attention. When considered important for a clearer understanding, the author will also refer to developments in science theory and systems theory. Whenever concepts regarding content and process are discussed, priority is given to the general idea rather than details, referring always however to specialised literature and giving a brief explanation of key concepts. This study is meant to give an overview of STSD as a field. Although all care is taken to avoid major pitfalls, it appeared to be a divine task to draw a completely valid picture of past events which is not distorted in any respect. It also came out to be impossible to present an historic account which version is entirely acceptable for all its key actors. Although carefully prepared, this Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter One - Draft - August 1992 2 anthology of STSD is just one interpretation of ideas and events which will be judged very differently by its stakeholders, e.g. field workers and academics. Because of their distinct cultures and values, respective contributions to the field of STSD resulted in very different kinds of framework. Although both have contributed in their own characteristic way to the development of the paradigm, they of course do not agree with each other about the centrality of their suggestions. Therefore it is inevitable that the same passages in this anthology will simultaneously cause either small wafts of satisfaction or disappointment in those two groups of stakeholders. Thus, the accents placed provide a quite personal reconstruction of the development of STSD. An attempt is made to filter the main contributions and to present those different approaches in some sort of a time framework.
1.2 Some Initial Statements to Explore the Field
To introduce Socio-Technical Systems Design to the reader, a rough cari cature of its main features is presented by means of the following six statements:
Statement 1 Socio-Technical Systems Design in vol ves a basic shift in organizational paradigm. STSD adds as its basic philosophy a set of democratic values to organization theory.
Statement 2 Socio-Technical Systems Design is neither a management approach, nor a workers seizure. As an holistic approach, STSD tries to combine both interests.
Statement 3 Socio-Technical Systems Design has strong roots in participation. With respect to organizational policy, STSD adds to the usual technical and economic goals a set of relevant human goals.
Statement 4 Socio-Technical Systems Design propagates a dual design orientation, creating both democratic structures and democratic social processes at the same time.
Statement 5 Socio-Technical Systems Design is not exactly a theory-based sound academic discipline. Grown on as an action research movement, STSD is above all pragmatic, applied and problem-oriented. As such it has acquired only a modest Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter One - Draft - August 1992 3 position in the formal system of science.
Statement 6 Socio-Technical Systems Design as a field is not very homogeneous. Although there is much common ground, conceptual and methodological diversity have developed over the years, resulting in distinct approaches, applied in different areas.
It is tempting to immediately work out each statement in a rather detailed fashion. But this should not be the aim of an introduction. Being not more than an appetizer, there is only room for some broad remarks. Looking at the six statements, it is evident they all refer in one way or another to the fundamental paradigmatic ~!1.ange which took place in the second half of our century. This paradigm shift can be summarized as a transition from an autocratic to a democratic work organization. With democracy we do not mean the generally known indirect representative form, described by Emery (1989a) as "chosing by voting from amongst people who offer themselves as candidates to be our representatives" (p.l). What is meant here is the more direct participative variant of democracy, which is aimed at "locating responsibility for coordination clearly and firmly with those whose efforts require coordination" (Emery F. & Emery, M., 1989, p.l00). STSD paradigm can be roughly identified as the introduction of participatory democracy in industry. Some statements also point to the 'siamees twins' characteristic of STSD, namely the duality of the creation of democratic structures by means of the creat ion of democratic social processes. Van Beinum (1990) summarizes this essential feature as a complicated democratization project carried out simultaneously on both the operational and the cultural level. Failure to implement democratic values on both levels at the same time, necessary will result in alternative readings of the old organizational paradigm, e.g. social engineering or parochial democracy. Real STSD should always be a well-balanced combination of syn chronous structural and cultural change.
1.3 Chapter's Outline
This monograph contains an anthology of the Socio-Technical Systems Design (STSD) paradigm, documenting the period from 1951 until 1991. As is put forward in Chapter One, this theoretical study embraces all forty years of development and expansion of the paradigm, from its semi-auto nomous work group-based inception at Tavistock up to the present network oriented Scandinavian Democratic Dialogue, the Dutch approach towards Inte- Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter One - Draft - August 1992 4 gral Organizational Renewal of the firm, and the Australian Participative Design tradition. The study is designed as an historic account. It presents a shaded picture, carefully reconstructed on the basis of the available literature, and where possible corrected for distortions caused by information from secondary sources. In Chapter Two a general outline of the STSD paradigm is given in terms of method(ology), content and phases of growth. Also an analytical framework is developed to better discriminate theory of content aspects from theory of process issues. Chapter Three documents the first two distinctive development traject ories, i.e. the Pioneering Phase and the phase of Classical Socio-Technical Systems Design. Placing emphasis on the highlights, these stages first of all are described as anecdotes. Moreover the development of methods and concepts is characterized by giving short descriptions. Chapter Four documents the pluralistic development trajectories of Modern Socio-Technical Systems Design. Its main variants Participative Design, Integral Organizational Renewal and Democratic Dialogue are presented, speci fying both theories of content and process. Also Modern STSD in North America is discussed. In Chapter Five the epistemological and methodological foundations of STSD come to the fore. Scientific-philosophical points of departure, systems methodology and model cycles, and some theories of concepts and process are discussed. Chapter Six contains a critical evaluation of the STSD paradigm in terms of methodology, theory and practice. Tracks and variants are compared with each other using the framework which was developed in Chapter Two. The critique itself is contrasted with some widespread pre-judgements and knowledge gaps which exist among authors using secondary sources. In Chapter Seven the future of the paradigm is discussed, as it emerges in the beginning of the last decade of our century. Chapter Two STSD: Towards Some Root Definitions of the Paradigm
Table of Contents Page
2.1 Introduction 5 2.2 STSD: Brief Characteristics of Content 5 2.3 STSD Message: Goals, Mission and Metaphor 8 2.4 STSD Enquiry: Some Methodological Considerations 9 2.5 STSD Images: Milestones and Development Trajectories 12
2.1 Introduction
Since its inception in the fifties, the Socio-Technical System Design paradigm has never left the socio-scientific and management literature. Socio Technical Systems Design (STSD) plays an important role in giving shape to the plants, offices and government institutions that follow modern patterns. Sociotechnical systems design is an applied science which is aimed at improving the quality of work and organization through adaptation or funda mental redesign of contents and composition of technology and human tasks. In the past four decades, many authors contributed to the development of this broad-minded approach. Before we describe the actual development of STSD on the basis of a division based on phases, we first give a general characterization of its goals, mission and metaphor, its methodology and aspects regarding its content.
2.2 STSD: Brief Characteristics of Content
As is asseverated in chapter I, Socio-Technical Systems Design involves a basic shift in organizational paradigm. STSD can be compendiously characterized as a reaction to the unilateral emphasis placed in previous paradigms (Scientific Management: Taylor, 1911; Bureaucratic: Weber, 1947; Human Relations: Mayo, 1933) on either the technical or the social aspects of the organization. In the new perspective, both factors are integrated as being components of one single 'sociotechnical entity'. Following Trist (1981), and renewing the attempt to give a brief and concise typification of STSD, Van Beinum (1990a) listed nine character istics of content of what he refers to as 'the new organizational paradigm', which Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 6 he put in contrast with the characteristics of the 'old paradigm': the Tayloristic bureaucracy (cf. box 2.1). Ketchum & Trist (1992) translated those attributes into seven indications of personal paradigm change (d. box 2.1).
Box 2.1 Brief characterization of STSD as a new paradigm and as a changed personal attitude "Old paradigm * Redundancy of parts "Give up * External coordination and control * Feeling of having learned it all * Autocracy * Reductionist thinking * Fragmented socio-technical system * Dependence on procedures * Technological imperative - man as extension of * False simplicity machine, a commodity * It is 'they' who are to blame * Organizational design based on total specification * Virtue of being certain * Maximum task breakdown, narrow skills * Belief in stability * Building block is one person - one task * Alienation New paradigm * Redundancy of functions * Internal coordination and control New Reality * Democracy * Learning never stops * Joint optimization of the socio-technical system * Systems thinking * Man is complementary to the machine and a * Focus on results resource to be developed >I- Complexity * Organization design based on minimum critical specifica tion * Personal accountability * Doubt * Optimum task grouping, multiple broad skills * Continuous change" * Building block is a self-managing social system * Involvement and committment"
Trist (1981), p. 42 Ketchum & Trist (1992), p. 45 Van Beinum (1990a), p. 3 Ketchum & Trist (1992), p. 40
We would like to elucidate those listings a little further by making some paradigm-based two and two comparisons:
- Redundancy of Functions versus Redundancy of Parts. Rather than maximizing the labour division (overcapacity of persons having only one function within the organization), STSD suggests a minimal work division (overcapacity of functions in each person within the organization). Everybody is expected to be able to carry out different tasks, which leads to personnel being available for multiple jobs. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 7
- Internal versus External Coordination and Control. Self-regulation rather than step wise supervision is considered to be of paramount importance in the sociotechnical paradigm. Emphasis is being placed on small organization units with internal coordination and semi-autonomous control. - Democracy versus Autocracy. The aim of STSD practitioners is direct partici pation of personnel in decision-making. The approach is based upon democ racy in the workplace. - Joint Optimization versus Fragmentation. STSD prefers to take an integral as opposed to a partial approach, which implies optimization of various aspects rather than maximizing the own job-specific aspect. - Man as Resource versus Commodity. The sociotechnical paradigm considers the working man as being complementary to the machine, and not as its useful extension. People are the most valuable asset of an organization, which must invest in them. - Minimum Critical versus Total Specification. STSD practitioners will prevent an organization from designing its structure in a detailed manner. They start with the idea that only the contours need to be determined; the remaining parts are filled in by the users according to their own insights and needs. The current situation is of course a condition relevant to the actual organization of work. - Maximum Task Breakdown versus Optimal Task Grouping (Narrow versus Broad Skills). The sociotechnical paradigm strives for complex jobs in a simple organization rather than simple jobs in a complex organization. This means that personnel must have multiple skills. - Individual versus Group. In STSD, the smallest organizational unit is the group, not the individual. In this way it is possible for individuals to take control of the organization of work. - Alienation versus Involvement and Committment. Job erosion leads to alienation. Sociotechnically redesigned labour systems are characterized by 'whole tasks': It is meaningful work, thus promoting personnel committment. - Active versus Passive Disposition to Learning. The personal attitude of "having learned it all" should be replaced by a more open intellectual orientation in which new ideas are welcomed and tried out enthusiastically. - Thinking in Wholes versus Partial Analysis. A piece-meal approach to problem solving is substituted for a personal rational based on the consideration of wholes (systems). - Emphasis on Outcomes instead of on Procedures. The individual attitude should be to attach great value to attain good results instead of just adhering to some standard routines. - Looking for Real instead of Oversimplified Solutions. Personal assumptions and pre conceptions should be made explicit in the search for genuine answers to problems. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 8
- Accepting versus Disclaiming Responsibility. Individuals should no longer blame others for things that went wrong, but should accept full responsibility for their own work. - A Sane Dose of Doubt instead of the Illusion of Self-Assurance. In a rapidly changing world the personal trait of outward would-be certainty is no longer valued as a virtue. A more doubtful attitude is viewed as a better guarantee for greater achievement and learning. - Continuous Change versus Stability. Notwithstanding our inborn endeavor for constancy we have to accustom ourselves to uncontrollable change, because it is an indispensable feature of our present-day world.
2.3 STSD Message: Goals, Mission and Metaphor
STSD can be identified as a 'practical paradigm'. According to Van Strien (1978) this is !fa circumscribed way of dealing with a set of problems in practical reality" (p. 291). The author asserts (p. 291) a practical paradigm should contain three elements: !fa piece of scientific theory; some philosophy, in the sense of norms and goals, specifying an ideal state of affairs; and a coherent set of inter ventions, intended to solve problems and to change reality in the direction of the norms and goals stated in the guiding philosophy". In the case of STSD, these constituents can be clearly identified. First starting with the second element, STSD's guiding philosophy can be specified as Participative Democracy. Its basic mission is improving the human condition at the work place while at the same time being equally attentive to the production goals. This primary objective of democratization of work is reached by means of direct participation of all relevant stakeholders. To accomplish Participative Democracy, a set of workable human values serves as norms. The theoretical commodity of STSD is 'open-systems thinking', with self regulation as its characteristic feature. STSD intentionally makes use of the meta phor of the organization as an adaptive whole, giving birth to the concept of a socio-technical system as a predominant frame of reference for both description, analysis and design purposes. STSD interventions are unanimously aimed at substantial reduction of the division of labour in all sorts of work settings. Pre-eminently participatory in character, these manners are directly borrowed from 'action research', endorsing at the same time collective self-work design and group decision-making. In order to further delineate the STSD paradigm into some logically separ able relevant parts an analytical framework is adopted which initially is used in Soft Systems Methodology (cf. Checkland, 1975/1981/1985; Checkland & Scholes, 1990). This scheme is especially fruitful in distinguishing theory of content aspects from theory of process issues. It additionally offers a convenient way out Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 9 of the confusion of tongues concerning the professional use of the systems concept. In recent literature there is increased condemnation of the word 'system' as the name for the abstract notion of a whole. Because it is widely used as a label in everyday language, Checkland & Scholes (1990) recommended to renounce the word 'system' as a technical term altogether. Checkland (1988) already suggested to employ Koestler's (1967/1978) term 'holon' to unequivocally designating the abstract idea of a whole, having emergent properties, and to rename 'systems thinking' into 'holonic thinking'. We have taken this advice for granted. To incite transparency even more, we suggest to define STSD paradigm as a 'twofold' holonic approach, applying systems thinking in both content and pro cess. In Checkland's terminology we typify STSD as a well-balanced combination of both a 'purposeful conceptual holon' and a 'purposeful human activity hoi on' (d. figure 2.1). STSD is employing a modified 'open-systems model' as its purposeful conceptual holon. This device can be used to describe a work organization as a single whole which may be able to survive in a changing environment. As Checkland & Scholes (1990) have pointed out "this whole entity may exhibit emergent properties as a single whole, properties which have no meaning in terms of the parts of the whole". STSD's conceptual holon can be used to describe overall organizational performance as if it were a sociotechnical system. STSD practises action research as its basic process of enquiry or purposeful human activity holon. The resulting set of both formal and informal socio technical analysis and design methods, is defined here as a 'human activity system' capable of planning tRe actions which may be executed in reality in order to change the problematic work situation. This human activity holon is firmly based on the declared perspective of Participative Democracy which can be identi fied as STSD's normative world view.
2.4 STSD Enquiry: Some Methodological Considerations
For a long period of time, in academic circles STSD was (considered) an odd one out. Such an holonic, action research-oriented science did not quite fit into the system of academic disciplines developed at the universities. STSD was not only new as systemic participative design theory in terms of its contents, it also implied a clearly different paradigm in terms of its methodology. In order to obtain insight into the actual meaning of STSD, academics had to take a different attitude in various respects. Not only did they have to learn to think in terms of new schemes, they also had to change their work habits. used in the (perceived) reality itself
(perceived) problem situation Socia-technical analysis and design in the world of wor systemic process of research/ enquiry description of viewed as purposeful human activity holon, perceived reality based in specific world view ....L·0------. ....--S-0-C1 work organization ields technical as a whole entity conceptual with emergent model proporties systemic content of research/ enquiry: the open systems model as a purposeful conceptual hoI on
Figure 2.1. A SSM-inspired analysis of STSD paradigm
.... o Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 11
- The fundamentally different way of thinking implied a shift from the 'machine' approach to the 'systems' approach (Ackoff, 1974). The main characteristics of the machine approach are: the emphasis being placed on reduction (converting wholes into parts; disaggregation); the emphasis placed on analytical thinking (explaining the behaviour of entities from the addition into the behaviour of parts); as well as the emphasis being placed on mechanistic thinking (in terms of the uni-causal cause/effect relationships). The object of the study is viewed here as a machine. The main characteristics of the systems approach include emphasis being placed on expansion (the parts are included in ever-expanding entities; aggregation); the emphasis on synthetic thinking (explaining behaviour from the role of the parts and how they function in the larger whole); and the emphasis on theleological thinking (determining and changing objectives, adaptation; cause is essential though not sufficient for a certain effect). The object of the study is viewed here as an 'open system' which interacts with its environment. - The fundamentally different way of working implied a shift from the use of a predictive model cycle to a regulatory cycle on the one hand, and a different attitude of the researcher on the other; from distant to co-influencing. The empirical or predictive cycle (De Groot, 1980) accentuates the testing of hypotheses that are derived from an a priori formulated theory by means of the following steps: observation, induction (generalising general connections from observed connections), deduction (formulating ideal-types/hypotheses), test (verifying/ falsifying), evaluation. The regulatory or design cycle (Van Strien, 1986) stresses actual designing and, on the basis of that, developing a theory for practice through the following steps: problem definition, diagnosis, plan, action, evaluation. The role of the researcher is no longer distantly observant, but more involved and in fact co-influencing. The relevant process is referred to as 'action research'. It may be clear that many researchers have had difficulty with such a radical methodological changing paradigm. Illustrative of this is Hackman's lamentation: 'It may be that the only good way to comprehend a sociotechnical message is to move from the library to the shop floor and then finally to understand'. Ah hal That's what it means.' (Hackman, 1981, p. 76).
2.5 STSD Images: Milestones and Development Trajectories
The history of STSD is a sequence of major and minor discoveries, projects, conceptualizations and developments of methodologies. The literature about it is very fragmented. English handbooks are lacking, whereas a number of key publications have for a long period of time not gone beyond the stage of 'internal report'. All of this combined makes it a difficult task to give a reason- Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 12 ably valid outline of its historical development. Other authors have recently made an attempt to record the history of the Socio-Technical Systems Design paradigm. Merrelyn Emery (1989), for example, distinguishes a number of important 'milestones':
- As a first relevant fact - basically not more than a pace-setter - she mentions Lewin's leadership experiments just before the Second World War (d. Lippit & White, 1939). These laboratory studies pointed to three basic types of organi zational structures: the autocracy (bureaucracy), the democracy, and the 'laissez-faire' type (structure-less variant). - As a second relevant fact - the first factual milestone of STSD - Emery refers to the British mine studies (d. Trist & Bamforth, 1951; Trist et al., 1963). In these field studies, researchers discovered an alternative form of work organization (the so-called 'semi-autonomous work group'), which they tried out on a limited scale. - As a third relevant fact - the second factual milestone of STSD - Emery mentions the Norwegian 'Industrial Democracy Project' (d. Emery, F. & Thorsrud, 1964/1969/1976). In this project, employers, employees and the government for the first time jointly carried out research into and improved the democratic quality/content of industrial sectors. - As a fourth relevant fact - the third factual milestone of STSD - Merrelyn Emery (1989) refers to the development of the so-called 'Participative Design' methodology in Australia (d. Emery, F. & Emery, M., 1974). Here, the employees themselves were given the opportunity to carry out the whole trajectory of sociotechnical analysiS and redesign by means of 'participative design workshops' and 'search conferences'. - In addition to Emery, Van Beinum (1990a) has proposed a fourth factual mile stone in the development of STSD, namely 'large-scale and broadly based organizational change process with 'democratic dialogue' as the leading element on the conceptual as well as on the operational level' (d. Gustavsen, 1985/1988). This has been brought into practice on a national scale. The Dutch approach to Integral Organizational Renewal (De Sitter et at., 1990) may compete with this fourth 'milestone' classification (d. chapter seven).
Based on a bibliometrical analysis of the literature (cf. Van Eijnatten, 1990a/b) and where possible corrected for changes in the actual sequence of events (Fred Emery, 1990 - personal correspondence), we have attempted to categorize the historical line of STSD into phases. The three development trajectories can be distinguished as follows:
- Phase I (1949 - 1959+): The period of the Socio-Technical Pioneering Work Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 13
- Phase II (1959 - 1971 +): The period of Classical STSD - Phase III (1971 - xxxx): The period of Modern STSD
The period of Modern STSD can further be divided into four separate tracks:
- Variant A (1971-xxxx): Participative Design - Variant B (1973-xxxx): Integral Organizational Renewal - Variant C (1979-xxxx): Democratic Dialogue - Variant D (1971-xxxx): North American Consultancy
Figure 2.2 gives a representation of the phases and tracks thus disting uished, combined with the milestones previously mentioned. What imme diately strikes the eye, is that the courses partly overlap in time. Sometimes, there almost exist parallel flows. Two main causes can be given for this. Firstly, from time to time the inventors/ developers of the paradigm regroup to discuss new ideas, while the implementors/consultants continue to follow the course taken for some time. Secondly, the development of STSD is a-synchronous in the different countries and continents. One country is already in the next phase whereas the other has yet to start the previous one. It also happened (for example in the United States) that the entire development started off only after a number of years. This makes it difficult to link concrete end-dates to the various stages. Anno 1991 Classical STSD and the various Modern STSD approaches coexist abreast as professional approaches at separate locations. This situation not seldom causes confusions of tongues among new-comers in this field.
Several authors have tried to further specify some distinctive problem areas STSD is covering (cf. Trist, 1981; Emery, 1982; Wright & Morley, 1989; Van Beinum, 1990a). Baburoglu (1992) summarized and put together those attempts, merging them into four different nameless tracks. We re-interpreted those tracks on the basis of our SSM-inspired STSD framework as three broad inclusive cat egories of perceived problem situations in the world of work.
We distinguish:
- type 1 perceived problem situations: a1l sorts of work problems detected at the work group / department level. The main issue here is the (mal)adaptive functioning of the internal social work organization in relation to technologi cal development i.e. rationalization of production process. Track A
STSD TrackB PHASE I • Pioneering Wo~ TrackC
PHASE II •...--=S~TS~D:::..- ___-I ...... • Contemporary STSD TrackD Classical Approach Variant D: North American Consultanc
I STSD ASEII • Modern Approaches semi-autonomous psycho workgroup logical self- inter-org. I networks classical require srso ments
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
Figure 2.2 The phases and milestones in the development of STSD Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Two - Draft - August 1992 15
- type 2 perceived problem situations: all sorts of organizational problems detected at the enterprise level. The main issue here is the (mal)adaptive functioning of the single whole organization in relation to active competitors under conditions of turbulence.
- type 3 perceived problem situations: all sorts of complex meta-problems detected at the inter-organizational, domain level. The main issue here is the (mal)adaptive functioning of referent organizations in relation to society under conditions of turbulence.
Barbiiroglu (1992) added to this list a distinct type 4 perceived problem situation, characterized by severe and prolonged maladaptive response and contextual conflict portrayed by organizations under conditions of hyper turbulence (cf. chapter seven). For the time being we consider this only a special case of our last two categories. For each type of perceived problem situations STSD paradigm came to apply specialized theories of content (conceptual holons) and/or theories of process (human activity holons). Added to the already mentioned mixture of phases and variants, this picture illustrates the complex variety of STSD as a field. The ideal of Participative Democracy serves as the one and only umbrella under which these different approaches remain recognizable as mere manifesta tions of the master paradigm. Chapter Three STSD: Initial Formulations of the Paradigm
Table of contents Page
3.1 Introduction 17 3.2 The Pioneering Role of Tavistock 18 3.2.1 Ken Bamforth's Re-Discovery of a Work Tradition 18 3.2.2 Action Research as the Mere Context of Discovery 21 3.2.3 Latent STSD and the Contagious Spreading and Adoption of an Open-Systems View 23 3.2.4 STSD-specific Concept Development to Support the N ext Phase 25 3.3 Classical STSD 28 3.3.1 The Inspiration of the Norwegian Industrial Democracy Programme 28 3.3.2 The Spreading of Industrial Democracy: Idiom versus Replica 31 3.3.3 The Methodical Approach towards Industrial Democracy 31 3.3.4 An Outline of Basic Concepts in Classical STSD 33 3.3.5 An Impression of Projects as Reported in the Literature 38
3.1. Introduction
In the previous chapter the history of STSD is divided in three distinctive tracks. In this chapter we will describe the first two phases by means of anecdotes. The first development trajectory is referred to as the 'Socio-Technical Pioneering Work', roughly spanning the period from 1949 to 1959. In paragraph 3.2 attention will be given to the inception and careful development of STSD by staff members and visiting scientists of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London. While delineating the discovery of the Semi-Autonomous Work Group, the well-known projects will pass in review briefly, and the theoretical foundation from the early years will be discussed as it emerged from the practising of systems thinking. In paragraph 3.3 attention will be given to the second development Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 17 trajectory, shortly referred to as 'Classical STSD'. A broad time indication is the period 1959-1971. There will be a concise description of the first full-scale test of STSD in Norway. The further spreading of Classical STSD will be discussed, and the development of concepts and methods during this period will be looked upon.
3.2 The Pioneering Role of Tavistock
3.2.1 Ken Bamfodh's Re-Discovery of a Work Tradition
The cradle of STSD can be found in the postwar British coal mines. In the early fifties, a new, spontaneous form of work organization came into being which today is referred to as 'the structural variant of self-managing work groups'. The turbulent British coal industry - which was continually plagued by labour conflicts and which was nationalized and further mechanized after the Second World War was not exactly a working area that was easily accessible to social scientists. Yet, Ken Bamforth, ex-miner and a new researcher of the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London, was given the opportunity to visit the mine he used to work in, the Elsecar mine in South Yorkshire, which was closed to many other researchers. During his visit he observed an unknown form of work organization in a new coal seam, called 'the Haighmoor'. Due to the short coal front, the usual mechanization, the so-called 'longwall' method, could not be applied in this seam. Thanks to the fact that he was a former colleague, the local management gave him permission to carry out descriptive research together with Eric Trist. However, it proved to be difficult to obtain the management's permission to publish their findings. After some commotion, the mine management eventually agreed to a strongly censored version. In their now famous article - carefully included in an elaborate description of the mechanized coal mining process which was unravelled in small sub-tasks - Trist & Bamforth (1951) represented, in guarded terms, a unique underground alternative work organization that was built up of so-called 'composite work groups': small, relatively autonomous .work groups consisting of eight miners, who were responsible as a group for a full cycle in the process of coal extraction. This 'new' form of work organization much resembled the manual situation as it had existed before mechanization. The work organization observed in Haighmoor proved that there were other, even better, ways of designing the work organization within the same mine. This was flatly opposed to the prevailing 'one best way of organizing' practice "that fused Weber's description of bureaucracy with Frederic Taylor's concept of scientific management" (Trist, 1981, p. 9). Here actual practice showed that within the same mine there were different, and even bet~er ways to structure Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 18 the work organization (the latter principle of 'organizational choice'), This so called 'all-in method' soon developed into a success story, the starting point of the Socio-Technical Systems Design paradigm.
Box 3.1 An 'eye-witness' report of the difficult start of STSD
"In the autumn of 1949, I went up to Elsecar Colliery in N.E. Division, Ken Bamforth's old pit, and found autonomous work groups in the Haighmoor seam. Improved roof control enabled them to mine it. C.. ) Teams of eight men interchanged tasks on shift and each shift took over where the last left off. (. .. ) The method, called the all-in method had been conceived by Reg Baker then Area General Manager No.3 Area, N.B. Division, formerly manager at Eisecar. (oo.) The project was an immense success - human-wise, productivity-wise and every otherwise. I began to study it with Ken C.. ). It was both moving and exiting to talk to the men about the value they placed on their experience in the newly formed autonomous groups. (.. ,) I read a paper with Ken on the 'all-in method' and its significance as a new paradigm (. .. ) in the winter of 1950 C.. ). I then asked Baker about publishing an expanded version of the paper in Human Relations. He had to task N.E. Division who refused. (. .. ) They were frightened of the consequences of letting news about the 'all-in method' get out in the industry. They said it contained dynamite. (... ) This is why the original Trist-Bamforth paper (... ) was published simply as an analysis of the conventionallongwall with only indirect references (which are nevertheless plentiful, the model provided by the ripping team) to there being something of another kind on the way. This something was suppressed. (... )" Trist's private communication, 1977; Emery (1978), p.s-6
As Trist later recalled in his correspondence with Emery, the start of the sociotechnical paradigm did not exactly go without a hitch (see box 3.1). In fact, the pioneering phase came about in fits and starts. The research by Trist & Bamforth (1951) in the British coal mines is generally considered the starting point of the Socio-Technical Systems Design paradigm. This study was later the subject of numerous elucidations and discussions by many authors (d. for only a handful of references: Katz & Kahn, 1966; Hill, 1971; Klein, 1975; Cummings & Srivastva, 1977; Buchanan, 1979; Kuipers & Van Amelsvoort, 1990). Real experiments with autonomous groups were carried out in the Bolsover mines in the East Midlands coal field (Shepherd, 1951; Wilson & Trist, 1951; Emery, 1952; Trist, 1953). During his sabbatical leave from Australia in 1952, Fred Emery visited this mine, where he found that autonomous groups had been introduced in seven locations. However, here too the National Coal Board Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft August 1992 19 was terrified of the consequences and cancelled a proposal for further diffusion. From January 1955 until March 1958, Trist c.s. performed a series of descriptive case studies and field experiments with semi-autonomous work groups in the mines of North-West Durham. The reason for this was the 'discovery' of "the working of a conventional, semi-mechanized, three-shift longwall cycle by a set of autonomous work groups" (Trist, 1981, p. 16). Trist reported enthusiastically that groups consisting of 40 to 50 miners worked here while exchanging their various tasks and also drawing up the shift schedules themselves. Amongst one another they had worked out an adapted 'fair' rewarding system. Compared to an identical situation but with a traditional work organization, the output here was 25% higher, the costs lower, and absenteeism had been cut in half! A large number of reports were published pertaining to this Bolsover case (cf. Herbst, 1958; Higgin, 1957/1958; Murray, 1957a through g; Pollock, 1957/1958; Trist, 1956/1957). A collected description of these mine studies can be found in Trist e t al. (1963). Parallel to this, two 'natural occurring' field experiments were observed in the Indian textile industry (the Jubilee and Calico Mills in Ahmedabad, India; cf. Rice, 1953/1958/1963). As Trist (1981) reports "Rice did no more than mention through an interpreter the idea of a group of workers becoming responsible for a group of looms" (p. 18). Both in an automated and in a non-automated weaving mill the workers themselves created a system of semi-autonomous work groups, only in the former with lasting success (Miller, 1975). In the early fifties small groups were observed in both the London harbour (Trist, 1977), British retail trade (Pollock, 1954) and in Glasgow telephone exchange (Smith, 1952). Independently from Tavistock, Melman (1958) studied a very elaborated sort of semi-autonomous work groups structure - the so-called 'gang system' - in the Standard Motor Company at Coventry, England. Yet other early 'sociotechnical' reorganizations are known in Scandinavia. In Sweden groups were introduced to the Stockholm telephone switchboard (d. Westerlund, 1952), while King (1964) reported to have been implementing self regulating female teams in a Norwegian clothing factory. In the United States Kuriloff (1963) recorded an experiment with semi-autonomous work groups at Non-Lineair Systems Inc. in California. In Holland Van Beinum (1959) carried out a sociotechnical-tinged field experiment at the Dutch Giro Service in The Hague.
3.2.2 Action Research as the Mere Context of Discovery
The origin of STSD as a paradigm is closely linked wi th the in 1946 founded Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in London, and with its emblematic conduct of enquiry: action research. One reason for this outspoken Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 20 research policy was the fact that its founding members all had gained broad wartime experience with all sorts of action programmes in the British army. After the war they continued this habit (d. Wilson et al., 1952). Another rationale was they had been under direct influence of Lewin's (1946) novel group dynamics methodology which straigthforwardly coupled research to action in a regulative model cycle (d. Chapter 2, paragraph 4). The ultimate research aim became to study a complex situation by changing it! From its start action is prevalent at 'The Tavistock' and the researcher's role of being a change agent is broadly accepted as an essential prerequisite. The research focus is both client oriented and problem-oriented. As Rapoport (1970) is stating, the members of the Tavistock Institute attempted "to integrate medical and social science disciplines for the solution of social as distinct from individual problems. The main theme was the need to get collaboration from members of an organization while attempting to help them solve their own problems" (p. 500). Action research is not exactly an academic discipline. It undeniable shows some characteristics of a 'movement'. As Curle (1949) put it, this type of applied social research "aims not only to discover facts, but also to help in altering certain conditions experienced by the community as unsatisfactory" Cp. 269). Rapoport (1970) called it the art of seeing the relevance in knowledge for practice. Accord ing to Elden & Chisholm (1992) the researcher adds to his research a vision about how society could be improved. The field experiment served as a standard model for enquiring complex real life settings since Lewin's action research studies with children (Lewin et al., 1939; Lippitt & White, 1939; Lippitt, 1940, Barker et al., 1941), housewifes (Lewin, 1943; Radke & Klisurich, 1947) and his research project in the clothing industry, experimenting with female employees at Harwood Manufacturing Company (Bavelas, 1942; Maier, 1946). According to Foster (1972) "the arguments by Lewin for the merits of action research were Gestaltist in origin. He stressed the limitations of studying complex, real social events in a laboratory, the artificiality of splitting out single behavioural elements from an integrated system, and the advantages of understanding the dynamic nature of change, by studying it under controlled conditions as it takes place" (p. 530). Tavistock developed its own action research variant which was first practiced in the Glacier project (Jaques, 1951; 1964), in which only the social system was studied extensively. In the Elsecar Trist & Bamforth (1951) success story the co-influencing researcher'S role of action research was found minimal. The deviant form of work organization was already implemented by the miners themselves. The Tavistock researchers could do no more than only describe it and make a comparison with the current technology-induced longwall method. Eventually they also criticized the adequacy of the dominant work organization after longwall mechanization which was characterized by fragmented jobs. They Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 21 valued this as negative both from a human and from an organizational point of view. Or as Emery (1991) put it: "They argued, very strongly, that the human costs of longwall coal mining could be ignored only at serious costs to overall system performance" (p. 1). In the subsequent mining studies - particularly the Bolsover case - the Tavistock researchers could increase their factual action component a bit, but strict limitations of the National Coal Board prevented any large-scale test of the new innovative work organization. Also in India the employed action research approach proved to be so to speak imperfect with respect to the researcher's role. As Trist (1981) explained, the Ahmedabad field experiments have been initiated spontaneously by the workers themselves, one of them before, the other after a visit and lecture by Rice. In the pioneering phase of STSD action research served as a mere context of discovery, while democracy as a leading normative world view was only taci tl y presen t.
3.2.3 Latent STSD and the Contagious Spreading and Adoption of an Open Systems View
The start of the STSD paradigm spontaneously took place in the sub terranean galleries of the British coal mines. Despite the advancing mecha nization, in some coal seams miners chose to pursue their own old work tradition. It was an ex-miner who reported this phenomenon to the academic world. By the time these natural occurring field experiments had shown some good results in practice, the scientific explanation only just began. Initially the formulation of theories was strongly influenced by the psycho-analytical orientation at 'The Tavistock'. The very first conceptualisations were hence based on the group theory (cf. Klein's object relations (1932/1948); Bion's 'leader less group'/group dynamics (1949/1950); and Lewin's field theory/group decision-making (1947/1951). Soon, however, the promising and simultaneous development of the systems approach inspired the STSD pioneers. Due to the lack of both time and resources at 'The Tavistock/, it was difficult to develop its own concept in a systematic manner. The researchers from the very beginning were guided in their observations by the 'open-systems' way of thinking, which was initially propagated from biology, and later also from cybernetics. They enthusiastically adopted the new concepts and tried them out in actual practice, to test their usability (cf. table 3.1).
- Thus, the generally known 'Gestalt' notion (Kohler, 1929), renamed the 'holistic system' (Angyal, 1941), makes it possible to look at the whole coal mining situation, i.e. at both social and technical aspects and their mutual connection. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 22
- By means of the 'open-systems' notion (Koehler, 1938; Von Bertalanffy, 1950), attention is also directed towards the environment. Thus, the man-hostile and unpredictable work situation in mines can become explicitly involved in the research.
Table 3.1 Outline of systems concepts from biology, logic and cybernetics dating before 1959, adopted by the Tavistock researchers.
Concept Reference Discipline - adaptation Tomkins,1953 biology Sommerhoff,1950 biology - dosed/ open system Koehler,1938 biology Prigogine, 1947 thermo-dynamics Von Bertalanffy, 1950 biology - coenetic variable Ashby, 1956 cybernetics - co-producer Singer, 1959 philosophy - directive correlation Feibleman & Friend, 1945 philosophy Sommerhoff, 1950 biology -entropy Schrodinger,1944 biology Prigogine, 1947 thermo-dynamics - negative entropy Von Bertalanffy, 1950 biology ( - equifinality Von Bertalanffy, 1950 biology) - functional equivalent Nagel, 1956 biology - gestalt Kohler, 1929 psychology - goal-directed behavior Sommerhoff, 1950 biology - goal-seeking behavior Schtitzenberger, 1954 biology - homeostasis Canon,1932 biology - joint environment Ashby, 1952 cybernetics -learning Tomkins,1953 biology Sommerhoff, 1950 biology - morphogenesis Spiegelman, 1945 biology - multi-stable system Ashby, 1952 cybernetics - requisite variety Ashby, 1958 cybernetics - self-regulation Roux, 1914; Weiner, 1950 cybernetics Von Bertalanffy, 1950 biology Sommerhoff,1950 biology - (dynamic) steady state Hill,1931 biology (Fliessgleichgewicht) Von Bertalanffy, 1950 biology - (holistic) system Angyal, 1941 logic - theory of feedback mechanisms Wiener,1948 cybernetics
- The researchers place the concept of 'self-regulation' at the basis of the observed semi-autonomous group (Roux, 1914; Weiner, 1950; Von Bertalanffy, Annals of STSD F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 23
1950; Sommerhoff, 1950). Self-regulation of all steps of the coal mining process is most effective in an unpredictable environment, and 'requisite variety' (Ashby, 1956a/b, 1958) - in other words, all round miners in the semi autonomous group - are a prerequisite for that. This is exactly what Trist and Bamforth found in the Elsecar mine in South Yorkshire: small semi autonomous work groups consisting of eight miners, each of them equally rewarded, who as a group were responsible for a full production cycle in the coal mining process. The ever-progressive labour division, which was so typical of the mechanization of the industry at the beginning of the twentieth century, was all of sudden rigorously broken down. Actual practice provided all the necessary ingredients for developing a new organization theory, but its exact concept was not elaborated upon until the early sixties.
It is most curious to point here to the early German discovery of 'Gruppenfabrikation' (Lang & Hellpach (Eds.), 1922) which may be considered a remarkable forerunner of the semi-autonomous work group concept (personal communication with Bernhard Wilpert, 1991). Trist (1981) mentioned that during World War II "military technology gave increasing scope for, and prominence to, small group formations, recognizing their power to make flexible decisions and to remain cohesive under rapidly changing conditions" (p. 13).
3.2.4 STSD-Specific Concept Development to Support the Next Phase
The next phase in the development of STSD was heralded by Fred Emery's joining Tavistock in 1958 and the leaving of its director Wilson. As a result of increased tension, the sociotechnically-oriented researchers, under the guidance of Trist, were separated from the 'Human Relations'-oriented researchers which were led by Rice. The latter had had close connections with psycho-analysts since Tavistock was founded. Trist's HRC group (Human Resources Centre), which Emery was also a part ot continued the developing of STSD, but Rice and his CASR group (Centre for Applied Social Research) also continued for some time to publish sociotechnically-oriented literature (d. Menzies, 1960; Rice, 1963; Miller & Rice, 1967), which did not really help in improving the mutual under standing between these two groups. When Trist finally succeeded in obtaining financial support for socio technical concept development, Emery, supported by Herbst and Miller, turned his energies to the difficult task of tying up the numerous loose ends from the pioneering phase. Three documents (Tavistock 526-528; cf. Miller, 1959; Emery, 1959; Herbst, 1959) mark the transition from the pioneering phase to that of Classical STSD. In a commentary, Emery (1990) called this trinity of theoretical papers "the handbook for the sixties" (p. 4). Looking back on this foundation Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten Chapter Three Draft - August 1992 24 process he claimed some early recognition of their importance for a new theory of concepts: "From the beginning we realized we were talking about a radically different 'human use of human beings', but it was some time before we realized that this corresponded to the formal distinction that Feibleman & Friend (1969) had noted between asymmetrical and symmetrical dependence. The relation between the social and technological systems was clearly identified as correlative; not determinative, as in a causal relation" (Emery, 1991, p. 3). At this point, the rupture with the Human Relations tradition is final. It was not until the late fifties that the first area-specific systems concepts were published (d. table 3.2). Some of these concepts will be described more in detail below, because they belong to the basic notions of (Classical) STSD.
Table 3.2 Outline of area-specific STSD concepts Concept Reference
- composite work group Trist & Bamforth, 1951
- dissipative structure Emery, 1963
- disturbance control Herbst, 1959
- joint optimization Trist et al., 1963
- organizational choice Trist et al., 1963
- primary task Bion, 1950; Rice, 1958
- primary work system Miller, 1959; Rice, 1963
- responsible autonomy Trist & Bamforth, 1951; Wilson & Trist, 1951; Trist et al., 1963
- semi-autonomous work group Herbst, 1962
- socio-technical system Emery, 1959
- task and sentient system Miller & Rice, 1967
- technology, time, territory (boundary) Miller, 1959
- work method/task continuity Trist & Murray, 1958 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 25
- The 'socio-technical system' concept is central in the 'open'-systems approach. Only Emery (1959) made a serious attempt to demarcate and define this concept, unfortunately in an internal paper which has up until now not been integrally published. As Emery (1991, personal communication, p. 3) replied "some 1,600 copies of this document were sent out on request by the mid sixties. The document was summarized in Emery & Trist (1960) and (unacknowledged) in Katz & Kahn (1966)". Excerpts of this key-document also have been published in Davis & Taylor (Eds.) (1972) and in Emery (Ed.) (1978). A sociotechnical system consists of a (in Emery's terms) technical and social sub-system. In Trist's (1981) view these technical and social sub-systems are mutually independent in the sense that the former follows the laws of the natural sciences, and the latter those of the human sciences. However, they are mutually dependent, since they need each other in order to fulfill the production function: this concerns a link of heterogeneity. According to Emery (1959) the economic aspect does not constitute a separate third sub-system as Rice (1958) had previously suggested, but can be considered an instrument used to measure the effectiveness of the sociotechnical whole. - The concept of 'joint optimization' (Emery, 1959) refers to the most important sociotechnical objective: to achieve the 'best match' between technical instrumentation and social work organization. In 1963 Emery pointed to 'the ideal of joint optimization of coupled but independently based social and technical systems'. The sociotechnical entity should be optimized. According to Emery and Trist, attempts with the sole purpose of optimizing either the technical or the social system will necessarily lead to what they call 'sub optimization' of the sociotechnical totality. - The key concept of 'organizational choice' is implicit in the latter notion. In general it refers to the possibility to achieve one common goal through different means. More specifically it indicates that - given a certain technology - different forms of work organization are possible. In fact this rejects the idea of technological determinism. Van Dijck (1981) states that the concept of 'organizational choice' has its direct origins in the biological system concept of 'equifinality' (Von Bertalanffy, 1950) and the cybernetic law of 'requisite variety' (Ashby, 1956).
According to Emery (1959) the application of the open-systems concept to the production organization leads to the distinction of a 'socio-technical system'. A sociotechnical system consists of a social and a technical component. This system considers the technical component as being the 'internal environment' of the organization. After 1959, Emery also continued to work on the forma lization and methodological foundation of STSD as an open-systems approach (d. Emery, 1963a through d/1967). Jordan's message (1963) that man is supple- Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 26 mentary to, and not an extension of machines, inspired him to elaborate the design principle of 'joint optimization'. In the early sixties, Emery also carried out pioneering work in the area of science theory and methodology. For example, he further developed Von Bertalanffy's (1950) 'open-systems' concept, so that a definition of the process of 'active adaptation' was facilitated, and he based STSD on Sommerhoff's (1950) methodology of 'directive correlation' 'as a rigorous framework for contextualism' (see also chapter 5, paragraph 2). The methodology of 'directive correlation' presented by Emery in 1963 belongs to the absolute core of the sociotechnical paradigm, and encompasses in brief the fundamentally symbiotic relationship between an open system and its environment. The way in which these continuously follow from one another, was and still is not fully understood by many people, and it has been Emery in particular who has pointed this out time and time again (see also chapter 5, paragraph 3). Because of their revealing character and despite their difficult accessibility, the epistemological and methodological documents mentioned above have been of essential relevance to anchor STSD as a scientific paradigm. The well-known environment typology can be viewed as being one of the results of this founda tion process (see paragraph 3.3.4).
3.3 Classical STSD
3.3.1 The Inspiration of the Norwegian Industrial Democracy Programme
One of the highlights in the period of Classical STSD was undoubtedly the Norwegian 'Industrial Democracy' (ID) programme, spanning the period between 1962 and 1969. After the mine studies, it was practically impossible in the United Kingdom to carry out action research. The 'Purfleet Power Station' project was an exception (cf. Emery & Marek, 1962). In the early sixties, a favourable climate for larger-scale experiments arose not in the United Kingdom, but in Norway. Employer and employee organizations formed a joint committee early in 1962 in order to study problems surrounding industrial democracy. Later, the government also joined this committee. Research in this area was initially subcontracted to the Trondheim Institute or Industrial Social Research (IFIM), which called in the Tavistock Institute. Eric Trist brought about the initial contacts, but from The Tavistock it was Fred Emery, together with Einar Thorsrud of the Norwegian Work Research Institutes (WRI) in Oslo, who gave actual shape and guidance to the ID project (cf. Emery & Thorsrud, 1964). The most important item of the research programme was formulated as Ita study of the roots of industrial democracy under the condition of personal participation in the work place" (Emery & Thorsrud, 1976, p. 10). The programme included sequential field experiments in which alternative forms of work Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 27 organization (mainly concentrated around semi-autonomous work groups) were developed and tried out; subsequently, their effects on the participation of employees were examined at different levels within the organization. The firms participating in these projects had been carefully selected by the experts of the 'Joint Committee' from the most important sectors in Norway: the metal, paper and chemical industries. This selection was based on a rudimentary diffusion theory (Emery et al., 1958, see also section 4.2.2). After 1967 a minor project was still running in the shipping industry (d. Roggema, 1968). The following is a brief description of the four main projects.
- The first project started in 1964 in Chistiania Spigerverk, a wire draw plant in Oslo (cf. Marek et al., 1964; Emery et al., 1970). Group work was introduced by the research team, but the rewarding system immediately posed all kinds of problems. The change process was not under control in this pilot project. Local unionists and management had too little involvement, and therefore the project was cancelled when after more than a year the research team left the plant. - The second project was started in February 1965 after careful orientation and extensive consultation with unions and management at the chemical pulp department of the Hunsfos paper mill located in Vennesla, Kristiansand (cf. Engelstad et al., 1969; Engelstad, 1970). The change process was better controlled here: the introduction and formation of 'extended groups' was accompanied step-by-step by project and work groups composed of representatives of employees, bosses and management. However, the project really fell into its stride when the research team withdrew to the background and the (top) management committed itself in a more pronounced way. In 1966 the new work organization flourished and the effects of group work and multi-skilled personnel was proved convincingly, but early in 1967 the project got bogged down as a result of a crisis in the paper industry and the associated priority changes in management. In the seventies the Hunsfos employees themselves took over and began to breath new life into the project (cf. Elden, 1979). - The Industrial Democracy programme has faced more setbacks. After an initial refusal of the management to join the programme as a result of political circumstances within the firm, the third ID project was initiated - more than two years after the first application - in December 1965 at NOB0 household appliances/metalware in its establishment in Hommelvik near Trondheim (cf. Engelstad, 1970; Thorsrud, 1972). Here too, an experiment with semi autonomous groups took place, carefully embedded within the organization, and has now been elaborated upon for a new production line for electric radiator heaters. This project has become the actual demonstration project of the ID programme, which attracted many interested people from Norway and Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 28
Sweden. Later, when a new plant had to be put into use in view of higher production, the employees succeeded in maintaining the new organization. - The fourth ID project was initiated in 1967 - at the request of the firm itself - in the chemical concern Norsk Hydro, more specifically in the reorganization of the old and design of a new fertilizer plant in Heroya, Porsgrun (cf. Bregard e t al., 1968; Gulowsen, 1972/1974/1975). This project, in which Louis Davis also participated, was the umpteenth variant to the introduction of a group structure supported by a training programme and a rewarding system adapted to group work. It became a big success: The two plants with this sociotechnically based work organization functioned well until the late seventies.
The four demonstration projects described above received a lot of attention in the literature (cf. Emery & Thorsrud, 1969/1976; Engelstad, 1972; Gustavsen & Hunnius, 1981). Their aim was to indicate the practical feasibility of the new sociotechnical organization principles, but unfortunately these examples were seldom followed. In spite of the fact that the experiments were successful (cf. Gustavsen & Hunnius, 1981), they were largely limited to the department or the plant where they had been started. In their turn, the 'experimental gardens' became isolated from the rest of the organization, which even built up some kind of resistance against such a change. This phenomenon was referred to by Merrelyn Emery (1989) as 'paradoxical inhibition'. Although various diffusion schedules were set up, the ID programme stagnated in Norway around 1970.
3.3.2 The Spreading of Industrial Democracy: Idiom versus Replica
Things were much different in its neighbouring country Sweden, where a cooperation project, the so-called URAF programme, carried by employers and unions similar to that in Norway was initiated. Because of its slow progress, the employers soon decided to start their own programme in more than 500 firms (cf. Jenkins, 1975; SAF, 1975; Lindholm, 1975/1979). They also promoted a socio technical programme when new plants were built (cf. Aguren & Edgren, 1980). Apart from Saab-Scania, where final assembly in parallel loops already has been created in the new gasoline-engine factory in SoderHilje in 1972 (cf. Norstedt & Aguren, 1973), and parallel working has been succesfully installed in car body grinding in Trollhattan (cf. Karlsson, 1979), Volvo in particular has the reputa tion of developing a whole range of pioneering new forms of work organi zation, in which the one in Kalmar (dock assembly/straight-line assembly) has become most well-known (cf. Aguren et al., 1976/1984). For a more elaborate overview of the Volvo projects, see Auer & Riegler (1990). In 1976 the Swedish Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 29
'new factories' project started. A mixed group of 80 researchers and development experts analyzed new techniques for industrial building, process technology, materials handling, lay-out, design of the individual work stations and product design (cf. Lindholm, 1979). Studying the many innovations in practice since 1970, they identified a number of new production system engineering principles like 'flow groups', 'product shops', 'E-, J-, U- and Z-shaped lay-outs, computer controlled machines, robots and modular product designs (d. Burbidge, 1975; Bostrup & Soderberg, 1975; Aguren & Edgren, 1980). They also discovered the 'smaller scale' for factories as an emergent trend (d. Schumacher, 1975) and the use of new micro-electronics in production (for instance in new flexible transport systems in the automotive industry). Based on the new factories survey, four criteria for good production systems have been developed: "1. small independent production units; 2. untying man from machine-pacing; 3. jobs with more personal involvement; 4. reliable, fast production systems" (d. Aguren & Edgren, 1980, p. 105). Focusing on production engineering in the first place, they also fit in especially well with the contemporary STSD approach. In 1965, the Industrial Democracy programme was rehashed in the United Kingdom. The Norwegian example was 'copied', so to speak, at Avon Rubber, Shell and RTZ (personal communication with Emery, 1990). However, one important element was lacking here: a steering group which was composed of employers and employees. "The Shell Philosophy program was an innovation but not a change in trajectory. It was developed because we could not get in the UK a sanctioning body of the union and employer leaders, as we had in Norway" (Emery, 1990, p. 4). The Norwegian ID programme and its variants are characteristic of the period of Classical STSD, in which the expert approach flourishes.
3.3.3 The Methodical Approach towards Industrial Democracy
In giving shape to and working out the ID programme in Norway, a great deal of attention was given to a systematic elaboration of the project approach - amongst other things, because of its demonstration character (d. box 3.2). This has led to important 'break throughs' in the development of methods and concepts. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 30
Box 3.2 The methodological approach of the Industrial Democracy programme in Norway
"1. Establishment of a Joint Committee representing labour and management. 2. Choice of experimental company. 3. Systematic analysis of the company as a system and its environment. 4. Choice of experimental sites. 5. Establishing action committees. 6. Socia-technical analysis of experimental sites: a. description of variations in input and outputs and sources of variations. b. estimation of relative importance of different variations (matrix). c. description of formal organization. d. analysis of communications network. e. base-line measurement of (dis)satisfaction. f. analysis of wage and salary system. 7. Description of company policy. 8. Formulation of program for change, containing: a. multi-skilling of operators. b. developing measures of variations and data analysis methods for control by operators. c. attachment of local repair men. d. institutionalising of meetings. e. training of foremen. f. design and introduction of new bonus arrangement. 9. Institutionalisation of a continued learning and organizational change process. 10. Diffusion of results."
Emery & Thorsrud (1976), p. 150-154
In the ID project approach the whole process of change was defined and monitored in phases and steps. The starting point was a thorough sociotechnical analysis of the business situation found. The notions 'variance' and 'variance control' (d. Engelstad, 1970; Hill, 1971) were highly important here. Based on Herbst's (1959) concept of 'disturbance control', this principle of 'signalling occurring disturbances and their control by the employees themselves as close to the source as possible' was brought into practice through projects. The application of this principle took place by means of the so-called 'variance control matrix', a table with specific disturbance sources as one input and (factual) disturbance controls as the other. This procedure was the first and most important formal sociotechnical method. This 'traditional variance analysis' technique was applied for the first time at the Hunsfos paper mill (cf. box 3.3). Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 31
Box 3.3. A brief illustration of the original 'variance analysis' technique applied in the period 1965-1967 by Engelstad at Hunsfos
If 1. Identifying key success criteria 2. Drawing the layout of the system 3. List the steps in the process in order 4. Identify unit operations 5. Identify variances 6. Construct a variance matrix 7. Identify key variances 8. Construct key variance control table 9. Suggest technical changes 10. Suggest social system changes." Mter: Engelstad (1969 a/b); Engelstad et al. (1969)
A year later the technique was applied from the Tavistock at the Stanlow oil refinery of Shell-UK (d. Foster, 1967; Emery et ai., 1967; Hill, 1971). Although the number of steps mentioned in the literature varies to some extent, this method is known as the 'nine-step method' (d. Emery & Trist, 1978). It was originally developed for application in the processing industry, but was also later used for the analysis of discrete production situations and for mapping administrative processes. Emery was opposed to this. The 'technical variance' analysis method described above was introduced in combination with the design criteria (see box 3.4) in 1967 in (North) America when Louis Davis returned to his country and Eric Trist arrived at UCLA from Tavistock.
3.3.4 An Outline of Basic Concepts in Classical STSD
The period of Classical STSD is characterized by the further elaboration of concepts. As regards the basic concepts, a clear 'idiomising' occurs whereby concepts from systems/rigid thinking are no longer adopted so to speak 'unthinkingly', but rewritten and where necessary interpreted or simplified. From the start of the sixties onwards a large number of publications further developed or refined the basic concepts of Socio-Technical Systems Design. An outline of these concepts can be found in table 3.3. On the basis of the study by Tolman & Brunswik (1935) and using Sommerhoff's (1950) 'directive correlation' methodology and Ashby's (1952) concept of 'joint environment', Emery & Trist (1963/1964/1965) developed an environment typology which is Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 32
Table 3.3 Outline of important basic concepts in Classical STSD
environmental uncertainty Emery & Trist, 1963/1964/1965/1972 Emery, 1967/1977
directed action Chein, 1972
job redesign principles Emery & Thorsrud 1964/1969/1976
motivation theory of directed action Susman, 1976
sociotechnical design principles Emery & Trist, 1972 Herbst, 1974 Emery, 1974/1976 Cherns, 1976/1987
sociotechnical system Cummings & Srivastva, 1977
unit operations Davis & Engelstad, 1966
variance control Engelstad,1970 Hill, 1971 based on 'causal texture', consisting of four categories increasing in complexity and unpredictability. They make a distinction between: 1. placid, randomized environment; 2. placid, clustered environment; 3. disturbed-reactive environ ment; 4. turbulent field. This typology, a logical next step in sociotechnical conceptualization, stresses the increase in (changeable) demands affecting the organization from its environment, since organizations, being viewed as open systems, have a constant exchange relationship with their environment. Adapt ations of the organizational structure to changes in that environment are crucial in order to survive. Jurkovich (1974) refined this scheme further into a system distinguishing between 64 factors. The original Emery & Trist typology was later expanded by the hyper-turbulent 'vortex' variant: 5. vortical environment (Crombie, 1972; McCann & Selsky, 1984; Babiiroglu, 1988).
- Davis & Engelstad (1966) adopted the concept of 'unit operations' which was originally worked out in chemical engineering (A.D. Little Inc., 1965), and used it to describe the work of operators in terms of changes of state in the transformation process in the context of 'technical system analysis', Emery e t al. (1966) rejected the concept in favour of directive correlations (d. doc. 900). - The Norwegian ID programme was the first solid opportunity to test the Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 33
usability of the sociotechnical basic principles developed by the HRC group at Tavistock in actual practice. These try-outs showed that a number of norms were still lacking at work place leveL Therefore, Emery (1963d) and Emery & Thorsrud (1964) developed a series of job redesign principles on the basis of the work of Louis Davis (1957) from the United States (cf. box 3.4), to be used for the actual experiments with Industrial Democracy at the Norwegian company Hunsfos in particular.
Box 3.4 Detailed principles for the redesign of tasks
"Individual level: - optimum variety of tasks within the job. - a meaningful pattern of tasks that gives to each job a semblance of a single overall task. - optimum length of work cycle. - some scope for setting production standards and a suitable feedback of knowledge of results. - the inclusion in the job of auxiliary and preparatory tasks. - tasks include some degree of care, skill, knowledge or effort that is worthly of respect in the community. - the job should make some perceivable contribution to the utility of the product to the consumer. Group level: - providing for 'interlocking' tasks, job rotation or physical proximity. + where there is a necessary interdependence of jobs for technical or psychological reasons. + where the individual job entails a relatively high degree of stress. + where the individual jobs do not make an obvious perceivable contribution to the utility of the end product. - where a number of jobs are linked together by interlocking tasks or job rotation they should as a group: + have some semblance of an overall task. + have some scope for setting standards and receiving knowledge of results. + have some control over the boundary tasks. Over extended social and temporal units: - providing for channels of communication so that the minimum requirements of the workers can be fed into the design of new jobs at an early stage. - providing for channels of promotion to foreman rank which are sanctioned by the workers."
Adapted from: Emery (1963d), p. 1-2; Emery & Thorsrud (1964), p. 103-105; Emery & Thorsrud (1976), p. 15-17 Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 34
These so-called 'structural propositions for joint optimization' served as criteria for the assessment of the existing and newly created work situations. They were repeated in various publications afterwards (d. Thorsrud, 1968; Emery & Thorsrud, 1969/1976; Cummings, 1976; Cummings & Srivastva, 1977; Trist, 1981), and taken as point of departure by Hackman & Lawler (1971) and Hackman & Oldham (1976) in an altered form for the development of their Job Characteristics model. From the perspective of the entire organization Emery (1967), Emery & Thorsrud (1969), Emery & Trist (1972), Thorsrud (1972), Herbst (1975) and Susman (1976) made a set of sociotechnical design principles grouped by Cherns (1976/1987) into a logical consistent whole and complemented them (d. table 3.4). This simplification of concepts used here is remarkable. In the practice of sociotechnical design, the complex and little user-friendly design principle of 'joint optimization' is replaced by the concepts of 'participant design' (Emery, 1967; Emery & Trist, 1972) and 'compatibility' (Cherns, 1976). Similarly, the new multi-functional design principle (Cherns, 1976; 1987) substitutes the complex systems concepts of 'equifinality' and 'directive correlation'. A sidetrack development is Susman's (l976) attempt to develop a motivation theory appropriate to the sociotechnical framework. Based on a link of Klein's (l932) concept of 'object relations' and Chein's (1972) concept of 'directed action', Susman's 'theory of directed action' departs from motives such as behaviour, as actions of human beings who are considered 'purposeful sys tem'. Finally, during the period of Classical STSD a more acceptable definition of a sociotechnical system is also established as being a symbiosis between a technical system consisting of equipment and process layout, and a social system in which people carry out the tasks:
"A socio-technical system is a non-random distribution of social and technical components that co-act in physical space-time for a specific purpose."
Cummings & Srivastva (1977), p. 1
This definition leaves room for both an open- and a closed-system perspective. Moreover, it allows for consideration of steady states in both social and technical systems, at different aggregation levels. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 35
Table 3.4 Outline of sociotechnical design principles of Classical STSD. * emphasis on process of change.
- compatibility /participant design *) (Emery, 1974/1976; Cherns, 1976/1987)
- minimum critical specification (inspired on Beurle, 1962) (Herbst, 1974; Cherns, 1976/1987)
- the socio-technical criterion/variance control (Emery & Thorsrud, 1969; Cherns, 1976/1987)
- the multifunctional principle/redundancy of functions (Emery, 1967; Emery & Trist, 1972; Cherns, 1976/1987)
- boundary location (Susman, 1976; Cherns, 1976/1987)
- information flow (Cherns, 1976/1987)
- support congruence (Cherns,1976/1987)
- design and human values (Thorsrud, 1972; Cherns, 1976)
- incompletion/Forth Bridge principle/ double loop learning *) (Cherns, 1976/1987; Argyris & Schon, 1978)
- power and authority/Admirable Crichton principle (Cherns, 1987)
- transitional organization *) (Cherns, 1987)
- Elaboration of the concept of 'variance control' (Engelstad, 1970; Hill, 1971) is highly relevant to the development of Classical STSD. Based on Herbst's (1959) concept of 'disturbance control', this principle of the control loop in projects was further developed and put into operation. Recently Pas more (1988) has once more systematically listed a set of 'technical system design principles', which is largely based on this concept.
1. "Variances should be controlled at their source. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Three - Draft - August 1992 36
2. Boundaries between units should be drawn to fadlitate variance control. 3. Feedback systems should be as complex as the variances which need to be controlled. 4. The impact of variances should be isolated in order to reduce the likelihood of total system failure. 5. Technical expertise should be directed to the variances with the greatest potential for systems disruption. 6. Technological flexibility should match product variability. 7. Technology should be appropriate to the task. 8. Inputs should be monitored as carefully as outputs. 9. Core absorbs support. 10. The effectiveness of the whole is more important than the effectiveness of the parts."
Pasmore (1988), p. 62-68
3.3.5 An Impression of Projects as Reported in the Literature
During the Classical STSD period many hundreds of sociotechnical projects were carried out, both in so-called 'greenfield' sites (new factories and offices) and in redesign situations. A schematic representation of studies published during this period can be found in Table 3.5. Some forty-five studies originating from thirteen countries have been selected from the literature, on the basis of completeness of the categories used (starting year, company name, type of company, department, city/district, country and reference). All studies were carried out before 1980. An excellent survey of over 120 work system design 'experiments' - mostly from Europe, Australia and North America - has been published by Taylor (1977a/b). The majority of these projects can be labelled as Classical STSD (re-)design cases. We conclude that Classical Sodo-Technical Systems Design is extremely widespread, both in terms of geography and in terms of company type. It should be emphasized here that this is just a small pick from the various projects launched during the period of Classical STSD. Year Company Type of Company Department City, District Country Authors 1962 Philips Television factory Assembly Eindhoven Netherlands Van Beek (1964) 1962 PCGD Post giro Current account The Hague Netherlands Van Beinum (1963) 1964 Hunsfos Paper mill Chemical pulp Vennesla, Kristiansand Norway Emery & Thorsrud (1969/1976): Engelstad (1972) 1964 Christiania Spigerverk Steel industry Wire drawing Oslo Norway Marek et al. (1964); Emery & Thorsrud (1976) 1964 Akan Aluminium Aluminium factory Sheltered experiment Arvida, Kingston, Ontario Canada Archer (1975) 1964 Coras Iompair Eireann Transport company Bus service Dublin Ireland Van Beinum (1966) 1965 Akan Aluminium Aluminium factory Reduction division Arvida, Kingston, Ontario Canada Gagnon & Blutot (1969); Chevalier (1972) 1965 Nobe Domestic appliances Electrical panel heaters Trondheim Norway Thorsrud (1970); Emery & Thorsrud (1976) 1965 Philips Audio/Video Assembly Eindhoven Netherlands Does de Willebois (1968) 1965 PCGD Post giro Punch centres Leeuwarden/Tilburg Netherlands Van Beinum, et al. (1968) 1966 Northern Electric Advanced devices Montreal, Ottawa Canada Gabarro & lorsch (1968) 1967 Shipping Merchant ships Norway Roggema (1968); Herbst (1971) 1967 ShellUK Oil refinery Microwax plant Stanlow, Cheshire England Burden (1972/1975): Emery et al. (1967) 1967 Norsk Hydro Processing industry New fertilizer plant Heroya, Porsgrunn Norway Bregard et al. (1968): Gulowsen (1974) 1968 Gaines General Foods Pet food factory New plant design Topeka, Kansas USA Ketchum (1975): Walton (1972/1977) 1968 Coming Glass Works R&D department Medfield, Mass. USA Beer & Huse (1972) 1968 Shell Oil refinery Highly automated plant Teesport England Hill (1971) 1969 KNTU Textile ind ustry Spinning mill Bamshoeve Twente Netherlands Allegro (1971) 1969 Philips Television factory Assembly Eindhoven Netherlands Den Hertog & Kerkhof (1973) 1969 SaabScania Carrossery factory Grinding bodies Trollhiittan Sweden Karllson (1979); Logue (1981) 1970 Orrcfos Glass Works Polishing Sweden Aguren & Edgren (1980) 1970 Fokker Aircraft factory Dordrecht Netherlands In 't Veld (1984) 1971 SaabScania Engine factory Saab 99 motor-assembly SOdertiilje Sweden Norstedt & Aguren (1973): Aguren & Egren (1980) 1971 British Oxygen Welding/heating eq. B1etchley England Burbidge (1979) 1972 Secours lARD Insurance Paris France Pionet (1979) 1972 Olli vetti Components factory Ivrea Italy Butera (1975) 1972 Sherwin-Williams Paint factory Automotive coating plant Richmont, Kentucky USA Poza &: Markus (1980) 1972 Bang and Olufsen Audio-Video Pick-up assembly Stuer Denmark Larsen (1979) 1973 General Motors Automobile factory Assembly division Tarrytown, New York USA Walfish (1977); Rundell (1978) 1973 General Motors Automobile factory Fisher body plant Grand Rapids, Mich. USA Robison (1977) 1973 General Motors Automobile factory Entire concern Detroit, Michigan USA Miller (t 978); Landen (1977/1978) 1973 Volvo Automobile factory Car assembly Kalmar Sweden Aguren et al. (1976/1984) 1973 Rushton Coal mine Face work Pennsylvania USA Trist et aI. (1977) 1974 Philips Machine factory Tool department Eindhoven Netherlands Alink & Wester (1978) 1974 ESAB Welding equipment Semi-automatics shop Uxa Sweden Aguren & Edgren (1980) 1974 F1akt AB Ventilation equipment Production Ljungarum Sweden Aguren & Edgren (1980) 1975 SEMA Pension fund Executive services Paris France Lefebvre & ROlloy (1976): Legros (1976) 1975 Philips Machine factory Mechanical workshops Eindhoven Netherlands Den Hertog & Wester (1979) 1975 Shell Chemical plant Polypropylene plant Sarnia, Ontario Canada Davis & Sullivan (1980); Halpern (1984) 1975 Centraal Beheer Insurance company "Life" department Apeldoorn Netherlands Allegro & De Vries (1979); Glas (1980) 1976 Rolls Royce Automobile factory Engineering works Derby England Mumford & Henshall (1979) 1976 Tannoy Audio Accounting Coatbridge Scotland Weir (1980) 1977 Trebor Sharps Audio loud speaker departm. Woodford England Birchall et al. (1978) 1977 SEB-Pyrenees Domestic appliances Computer department lourdes France Grenier (1979) 1978 Siemens Pneumatic control eq. Karlsruhe Germany Schlitzberger (1978) 1979 Sulzer Turbine paddles Winterthur Swilserland Warnecke &: Lederer (1979) Chapter Four STSD: Modern Variants of the Paradigm
Table of contents Page
4.1 Introduction 38 4.2 Variant A: Participative Design 39 4.2.1 The Australian Solution to the Problem of Diffusion 39 4.2.2 PD and the Educational Approach towards Learning 43 4.2.3 Further Spreading of the Diffusion Model 47 4.3 Variant B: Integral Organizational Renewal 49 4.3.1 The Dutch Solution to the Problem of Integral Design 49 4.3.2 lOR and the Balance Model Based on Social 52 Interaction 4.3.3 The Participative Process of Organizational Renewal 56 of the Firm 4.4 Variant C: Democratic Dialogue 59 4.4.1 The Scandinavian Solution to the Problem of Diffusion 59 4.4.2 The Concept of Democratic Dialogue and the Theory 61 of Integrating Language and Practice 4.4.3 The DD Trajectory: Creating Scope by Engaging in a 64 Broad Ecological Process 4.5 Modern STSD in North America 67
4.1 Introduction
In chapter two the historic development of STSD is separated in three distinctive phases. In this chapter we will describe in detail the phase of Modern STSD. This trajectory can be further divided in four parallel tracks. In paragraph 4.2 Participative Design is presented. This Modern STSD variant originated in Australia. In paragraph 4.3 Integral Organizational Renewal is described. This Modern STSD alternative has been developed in The Netherlands. In paragraph 4.4 Democratic Dialogue is delineated. This approach emerged in Scandinavia. In Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 39 paragraph 4.5 Modern STSD in North America is exhibited.
4.2 Variant A: Participative Design
The first alternative of Modern STSD is called Participative Design (PD). This variant intentially breaks with the Classical expert-led STSD tradition. Being a genuine 'do-it-yourself' approach with only a minimum of theory of concepts, PD is aimed at participative design without the help of any expert/ consultant whatsover. PD has been developed in Australia.
4.2.1 The Australian Solution to the Problem of Diffusion
When Fred Emery returned to Australia in 1969 after spending a period of ten years in Europe, he was swamped with applications for projects similar to those he had carried out in the United Kingdom and Norway. To some extent, he was forced to have firms set up and implement their own design projects. Inspired by the good experiences with a 'vertical project group' (top-down cross section of the hierarchy) at Hunsfos, Emery developed the so-called 'vertical slice approach'. This approach implied the upgrading of 'Industrial Democracy' up to the level of the organization being an entity through the formation of 'self managing design groups', consisting of employees, foremen and managers at various levels, who cooperated on the basis of equality. Emery had learned a great deal from the negative ID diffusion experience in Norway, and attributed the disappointing results mainly to the expert approach used by the researchers. The projects had been insufficiently supported by the (persons directly concerned within) firms. Such an expert approach was no longer acceptable in view of the changed spirit of times (the students' rows in Paris were still fresh in everyone's memory). Sociotechnical researchers like Emery began more and more to understand that an entirely new democratic system of value was hidden at the basis of the semi-autonomous work group in the UK and the principles for task redesign developed in Norway. Emery & Thorsrud (1969, p. 105) initially spoke of "a limited number of general psychological requirements", but Emery (1977, p. 68) refer to Ita set of workable and relevant values C.. ), things C.. ) valued in work regardless of sex, nationality or race". He summarizes these values as follows (p. 68): "1. Freedom to participate in decisions directly affecting their work activity; 2. A chance to learn on the job, and go on learning; 3. Optimal variety; 4. Mutual support and respect of their work colleagues; 5. A socially meaningful task; 6. Leading to some desirable future." Trist (1976) also talks about new values, which enable us to cope with the , Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 40 increasing complexities concerning the environment, such as self-actualization, self-expression, and 'capacity for joy'. The technique developed by Emery in 1971, referred to as the 'deep slice' method of Participant Design, enables employees, (middle) management and union representatives to jointly take over the task and organization design from the start of the project. This was supposed to eliminate any resistance against change. The initial applications of this technique took place at the South Australian Meat Corporation SAMCOR (Yearling Hall), the Royal Australian Airforce, and Imperial Chemical Industries leI. Even before the now well known, 'little golden book' consisting of 14 pages was published (d. Emery, F. & Emery, M., 1974/1975) the method had been 'exported' to India (d. Nilakant & Rao, 1976), The Netherlands, and Norway. The long expected diffusion came about in Norway after all in 1972, because the firms assumed control of the development themselves, but not until the disappointed researchers had retired. At the core of PD is an explicit diffusion strategy, which came about gradually, and which was recorded by Herbst (1976) and Emery, M. & Emery, F. (1978). The starting point of this strategy was the diffusion model developed by Emery et al. (1958) for an agricultural renewal programme in South-East Australia. Further diffusion took place after innovations had been successfully introduced with those farms that were respected most. Within the agricultural community, which was characterized by an aggregate structure with relatively homogeneous components, these model firms were considered as being a sufficiently large 'critical mass'. Thoralf Qvale (1976) has made a concise summary of the findings of Emery et al. (1958), (see box 4.1).
Box 4.1 Results of the diffusion study of Emery et al., 1958
!la. Diffusion of new principles must start within the existing structure, and in a way flow from one level of leaders to the next. b. Generally, external scientific advisors will only influence the diffusion process through the leaders. c. Oral and written communication is rarely enough to lead to change, except on the level of leaders. d. Outside the level of leaders diffusion depends upon the force of the example. In order to be effective the demonstration must be such that everyone can see the similarity with his own condition. e. A well-respected person or group must be behind the example." Qvale (1976), p. 459
With the aim of explaining the (Norwegian) democracy experiments, Philip Herbst (1976) further elaborated this diffusion theory. The characteristics of Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 41 the diffusion process depend upon the structure of the total system. The network concept is put central in Herbst's theory. According to him (1976, p. 33) a network group can be described as being the reverse of an autonomous work group. It is a temporary organization of similar thinking people at different locations, who meet occasionally for consultation. Such a meeting is sometimes referred to in the literature as a 'flocking session' (cf. Davis & Cherns, 1975). Flocking is a phenomenon which involves different people with common interests coming together for a few days to intensely confer, without making new arrangements for another meeting. According to Herbst (1976) flocking by members of a network is likely to occur, and it supports a network's objective, namely maintaining 'long-term directive correlations', The process consists mainly of stimulating one another in reaching a common, though not (fully) defined objective. The primary function is its common learning process. Emery, M. & Emery, F. (1978) base their PD paradigm on an open-system model, which in their view is applicable to the diffusion process (see Figure 4.1). The 'system' is composed here of the members of a PD workshop, search conference or network of firms, the 'environment' consists of 'the extended social field of directive correlations' (Emery & Trist, 1981). In other words, the changed society as a whole. The input function is called 'learning', the output function is called 'planning'. Both Merrelyn and Fred Emery state in general that the level of the environment complexity determines the form assumed by the learning and planning functions in practice. In a competitive 'type III' environment (,disturbed, reactive', compare paragraph 3.3.4) the learning function will assume the form of 'problem solving', and the planning function that of 'optimizing, using only technical and economic criteria'. In a turbulent 'type IV' environment (rapid, unpredictable changes, disturbed ecological chains) learning takes place through 'puzzling' (Angyal, 1965), and planning through the active and adaptive development of 'desirable future scenarios' (Emery, 1977). Puzzling is a form of learning - in the literature it is also referred to as 'double loop learning' (cf. Argyris, 1970/1976; Argyris & Schon, 1978) - in which individuals try to discover the more fundamental key questions in a non hierarchical, friendly ambience. They try to find trends in an excess of data, filtering 'the leading part' (Emery, 1967). Planning subsequently occurs step-wise plotting, evaluating and adapting a strategy consisting of jointly formulated 'desirable future scenarios'. According to Einar Thorsrud (1972) this type of policy-making is a form of active, adaptive planning, which is basically a continuous learning process. The actual motor behind PD is the pleasure experienced during this learning process. Rather than assuming an expectant attitude, one is willing to get to work. In the PD workshop, members start , Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 42 working as a group to adapt the working situation (in their own firm) all by themselves; in the search conference, participants develop future scenarios.
L22 (autonomous environment functions) The environment itself is a constant process of change (external dynamics)- / Lll """" "\ (subsystem functiony L12 I The system itself is (output function) \ also part of a constant J planning ~ process of change The system changes ~ \ (internal dynamics;! the environment '- L2l (input function) -- learning The environment changes the system
Figure 4.1 An open-systems model for diffusion
Legend: - system = PD group or network, search conference; - environment = societal institutions and firms; - the indication 'L' stands for systematic coherence; - the code 'I' stands for system; code '2' stands for environment. Adapted from: Emery, M. & Emery, F., 1978, p. 259/260; Emery, M" 1986, p. 416; Emery, M., 1989, p. 183.
Another important item is that they do not necessarily aim for consensus: the aim is 'rationalization of conflict' rather than 'resolution' (d. Emery, M. 1987). One tries to arrive at common starting points in a broad area. According to Merrelyn Emery (1989), the process of PD apply cross-culturally, in contrast with its product (actual design as a concrete result). This process is described as the creation of possibilities for open-ended self generative learning, 'learning to learn', of 'searching for ends instead of means'. PD is an evolutionary process which involves the democratization of the working situation. It is certainly not a 'T group' training oriented towards personal relationships! It is a type of 'demo cratic planning', described by Roos (1974, p.218) as "Man's conscious and collective self-control of the development of a system". Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft August 1992 43
The emphasis being placed on the diffusion process rather than on the changes regarding the content itself is a main characteristic of the period of Modern STSD. In this context, one speaks of the difference with the previous phase as a 'figure-ground reversal' (d. Herbst, 1976; Emery, M. & Emery, F., 1978; Emery, M., 1986). The 'figures' refer to our factual structures (the plants, offices, institutions), the 'ground' to our lifestyles and values. The object of change is reversed, a change in attitude is at stake now: learning to participate. Max Elden (1979) has summarized the characteristics of PD step by step (see box 4.2).
Box 4.2 Characteristics of the period of Modern STSD
"1. A design team representative of (if not elected by) the employees: at the very least, employees agree to a change effort and union representatives usually are redesign team members. 2. Employees receive some training in work redesign concepts and techniques. 3. Participatory search processes initiate the change effort and are not necessarily limited to the design team. 4. The design team develops its own criteria and alternatives (little reliance on installing some pre-designed package). 5. All employees concerned participate at least in evaluating alternatives. 6. There is a high degree of participation in all phases of the redesign process (planning, developing alternatives, evaluating, etc.) which is focused and paced by the people affected (not primarily by management or change experts). 7. Outside experts have a share learning role that changes over time (from some teaching to learning with the participants and eventually to learning from them). 8. There is a supportive network of co-operative relations between design teams from different organizations who learn from each other's experience (they are not entirely dependent on experts for the necessary learning)."
Elden (1979a), p. 250-251; Elden (1979c), p. 373-374
4.2.2 PD and the Educational Approach towards Learning
'Participative Design' (PO) is described by Merrelyn Emery as being "an environment for conceptual and experiential learning about democratic learning organizations" (d. Emery, M., 1989, p. 114). In the seventies, two such environments have been further elaborated upon: the Participative Design Workshop (Emery & Emery, 1975; Crombie, 1978; Williams, 1982), and the Search Conference (Emery & Emery, 1978; Williams, 1979; Emery, M" 1982; Crombie, 1985). - The 'Participative Design' (PD) Workshop is a meeting lasting anywhere from 1.5 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 44
to 3 days in which four to ten members selected from all layers of the organization ('deep slice') are brought together in order to map the working situation on the basis of equality and under the guidance of a so-called facilitator. The basis of its content which is at the core of this self-managing design group can be found in part I of the 'little golden book' (Emery & Emery, 1975). This part places the six psychological requirements mentioned above next to the 'genotypes' of the bureaucratic ('redundancy of parts') and the democratic ('redundancy of functions') structures, and gives a concise description of the advantages of the latter. The methodical basis which is at the core of the operation of the 'total design team', can be found in part II of the golden book. The different personnel functions are assessed on the basis of the six psychological job requirements, and the process flow is analyzed. Also, training requirements are derived from a so-called 'multi-skilling table', which evaluated skills per person for each (group) task (see table 4.1). The aim of the PD workshop is to achieve structural organizational change by those involved. Its set-up is 'anti-expert-oriented', and is based on the assumption that 'the most adequate and effective designs come from those whose jobs are under review' (Emery & Emery, 1975). Emphasis is not placed on content, but on the participative process, in which the members of the organization create their own evolutionary learning process. A specific collective learning environment for Participative Design is the so called 'Development of Human Resources' (DHR) Workshop (d. Emery, M., 1988). This is a training programme given at a university for (recently composed) teams from various organizations. For an illustration of the content of such a workshop, see box 4.3. A PD workshop ahead of its time was the informal European network group which was composed in the early sixties by sociotechnical researchers from the very beginning. Apart from researchers from the UK and Norway, this group included Hans van Beinum and Mauk Mulder from The Netherlands. - Continuing on from the PD workshop, Fred and Merrelyn Emery developed the so-called 'Search Conference'(d. Emery & Emery, 1978; Williams, 1979; Emery, M., 1982; Crombie, 1985). This is a non-hierarchical, policy-preparing meeting based on the principle of 'redundancy of functions' involving a maximum of 35 persons, who cooperate two to three days in order to give shape to the future on the basis of equality. The sociotechnical search conference makes use of the indirect or 'broad front' approach, and is directed towards the joint development of 'desirable and probable future scenarios'. Special attention is given to the possibilities and limitations of the environ ment, with the history of the firm taken into account. This participative form of pro-active planning assumes that people are pragmatic and strive for meta- Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 45
objectives (ideals); that they are willing to learn and wish to determine their own future. Its explicit objectives are: establishing policy, planning a'nd learn ing in a non-dominant democratic structure. The very first search conference ahead of its time was held at Tavistock in 1959, when Emery and Trist listed the theories of Bion, Selznick and Asch. In 1975 a search conference was organized to plan a new projected town of Canberra, called Gungahlin (d. National Capital Development Commission, 1973; Emery, M., 1982).
Box 4.3 The programme of a Development of Human Resources (DHR) Workshop
"Plenary, Final briefing, expectations Collection of data about changes in the extended social field
Small groups work on desirable and probable futures Connections are made to democratic structures
Plenary. Briefing on concepts and tools
Mirror Design Groups. Two disparate groups work together A + B analyse and redesign A's organization. C + D do the same for C's
Plenary presentation and discussion of designs
Reverse mirror groups. A + B redesign B's; C + D redesign D's
Plenary reports as above
Team groups and/ or plenary. Next steps. Strategy." after Emery, M. 1982; p. 296; Emery, M., 1989, p. 115
- As mentioned before, another central device in the PD-approach is the so called 'multi-skilling table' (d. table 4.1b). This is a useful technique to analyse the (acquired) skills of people in a semi-autonomous work group, in order to plan an appropriate training programme. As part of the analysis the personnel functions are judged against the psychological criteria, mentioned in para graph 4.2.1 (d. table 4.1a). The multi-skilling table is also applicable in the Classical STSD approach. Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 46
Table 4.1 Skill analysis techniques of the PD approach
a. Class of job or skill grouping
Psychological criteria Filing Recep- Account- scores for job satisfaction Typists Clerks tionist ant range
1. Decision Making -2 -4 3 5 -5/+5 2. Variety Optimal -4 -5 0 2 -5/+5 3. Learning -2 -3 1 4 -5/+5 4. Mutual Support 3 3 1 0 0/10 and Respect 5. Meaningfulness 3 1 5 7 0/10 6. Desirable Future 4 2 2 9 0/10
Emery, F. & Emery, M. (1975), p. 46; Emery, M. (1982), p. 306; Emery, M. (1989), p. 107
b. Multi-skilling Table
Individuals Sills required for group task in the group J K L M number typing design art machining publication of skills work costing
Mary x x 2 Jim x x x 3 John x x 2 Alice x 1 Joe x x x x 4 Jenny x 1
Number 6 2 3 2 with skill
Emery, F., & Emery, M. (1975), p. 47; Emery, M. (1982), p. 307, Emery, M. (1989), p. 108 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 47
4.2.3. Further Diffusion of the Diffusion Model
PD as Modern STSD has not been as widespread (yet) as its classical predecessor. This is probably connected with the anti-expert character of the new approach, which puts consultancy agencies on a sidetrack. In the seventies, out side Australia PD workshop projects were confined mainly to Scandinavia, India, Great Britain and The Netherlands. Only a minority of these projects have been documented in the literature.
- Even before the 'golden book' was published, 'off-site/do it yourself' workshops were regularly held in Norway as from 1972. Per Engelstad and Lars 0degaard (1979) reported the monitoring of five of such consecutive year groups, each consisting of six teams from a total of 25 different firms (mass manufacturing, processing industry, batch industry and service sector). In 1975, Max Elden initiated a PD project in a bank (d. Elden, 1974/1976/1977/1979b; Herbst, 1975; Herbst & Getz, 1977). In the shipping industry, the Work Research Institutes (WRI) in Oslo also performed several PD projects (d. Roggema & Thorsrud, 1974; Rogne, 1974; Roggema & Hammarstrem, 1975). Johansen (1975/1976/1979) reported on a PD project on the newly built merchant ship/trading vessel MS 'Balao'. Engelstad & Rogne (1977) described a search conference in the Norwegian off-shore industry. New legislation in Norway provided support for the PD paradigm, also in education, municipal adminis tration and hospitals. - The same holds for Sweden (d. Qvale, 1975; Mills, 1978). Unions are allowed to negotiate with the management regarding all kinds of items. With the Industrial Democracy Act, which was adopted by Parliament in June 1976, Sweden led the way in Europe (cf. Gunzburg & Hammarstrom, 1979). As mentioned in paragraph 3.3.2, the diffusion of Industrial Democracy projects in Sweden were successful. In 1975 the so-called Demos project started (d. Sandberg, 1979). The project is concerned with democratic decision-making and (corporate) planning and is aimed at supporting the activities of unions at various levels (centrally and locally - from work place analysis to negotia tions). This project is backed by more fundamental research into the precon ditions and limitations relative to democracy, planning and self-determi nation (Sandberg, 1976). - In Denmark projects were performed between 1969 and 1973 which could fall under Modern STSD. Agersnap et al. (1974) report a number of experiments involving new kinds of cooperation in seven firms in the metal industry (N. Foss' Electric, Hilleroed; Hejbjerg Machine Factory, Aarhus; Philips Radio, Copenhage~; Danfoss, unknown location; Haustrup, unknown location; Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 48
Nordic Cable and Thread Manufacturers NKT, Glostrup; Scandinavian Air lines System, Copenhagen). - Participative Design was also successful in India (d. Nilakant & Rao, 1976). In the mid-seventies, the National Labour Institute (NLI) organized seven PD workshops throughout the country. In 1975 a classical Industrial Democracy project was initiated at Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL) in Tiruchirapalli. In 1976, this project was extended with a three-day workshop organized by the BHEL in conjunction with Einar Thorsrud. Apart from a number of departments of this firm, representatives of the National Bank, the postal services and an insurance company participated in this workshop. As Nilakant and Rao (1976) illustrate, Emery and Emery's (1974) directions were closely followed, in terms of both the workshop's organization and the method applied (evaluation of psychological job requirements and the use of the multi-skilling table for outlining a training programme). Subsequently, PD workshops were held in the National Bank and the insurance company. - Great Britain also gained a great deal of experience with PD. From the Tavistock, projects were carried out from 1974 until 1979 within the Job Satisfaction Research Programme, in conjunction with the Work Research Unit (WRU) of the Ministry of Employment. Researchers actually made use of the PD workshop at Associated Biscuits in Bermondsey. Supported by Margaret Butteriss and Archie MacKenzie of WRU, Mary Weir (1979) organized a PD workshop in Glasgow. Once again, Einar Thorsrud acted as introducing speaker for the teams coming from five Scottish firms (Scottish & New Castle Breweries Ltd., Edinburgh; Philips Ltd., Hamilton; Ladybird Ltd., Glasgow; Ailsa Trucks Ltd., unknown location; Tannoy Products Ltd., location unknown). The work of Enid Mumford is worth mentioning here. She applied the participative approach in a British supplier company, a bank, an engineering firm and an insurance company (d. Mumford, 1979). Her explicit line of approach included the introduction of computer systems in office settings. - In the United States and Canada, a careful application of Participative Design has only recently emerged (personal communication with Fred Emery, 1990).
Because of the lack of almost any academic case studies or publications detailing discrete sites, it is impossible to present a detailed list of Australian PD projects. As Merrelyn Emery is putting it: "With the advent of PD, responsibility and control passed from academics and practitioners of PD to the organizations. It's their business, not ours. We don't follow up unless specifically requested and then it's usually only if they want help to go further. Often we don't know how it's gone and sometimes we find out years later. Only recently we discovered that , Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 49 a small team who attended a PD workshop in the early seventies had set up a green field site out in the country which is working well to this day and is used to demonstrate democratic organizations to students at the local agricultural college" (author's personal correspondence with Merrelyn Emery, 1992). The Australian solution to the problem of diffusion apparently is very successfuL According to Merrelyn Emery Australia definitely has moved into the phase of implementation and diffusion.
4.3 Variant B: Integral Organizational Renewal
The second alternative of Modern STSD is called Integral Organizational Renewal (lOR). Unlike Participative Design this approach offers very detailed structural principles in terms of design content (d. De Sitter, 1989b; De Sitter e t ai., 1990), while at the same time specifying a theory of change by means of worker participation after training. lOR is a direct reaction to the static and partial concepts of Classical STSD, and in essence a Dutch development with some roots in German Sociology (Luhmann, 1972).
4.3.1 The Dutch Solution to the Problem of Integral Design
In the beginning of the seventies, in Holland De Sitter developed a new approach to qualitative system dynamics, which he called "a system theoretical paradigm of social interaction" (d. De Sitter, 1973). This became the foundation of the Modern STSD variant in The Netherlands. At first it appeared a rather complex and abstract, but clear-cut approach which has been worked out in more detail and incidentally applied in expert-led projects (d. De Sitter, 1974a/b/1978/ 1980a/b; De Sitter & Heij, 1975; Swets & Van der Zwaan, 1975; Van der Zwaan & Vermeulen, 1974; Van der Zwaan et ai., 1974). From the end of the seventies, the Dutch variant of STSD became increasingly user-friendly and in the late eighties developed into the practical design approach of 'Integral Organizational Renewal' (lOR). According to De Sitter (1989a), an integral approach is a structure approach by definition. By 'structure' he means that part of a process which is relatively invariant in time (nature of the operations, norms). The core of an integral approach is "that on the basis of a strategic orientation external function demands are determined. C.. ) Problems in the business management are evaluated in the light of the function demands ... If (De Sitter, 1989a, p. 36). He refers to settling those problems that can be solved independently of one another as 'improvement' (partial change in structure), and to settling interdependent problems as 'renewal' (integral change in structure). In De Sitter's view, renewal basically means the reordering of process functions with \ Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 50 respect to order flows. De Sitter (1989a) typifies lOR as a fundamental shift from the old functional production concept to the new flow-oriented production concept. The Dutch approach has been influenced much by the 'new factory' project (compare paragraph 3.3.2). De Sitter maintained direct contacts with his Swedish colleagues in this respect. In the early eighties, new opportunities arose for the application of STSD, because the quality of work was no longer viewed as a social luxury, but as an essential foundation for a flexible production organization. De Sitter observes these developments, and places the production and work organization in a socio economic perspective (De Sitter, 1980). He was the first to connect themes as the quality of working life, efficiency and effectiveness, as well as social binding and cooperation in a model. Following up on that he pleads for 'new factories and offices' based on modern STSD (De Sitter, 1981a). In these publications he stands up for more policy-based integration of the areas of attention of the quality of work (with stress and alienation as problems), the quality of the organization (with flexibility and controllability as bottlenecks), and the quality of the internal industrial relations (with employee turnover, absenteeism and labour conflicts as central issues).
Table 4.2 Three types of partial analysis in the study of participation
type of democratic object of refom object of expected quality level approach 'idea' analysiS function
the engineering participation primary pro- production organizational quality of approach in managerial cess regulation, control performance organization functions boundary structure control betweer work units
the personnel integration of autonomy and task work quality of approach productive and discretion structure motivation work regulative task functions
the union- represen ta tion regulation of structures of stability of quality of management of collective working con- collective re- cooperation, labour approach interests ditions and presen ta tion, effective relations the rules and conflict distribution procedures regulation of rewards
De Sitter (1981b), p. 6
He points out that the issue of industrial democracy has traditionally been frag- Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 51 mented in the above-mentioned problem areas which are separately studied by psychologists, sociologists, economists and organization scientists. This has resulted in the well-known 'engineering, personnel and union-management approach', having as respective orientations isolated improvement of the quality of the organization, work and industrial relations (d. table 4.2). De Sitter very well recognized the functional relevance of participation in decision-making as a vehicle for industrial democracy in order to have a syner getic effect on the above-mentioned problem areas. For an operational definition of participation, see box 4.4.
Box 4.4 Indicators of participation
!la. the number of regulative functions performed;
b. the levels of regulation implied in a work role: - internal regulation; - external regulation;
c. effectiveness or influence: - task complexity; - substitutability;
d. symmetrical interdependence". De Sitter (1981b), p. 8-12
Integral design is at the core of the lOR approach. A basic problem is the ability to control the production system as a whole; the objective of STSD is to improve this ability by means of changes in structure. The balance model acts as the core of lOR in terms of content; interference and control capacity are its central concepts. As is summarized in box 4.5, lOR is about the explanation and design of a new architecture of structure for an entire organization which will improve its future controllability under turbulent environmental conditions. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 52
Box 4.5 JOR as Modern STSD
lilA truly integral sociotechnical design is structural design. (... ) It is therefore the specific architecture of a systems structure which should be viewed as the core of sociotechnical theory and design. 2.Sociotechnical theory should therefore integrate its explanatory function (how a specific architecture of structure determines the opportunities for coordination, adaptation and innovation of system-internal and external functions) with its design function (how alternative architectures change such opportunities in which direction). 3.C .. } no speculative assumptions are made as to basic specifiable human needs nor social system values. Social, rather than individual, structure is viewed as preconditional for the development of whatever needs and values as they come into being and change in the course of time (... ). 4. The basic problem is the control of future system states, at all levels of aggregation: individual, organization or network. C.. ) As we do not know what the future will bring us, we do not know the specific objects and problems to be controlled. Therefore, the designer's goal must be to improve a systems 'controllability': its generic capacity to control C.. ). S.Combining the notion of controllability with the notion of integral design, the conclusion must be that STSD should study the manner in which alternative architectures of structure influence systems' controllability."
De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 10
4.3.2 lOR and the Balance Model Based on Social Interaction
As a reaction to the static and partial nature of Classical STSD theorizing (in terms of needs and values) De Sitter (1973) developed a Modern STSD para digm which he based on social interaction. Having understood the basic message which came out of the important Habermas-Luhmann debate in German Socio logy (d. Habermas-Luhmann, 1971) he used Luhmann's (1967) social systems theory as point of departure for his rather abstract, so-called 'balance model' (cf. De Sitter, 1974). Social interaction is basic in this new approach. De Sitter's contribution to Modern STSD is a structural theory of content about the division of labour and its effects on 'interference probabilities' (cf. box 4.6), Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 53
Box 4.6 Some essentials of De Sitter's balance model
"1 An organization is modelled as a network of interaction cycles in which a multitude of functions are produced. 2. The network would be 'balanced' if all inputs and outputs involved in the interaction cycles were contingent, i.e. shape opportunities for the partners to produce required outputs by conversion of received inputs according to established norms. (... ) 3. For each individual or sub-system in a system, or for each system in a network of systems, an input is central to the degree that its deviation would block the normative completion of the remaining 'complementary' interaction cycles and their respective functions C.. ). 4. Thus, process disturbances in interaction processes can always be analyzed in terms of interference between two or more interaction cycles. 5. Maintaining the precarious complementary balance between interaction cycles by reduction of interference and interference (disturbance) probabilities is therefore the basic practical setting of the problem of control in organizations ( ... ). 6. Reduction of actual interference can be defined as operational control, whereas the reduction of interference probabilities requires structural change. Systems may differ with respect to their 'probability of interference' which is a structural trait related to the specific architecture of a system's structure."
De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 10-11
As said before, the balance model is in the center of lOR's theory of con cepts (d. De Sitter, 1978). Essentially it is an interpretation of Ashby's Law (Ashby, 1956). It states in general, that a system's variability should match environmental variability. Applied to the concepts of controllability, the balance model stipulates that an organization'S viabilities for control should equal the environmental demands for control. Hoevenaars (1991) developed a graphical representation of the working of the balance model in the case of controllability (d. figure 4.2). As can be seen in the figure, four different states are possible: a. viabilities for control outrange demands for control (this state is inefficient: the organiza tion has created too much control devices); b. demands for control outrange viabilities (this state is ineffective: the organization lacks adequate control possi bilities); c. there is an equilibrium state created with minimal demands and viabilities; d. demands and viabilities are balanced without prior creation of some minimum levels. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 54
..- 15 0 Jj Jj s:: § 0 u -.a u s:: '"' ..e'"' Q) ..e tI':l ss:: "0 ....0 ~ '"':> S s:: Q) Q) "0
tI':l ....Q) ...... -...... -...... !...... 0 ....!. .0 Q) ro Q) ro tI':l ..... -tI':l ..... :> ...... :> .-ro ...... ro ...... s:: g E .....e 2'"' s:: -"0 .....Q) s:: 0 s:: ...... s:: u - .... 8
...... 0 0 ...... '"'s:: '"'s:: 0 ..- 0 ro u .....ro u -..... s:: s:: '"' Q) '"' Q) ..e ..e S tI':l S tI':l s:: "0 s:: "0 s:: 0 s:: ....e ro ...... ro :> S '"' s:: Q) ~ ~ Q) "0 Q) "0
.:;: ...... ro ..... ro ...... s:: 0 -s:: 0 .b .b .....'"'Q) s:: 2'"' s:: ro u s:: 0 - ...... s:: 8 - ...... u Figure 4.2 A graphical representation of the lOR balance model Hoevenaars (1991), p. 20
The lOR approach typically strives for condition c. by factually reducing environ mental complexity by means of parallellization of order flows. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 55
The balance model is equally applicable to the concepts of flexibility and quality of work.
lOR research consists of making an inventory of market demands and performance criteria (cf. Bolwijn et al., 1986; Bolwijn, 1988; Bolwijn & Kumpe, 1989; Kumpe & Bolwijn, 1990), and, in its extension, the identification, analysis and introduction of structural parameters which together must reduce the chance of disturbance and sensitivity taking place (cf. box 4.7).
Box 4.7 Structural parameters for sociotechnical analysis and design (lOR approach)
1. Functional (de)concentration: Grouping and coupling performance functions with respect to order flows (transformations). There are two extremes: all order types are potentially coupled to all sub-systems (concentration), or each order type is produced in its own corresponding sub-system (deconcentration in parallel flows). 2. Performance differentiation: Separating the preparation, supporting and manufacturing functions into specialised sub-systems. 3. Performance specialization: Splitting up a performance function into a number of performance sub-functions and allocating them in separate sub-systems. 4. Separation of performance and control functions: Allocating a performance and corresponding control function to different elements or sub-systems. 5. Control specialization: Allocating the control of functional aspects to separated aspect-systems (quality, maintenance, logistics, personnel, etc.). 6. Control differentiation: Splitting feedback loops into separate control levels Adapted from: De Sitter (1989b), p. 234; De Sitter (1989c), p. 14; De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 12 Performance and control are the basic functions here. Initially, De Sitter distinguished between two basic aspect-systems: the Production Structure (P) as grouping and coupling of executive functions (performance), and the Control Structure (C) as grouping and coupling of regulative functions (control). Later, these were expanded by the Information Structure (I) as technical elaboration of P and C. A whole series of design principles were formulated in the eighties (cf. box 4.8). Giving shape to the production structure through parallelization and segmentation drew special attention. This is really concerned with a method to Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 56 fundamentally change the organization of the technical processes, which is an explicit objective of the sociotechnical paradigm. The lOR approach pays a great deal of attention to the parallelization of order flows. For an elaborate study on the possibilities of Production Flow Analysis (Burbidge, 1975) as a technique for parallelization, see Hoevenaars (1991). Box 4.8 A selection of design principles from the lOR approach Design strate~ Structure Level Parameter a. Parallelisation P macro 1 b. Segmentation P meso 2+3 c. Unity of time, place and B micro 4t/m7 action d. Bottom-up allocation of B micro, 4 feedback loops meso e. Uncoupling of feedback B meso 6 loops in time f. Building in feedback loops B micro 1 t/m 7 in each task Ada pted from: De Sitter (1989b), p. 237-249; De Sitter (1989c), p. 16-25; De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 13-19 In addition, the formation of the control structure has also been elaborated upon in detail (cf. Landre, 1990; Van Amelsvoort, 1989/1992). Also, the explor ation of the information aspect is given attention (cf. Van Eijnatten & Loeffen, 1990). The lOR approach moreover distinguishes explicit design sequence rules (De Sitter et al., 1986; De Sitter, 1989b; De Sitter et al., 1990). Thus, the production structure should be given shape preceding the control structure and the design of process technology, and the design of control circles should be in the order of allocation, selection and coupling. 4.3.3 The Participative Process of Organizational Renewal of the Firm Apart from the content of the (re)design, the process of change also receives full attention. lOR suggests a renewal trajectory of two to four years (Den Hertog Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 57 & Dankbaar, 1989; De Sitter et al., 1990) including a strategic exploration, on-the job training and training for self-design, as well as project phasing and manage ment. The lOR approach has developed its own characteristic solution to ascertain a participative redesign process. As contrasted with PD the explicite strategy here is to engage in a careful and prolonged educational programme in self-design for all involved in a renewal project. During the training, which is rather intensive (six periods of two days in a conference resort) workers and managers are getting acquanted with the major design principles and methods, with wholistic thinking and with the lOR strategy of change. The participants are put in multi-disciplinary groups, in which there is ample room for experiential learning by applying the new concepts to their own organization. The specific business development is always taken as main point of departure (d. Den Hertog & Dankbaar, 1989). To administer those courses a special institution, the Dutch foundation for the Promotion of the Quality of Work and Organization (NKWO), has been established. Since its inauguration in 1984, thousands of blue and white collar workers and managers from all levels in the hierarchy have followed their STSD-specific educational programme. In the last decade in Holland several hundreds of lOR projects have been executed in industry, issueing the whole trajectory of integral redesign or just parts of it. Unfortunately the documentation in the literature of the majority of these ventures is problematic. There are a few small review studies (d. Brouwers et al., 1987; Fruytier et ai., 1988; Joosse et al., 1991; Kommers et al., 1991; Den Hertog & De Sitter, 1992) documenting only a few dozens of studies. Although results are positive in most instances, as a consequence there is no possibility for a more systematic attempt to sheaf cases for the purpose of evaluation. Just to give an impression a small number of projects the author is familiar with, are listed in table 4.3. lOR is very elaborated in terms of its theory of concepts and process. As contrasted to the cases, all peculiarities of the approach have been well-docu mented in an easy comprehensible way with much attention to the feasibility of practical implementation. In this synopsis only the main points have been pre sented. Year Company Product/Service ! Analysis/ Authors Design 1980 IHCSmitb.v. Ships/parts Kinderdijk x A/D Maassen (1982); Van Amelsvoort (1983); Verschuur (1985) 1981 Philips Components Coal resistors Roermond x x A/D Van Eijnatten (1981a/b); Van Amelsvoort & Vossen (1984) 1982 Philips Domestic App. Shavers parts Drachten x A Haes & Kalkman (1982) 1982 Philips Lighting TL tubes Roostendaal x A Vossen & Van Zelst (1982) 1982 DSM Chemicals Sulfa/ZAV / ACN Geleen x A Van de Westelaken (1983) 1983 Philips Domestic App. Termoplasts Drachten x A Nieuwenhuizen (1984); Van Eijnatten (1985) 1984 OAF Trucks Truck shafts Eindhoven x A/D Borrie (1984); Buyse (1987) 1984 Dutch Government Min. of Int. Affairs Den Haag x A Otten et al. (1984) 1985 MONA Desserts / sweets Zoetermeer x x A/D Lichtenberg & Sinten (1986) 1986 DAF Trucks Truck final assembly Eindhoven x A/D Eijnatten et al. (1986); Hendriks (1986); Demares (1986) 1986 Grasso Products Compressors Den Bosch x x A/D Barten (1986); Van Amelsvoort (1992) 1987 Philips Lighting Half-fabricates Maarheeze x A/D Van Amelsvoort & Vogelzangs (1987); Van Amelsvoort (1992) 1987 Philips Components Semi-conductors Stadskanaal x x x AID Van Amelsvoortet al. (1988); Landre (1990); Van Amelsvoort (1992) 1987 Van Nelle DE Tabacco Rotterdam x x AID Van Amelsvoort & Vossen (1987); Van Amelsvoort (1992) 1988 Frans Swarttouw Transhipment Rotterdam x x AID Van Amelsvoort (1988/1992) 1989 Arco Chemicals PO/TBA Rotterdam BoUek x AID Hoevenaars (1991) 1989 OAF Trucks Truck cabines Westerloo (Belgium) x AID Verschuur et al. (1989) 1989 Unichema Int. (Unilever) Oleochem.prod. Gouda x x AID Van Hulten (1990); Hoevenaars (1991) 1990 Organon lnt. (AKZO) Pharmaceutical prod. ass x AID Koen (1991); Hoevenaars (1991) 1990 Thomas Orijver & Colour jars Leeuwarden x A/D Terra (1988) Verblifa 1990 Philips Components C-SMOcond. Roermond x x AID Hoevenaars (1991) 1990 AVEBE Farina Veendam product innov. AID Cobbenhagen & Philips (1990) 1990 Philips Lighting Armatures Winterswijk labour relations A BuiteIaar et ai. (1990) 1991 Stork PMT Poultry proc. syst. Boxmeer x A Loeffen (1991); Pleij (1992) 1991 Thomas Engineering b.v. Car components Utrecht accountancy AID Kunst & Roberts (1990); Boons et al. (1991); Roberts et ai (1991) 1992 Holec-HAT Parts manufacturing Hengelo x A Simonse (1992); Loeffen (1992) 1992 Philips Components Cristals Doetinchem x AID Van den Heuvel (1992) Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 59 4.4 Variant C: Democratic Dialogue The third alternative of Modern STSD is called Democratic Dialogue (DD). Unlike Participative Design and Integral Organizational Renewal this approach goes well beyond the enterprise level. We are pointing here to the initiation of a large-scale change process in a broadly based societal context with democratic dialogue as vanguard (d. Gustavsen, 1985/1988/1989). Basically, it is a reaction to the Participative Design (PD) approach, while placing emphasis on the formation of networks and the development of local theories. More specifically, it is a repul sion to the modest results of PD in Scandinavia. PD was brought into practice there at some large firms in the seventies, but it was far from being a big success in small and medium-sized companies. This was attributed, amongst other things, to the lack of adequate mutual networks. Both in Norway and in Sweden an attempt was made to change this by means of DD. 4.4.1 The Scandinavian Solution to the Problem of Diffusion The occurrence of DD in Norway and Sweden can be shortly characterized as a renewed attempt to disentangle the encapsulation dilemma. A novel answer to this diffusion problem was found in a dialogue-based interactive approach, focusing both on the creation of inter-organizational networks and on the development of local theories. Or as Nilsson & Nilsson (1990) put it, the basic solution constituted the symbiosis of inter-organizational and intra-organiza tional learning, as a result of what Gustavsen et ai. (1991) have called a demo cratic dialogue between management and workers at all levels and areas of the enterprise, and beyond. In Scandinavia DD was highly prompted by action researchers who influ enced the labour market parties who came to agree on broadly based programmes instead of incidental projects. In Norway, a national basis emerged for the introduction of DD in 1982, when employers and employee confederations decided on a supplementary 'Company Development' (CD) contract as part of their 'basic agreement'. This CD accord was aimed at improving the work organization by joint collaboration of management and workers. To implement it, the national HABUT stimulation programme was initiated. The acronym stands for the Norwegian language equi valent of 'The Basic Agreement's Company Development Measures'. In the period 1983-1989 some 200 companies participated in the HABUT programme. Project support was mainly given to individual companies (85%). Only a few support activities (12%) were related to industrial branches (d. Engelstad, 1991a). The HABUT programme typically enabled different types of projects (d. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 60 Engelstad, 1991b), actually stimulating the occurrence of planning conferences (65% of the projects), financing half-time scholarships for pairs of company project coordinators (19% of the projects) and direct supporting company projects for participative redesign of the work place (16% of the projects). Box 4.9 Main features of the LOM programme "1.magnitude: more than 80 enterprises and public institutions and about 50 researchers from different institutions all operating within a loosely arranged common framework and forming networks of learning and diffusion. (... ) 2. unit of change: a cluster of organizations collaborating with each other and with research. Broadly based approaches within and across organizations feed into processes of intra- and inter-organizational learning. The strategy is to link these clusters to other enterprises and clusters to form larger diffusion networks. 3. process of organizational change: based on and guided by the uniques of each local development. It rejects a general model for change and works with the notion of developing local theory, that is the local generation and continuous reconstruction of different patterns of work organization. Social research is in a support role to local action. 4. ongoing process: the actual existing experience is to form the base line for each project which therefore cannot be defined as a zero point but is defined in terms of an ongoing process. Participation in the programme commences with a project development conference in which representative vertical slices of the various enterprises jointly make decisions about the organization and direction of their local projects. 5. vanguard: the programme is founded on discourse-oriented democratic theory. Democratic dialogue which encompasses large networks of people forms the vanguard of the approach and determines the direction of local development. 6.infrastructure: the programme uses multi-level strategies which connect local developments to the various elements in the larger infrastructure of Swedisch society. Its points of anchorage in laws, agreements and bi- and tripartite structures and its linkage with the broader social and political structure, make the LOM programme 'reform oriented' rather than 'organization development oriented' (Gustavsen, 1989)." Van Beinum (1990a), p. 16-17 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft August 1992 61 Professional backup for these measures came from the Work Research Institute in Oslo, providing DD methodology and network strategy. In Norway the tripartite SBA national programme for the democratization of work and work organizations started in 1988 (d. Qvale, 1989/1991). The Norwegian Work Life Centre in Oslo is running this programme for five years. Covering both the private and public sectors, SBA is aimed to create local net works. It applies an explicit multi-level change strategy, in which the form or process through which solutions are generated, is put central (d. Hanssen-Bauer, 1991). After several evaluations, branch-based networks also became the new objective of the HABUT programme (d. Engelstad, 1991b). In line with the Co Determination Act, also in Sweden the social partners decided in 1982 on a Company Development agreement. To implement it in both the private and public sector, the Swedish Work Environment Fund grounded the LOM programme in 1985. LOM is the Swedish language acronym for 'Leadership, Organization and Co-determination'. Over a period of five years, LOM acted as the umbrella under which several separate, regional network programmes operated. According to Gustavsen (1989) more than 100 firms and institutions took part. Van Beinum (1990a) summarized the most important features of this broadly based, deep-sliced programme (see box 4.9). 4.4.2 The Concept of Democratic Dialogue and the Theory of Integrating Language and Practice Democratic Dialogue is best described by its originator Bjorn Gustavsen as a concept of communication. He not only gives a definition but also specifies the do's and don'ts of the approach (d. box. 4.10). These '13 commandments' stress the reciprocate character of the dialogue and the duty of all participants to become involved in the settling on of agreements as primary courses for cooperative action. Democratic Dialogue has been based on a linguistic-pragmatic type of theory of science (d. Habermas, 1962; Luhmann, 1984), while stressing the generative means by which knowledge is produced in deliberation and open conversation. As Gustavens (1992) is presuming, DD can be depicted as a contextual elucidation of the discourse aspect of democracy (d. Finlay, 1985). It is focusing on the interdependence between work and dialogue, epistemologically linking language and practice not by field experiment, as Lewin did, but by ordinary vocabulary (d. Gustavsen, 1991). The research process is conceived here identical with a restructuring of language. That language cannot be reshaped in the absence of a corresponding reconfiguration of practice, is used as a postulate. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 62 A theory of communication is at the base of the DD approach. Its main purpose is maintaining scope in the development process by engaging in broad involve ment and participation. Box 4.10 The 13 commandments of the 'Democratic Dialogue' approach "I. The dialogue is a process of exchange: ideas and arguments move to and from between the participants. 2. It must be possible for all concerned to participate. 3. This possibility for participation is, however, not enough. Everybody should also be active. Consequently each participant has an obligation not only to put forth his or her own ideas but also to help others to contribute their ideas. 4. All participants are equal. 5. Work experience is the basis for participation. This is the only type of experience which, by definition, all participants have. 6. At least some of the experience which each participant has when entering the dialogue must be considered legitimate. 7. It must be possible for everybody to develop an understanding of the issues at stake. 8. All arguments which pertain to the issues under discussion are legitimate. No argument should be rejected on the ground that it emerges from an illegitimate source. 9. The points, arguments, etc. which are to enter the dialogue must be made by a participating actor. Nobody can participate "on paper". 10. Each participant must accept that other participants can have better arguments. 11. The work role, authority etc. of all the participants can be made subject to discussion - no participant is exempt in this respect. 12. The participants should be able to tolerate an increasing degree of difference of opinion. 13. The dialogue must continuously produce agreements which can provide platforms for practical action. Note that there is no contradiction between this criterion and the previous one. The major strength of a democratic system compared to all other ones is that it has the benefit of drawing upon a broad range of opinions and ideas which inform practice, while at the same time being able to make decisions which can gain the support of all participan ts." Gustavsen (1990), p 6-7; Gustavsen, (1992), p. 3-4 Its central concepts are learning (the adeptness to conceive new ideas) and dialogue (the capacity to engage in open discussions, all-level participation, and in reaching all sorts of agreements). Using an interactive logic, DD passes on to Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 63 the workers both the licence to form their own 'local theories' and the power to bring forth their own solutions at the same time. The apparent shift in approach is evident: creating conditions for communication to develop puts emphasis on form/process issues instead of structure/content matters, as has been the case in Classical STSD. Also the role of research has been changed from an expert duty to the post of discussion partner. The above mentioned concept of 'local theory' (cf. Gustavsen, 1976; Elden, 1983) is at the heart of DD. According to Gustavsen (1991) it represents a rather extreme strand to usual contingency thinking: "While contingency theory modifies the idea of a general theory of organization, local theory leaves this idea altogether and looks upon the construction of a map of any given organization as a local process which can, however, rely on more general concepts. The way the concepts are selected and assembled is, however, a local process" (p. 20). The technique of 'organizational mapping' (Elden, 1983) is used in DD to make an organization diagnosis in a participative way, using the workers' tacit knowledge (cf. Kusterer, 1978) to generate their own unique, situation-specific local theory, which consists of a problem inventory and a process model of cause and effect relations, which is linking the symptoms and core problems in an eco nomical way. Participatory action research showed that even under sympathetic labour-management conditions workers' perceptions of problems and their genesis differ very sharply from management diagnostic appreciations of the work situation on the spot (cf. Herbst & Rysle, undated; Qvale, 1978; Elden, 1979/1981, Gustavsen & Hunnius, 1981). This is one of the reasons why in DD the expert role of research has been abandoned. Local theories are better suited to let workers and management cooperate to start their own change programme on the basis of a valid organization diagnosis. 4.4.3 The DD Trajectory: Creating Scope by Engaging in a Broad Ecological Process Gustavsen (1990) delineated the phases a typical democratic dialogue pro cess may imply (cf. box 4.11). As can be seen, the project development conference is of central importance to speed up the dialogue process. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 64 Box 4.11 Gustavsen's phases in the development cycle a typical Democratic Dialogue process may imply 1. Establishing in each enterprise a central bipartite project group consisting of management and workers. 2. Arranging an initial project development conference at a conference centre lasting for one and a half day, made up of 'vertical slice' project groups (7-10 people) consisting of line managers, staff and experts, first line supervisors, employee representatives and ordinary workers preferably originating from four different organizations, supported by an external conference staff of four people. 3. Initiating a 'limited' development project/ action learning process in each enterprise. 4. Creating some scope by (gradually) engaging in more broadly defined development work, including both as much functions, levels and problems as possible. 5. Active and collective constituing of project 'achievements' (both product and process). 6. Deep and broad (organization-wide) discussing of future development activities which are based on actual experiences during the dialogue process. after Gustavsen (1990), p. 55-80 A democratic dialogue can be given shape particularly at organized network meetings. Thus, conferences used as a platform for exchange are placed in a central position in this approach. In order to promote DD Gustavsen & Engelstad (1986) have defined under what conditions such conferences should be taken place (cf. box. 4.12). On the basis of experiences gained in this context, the so-called 'Develop ment Organization' (DO) approach developed gradually (Engelstad, 1990). This is a more indirect approach to PD, with the aim of creating a suitable platform for mutual exchange - also for SMEs - and of improving the quality of the mutual dialogue. The DO approach is based on five pillars: 1. the strategy forum; 2. 'company-wide' conferences; 3. project groups beyond departments; 4. basic groups within departments; 5. sociotechnical changes in the daily work organi zation. In particular, the first two pillars call for an additional elucidation. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 65 Box 4.12 Criteria for participation, public arena and legitimacy "I There must be a clear definition of arena(s) (... ) It does C.. ) imply that the outcome of the conference is built primarily on what has emerged on the official arena. 2. Public issues are the only legitimate ones. This is a corollary to criterion (1). 3. Resource persons act only on the public scene. This is a further expression of criterion (1). Resource persons, such as researchers, (... ) can only be used in public and not made accessible to 'off-the-record' consultations. 4. Analysis, problem solving, and decisions, have to build on what has emerged through the public proceedings. (... ) For democratic processes to be possible, it must be clear to everybody what facts and other premises for decisions are relevant. (... ) Again, the point is to avoid 'hidden' alternatives to which everybody does not have access. 5. Personal grievances and frustrations are topics which often tend to surface in developmental efforts. They should, however, as far as possible, be kept out of the encounters. Democratic encounters provide a training ground in democratic competence, and are not therapeutic events. (. .. ) However, personal grievances are not without significance (... ) it is not easy to distinguish between their 'personal' and 'structural' sides (. .. ) people should as far as possible turn towards the 'structural' side of the issues. In this way, a certain amount of training in democratic dialogue can take place before the more personal issues are allowed to enter the scene. (. .. )" Gustavsen & Engelstad (1986), p. 109 The strategy forum is not a steering group in the traditional sense, but the semi open conditioning body of the network which is also accessible to invited external experts. In order to prevent to the best extent possible drop-outs as a result of employee turnover over years, the forum is composed of two members of each participating party. The strategy forum formulates general objectives, brings together (groups from) the participating cores in the organization network, stimulates fruitful discussions, and maintains contacts with the whole 'broad front' of activities. With regard to the project development or planning conferences, it can be said that these were initially largely built up in the same manner as those in the PD tradition. However, they became gradually more focused. Based on the experiences gained with projects in a specific line of business, so-called 'branch projects' (cf. for example the garage-owner project: Engelstad, 1990), the 'Dialogue Conference' (DC) method has been developed, a type of PD workshop or search conference for network development. It starts from the assumption that the quality of the dialogue is an important vehicle for the change process. The DC method can be divided into three successive phases: 1. adoption in the branch network; 2. business development process; 3. expansion of the (supporting) network. During phase I, the demonstration conference takes place, the strategy Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 66 forum is composed and regional promotion conferences are held. In phase 2, a 'whole- company' conference is organized, and a part-time expert is admitted to the firm as a 'scholarship holder', paid and supported by the national programme. In phase 3, a 'network development' conference is held to expand the number of participating firms and supporting institutions. The strategy forum acts as initiator and coordinator in all these activities. The content of the conferences is largely left to the groups participating. However, the order of the sessions and composition of the groups are carefully planned in advance. Take for example the regional promotion conference. This conference is held under 'social island' conditions and lasts two full days. Some 30 to 55 participants from 4 to 7 firms take part, composed as 'vertical slice' groups varying in size from 5 to 10 persons. The plenary opening of the promotion conference is followed by four parallel sessions involving 10 persons at maximum and a plenary reporting session (Engelstad, 1990). In the first session, in terms of function homogeneous groups (executive personnel and manage ment) from different firms discuss the experienced business environment and its future developments. In the second session, the homogeneous manager groups are divided over the groups with executive personnel. These heterogeneous groups discuss the improvements required in a product and in the working environment in each department. In the third session, homogeneous groups of executive personnel from one single firm are formed together with managers from other firms. These heterogeneous groups discuss what radical other organizational structures are needed in order to achieve better results. Finally, in the fourth session, only personnel from one single firm are brought together, in order to talk about the process of change rather than its structure. The starting point is that each individual employee should take part in such change during working time. As has been illustrated before, the ultimate unit of change in DD is a cluster of (perfectly four) organizations. This implies both a multi-level approach including the organization-environment interface, and a network-oriented fabric connecting the world of work with society. According to Van Beinum (1990a) the LOM programme can be delineated as a pre-eminent prelude to a social ecologi cal approach. In Finland a government-induced DD-like development, the so-called 'JOY project', started in 1988 (d. Kauppinen, 1988/1989/1991; Kasvio, 1991; Landsbury, 1992). In paper and pulp production, metal industry and the municipal sector (hospitals) it stimulated joint labour-management development programmes on law-based subjects like leadership, organization and cooperation. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 67 4.5 Modern STSD in North America Although some elements of modern variants are clearly recognizable, and the present situation is becoming more and more pluralistic, in the United States and Canada contemporary STSD is basically a continuation of the classical ap proach (d. Taylor, 1990). Americal scholars still rely quite heavily on the Tavistock STSD experience, which has been imported into the USA by Davis and Trist in the late sixties. Rice's concepts are still widely used in expert-driven 'greenfield' projects. Also there is prolonged emphasis on the use of technical variance analysis in most consultancy work (d. Taylor & Asadorian, 1985). In the USA in recent years there have been several 'new' manifestations of the 'classical' approach. To illustrate this point we refer to Pava's (1983) delibe ration analysis for non-linear work; Shani & Elliott's (1988) strategic Organiza tional Review and Design (ORD) framework; De Greene's (1991) macro (societal) systems approach; Lytle's (1991) guides for linear and non-linear work; Purser & Pasmore's (1991) design principles for knowledge work (product development); and Ketchum & Trist's (1992) center-out model of change. Pava (1983) developed deliberation analysis as an alternative to traditional variance analysis. Deli beration analysis is especially applicable to non-linear technical systems (white collar work), and fits in nicely with the classical STSD approach. So does Shani & Elliott's (1988) ORD framework, which adds a new strategic correlative subsystem to the traditionally identified social and technical ones. De Greene (1991) added a political subsystem and accordingly commented on the rigidity and fragility of large sociotechnical systems Le. nations and world powers/ dominant coalitions. Lytle (1991) developed for Block/Petrella/Weisbord comprehensive checklists for the analysis and design of linear and non-linear work systems, which can be used to plan rather traditional STSD consultancy projects. Purser & Pasmore (1991) elaborated a classical STSD approach for knowledge work, substituting the con cept of 'joint optimization' for 'dynamic synchronization' and the principle of 'controlling variances' for 'removing barriers to learning'. On the basis of the experiences at the Gaines pet food plant in Topeka, Ketchum & Trist (1992) created the center-out model of change. Following the classical theory of con cepts, they developed a practical 'top down' wholistic approach to change. Unless the availability of all these applied 'instant approaches' to STSD consultancy, in North America no major new development track or variant has emerged up until now (d. Taylor & Felten, 1993). Other impulses came from 'emigrated' Americans and native Scandina vians who are now working (again) in North America. We are mentioning here Elden's (1985) participatory research and Kolodny & Tjernberg's (1986) mixed content/process model. From Australia Fred and Merrelyn Emery influenced Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 68 North American STSD thinking to a great extend. As is mentioned before, in North America STSD projects mainly are carried out by consultancy firms and governmental/private institutions. Just to illustrate this, we want to refer here to STS Associates; STS International; Block Petrella-Weisbord; Cotter & Associates; Pasmore & Sherwood; Alexander, Scott & Associates; American Productivity Center; Sociotechnical Design Consultants, Inc.; US Army; International Revenue Service; Work in America Institute; Ontario Center for Working Life; National Center for Productivity and QWL; DEC/SME; UCLA CQWL; Management & Behavioral Science Center (Warton School MBSC); and several US-State QWL centers. Not all of them survived throughout the years. In table 4.3 an impression of North American STSD projcts is presented, which have been carried out in the period 1980-1990. Cunningham & White (Eds.) (1984) documented another 15 QWL projects in North America. Taylor (1990) reported that at that time 115 STSD projects were in their execution phase. Most of them (75%) still operated in the continuous process industry. Beekun (1985) made a meta-analysis of STSD projects in North America, showing the effectiveness of the approach in both blue- and white collar work. Although the majority of projects followed the classical pattern, there are some examples of modern paradigm. For instance Block-Petrella Weisbord used variations of the PD workshop in printing, textile and contact lens manufacturing, and sorts of search conferences in steel, textile and financial services industries, and in medical education, service organizations, schools and colleges throughout the US (d. Weisbord, 1991). Because of its unique characteristics special attention is paid to Trist's Jamestown venture. From 1973 onwards Trist (assisted by his students Keidel, Eldred, McGuinty and Meak) operated an ambitious community development project in a small pauperized manufacturing city near New York. Trist took the challenge to revitalize this area. In 1976 more than 40 projcts were running in 12 plants (Trist, 1981), thanks to the active Jamestown Area Labour-Management Committee (1975/1982). According to Trist (1981) "a community-wide learning process C.. ) has been sustained at the community level over a period of seven years (. .. ) despite 'casualties' at the level of particular organizations. (oo.) As the result of these developments, a major engineering company, Cummins Engines, has been attracted to the town. C.. ) One or two small companies have followed, and a new hotel has been built in the city center" (p. 56). Because of its broad scope (in 1978 it was further expanded to the public sector e.g. schools and hospitals) the use of recruit conferences, the creation of an inter-organizational network, and the establishment of local management-labour cooperation, this projects constituted a DD approach 'avant la lettre'. Central in the Jamestown experience is the creation of a so-called 'representative referent organization' Year Company Name Type of Company Department City, District Country Authors 1980 Zilog Inc. (Exxon) Microproc. chip New plant lay-out Nampa, Idaho USA Gustavson & Taylor (1984) plant Taylor & Asadorian (1985) 1981 CSP Foods Food processing Edible oil production Harrowby, Man. Canada Chadwick & Clark (1981) 1982 State Government Public sector Center for data Bismark, North USA Shani (1983) processing Dakota 1982 United Hospital Med. rehabilit. hosp. Entire hospital Grand Forks, USA Shani & Eberhardt (1987) North Dakota 1984 Signetics Semiconductor Entire plant Sunnyvale, USA Shani & Elliott (1988) California 1984 Soabar (Avery Label) Tag/label printing All departments Philadelphia, USA Weisbord (1991) Pennsylvania 1985 McCormack Software house Whole company Natick, Massachusetts USA Henri (1987) & Dodge 1985 Westinghouse Electronic/ control Fabrication/ assembly Airdrie, Alberta Canada Kirby (1985) Canada devices 1985 General Electric Aircraft engines Fabrication/ assembly Bromont, Quebeck Canada Arnopoulos (1985) Canada 1985 Pratt & Whitney Aircraft engines Fabrication/assembly Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada Betcherman et al. (1990) 1988 McNeil Consumer Consumer products Whole factory Fort Washington, USA Weisbord (1990) Pennsylvania 1988 Northern Telecom Telecommunication PBX assembly Santa Clara, California USA Shani et al. (1992) 1989 X-TRBIE Software Whole organization San Luis ObiSpo, USA Sena & Shani (1992) development California 1990 PG + E Electrical power & Computer department San Luis Obispo, USA Shani & Krishnan (1992) utility California Annals of STSD F.M. van Eijnatten Chapter Four - Draft - August 1992 70 (Trist, 1983). This is an area-wide labour-management steering committee, repre senting several companies in the area. It started to organize cooperative skill training and stimulated the forming of in-plant labour-management committees (LMC's). These LMC's initiated all sorts of projects (job bidding, lay-out redesign, new product development, gain sharing, performance development, work restructuring, administrative review and employment maintenance, d. Keidel, 1981). Another novelty in this respect has been the 'entrepreneurial work teams' as Eldred called the multi-level, multi-functional task groups in product development. Outside the US, in Sudbury (Ontario, Canada) there had been a similar community development project (d. Sudbury 2001, 1979). Finally it is worth mentioning some American applications of STSD in developing countries, such as the redesign of the railway locomotives mainte nance depot at Sennar in the Sudan (d. Ketchum, 1981/1983/1984; Kidwell & Ketchum, 1981; El Jack et al., 1981), some work in Tanzania (Kawanaty et ai, 1981) and project evaluation in India (Kawanaty et al., 1981). Trist (1975) described a small project in Peru. Kiggundu reviewed the quality of working life in develop ing countries and explored STSD limitations and future directions (d. Kiggundu, 1982/1986a/b; Kiggundu et ai, 1983). Chapter Five Epistemological and Methodological Foundations of the STSD Paradigm Table of contents Page 5.1 Introduction 70 5.2 Scientific-Philosophical Points and the Nature of 71 Explanatory Diagrams 5.3 The Problem of the 'Openness' of Systems and Von 75 Bertalanffy's Leap 5.4 The development of Systems Concepts and its Influence 78 on STSD Modelling 5.5 STSD Methods and the Evaluation of Models for 84 Analysis and Design 5.6. STSD Practice and the Controversy on Design Content 96 versus Process 5.1 Introduction In the previous chapters some highlights of the STSD paradigm were presented, distinctive development trajectories and tracks were described, and there was a first exposition of concepts and methods. Due to the basic historical account followed, a closer examination of methodology was not possible. This chapter will further elaborate on the scientific foundations of STSD: - In paragraph 5.2 the main scientific-philosophical points of departure and the nature of STSD explanatory diagrams will be presented. - In paragraph 5.3 the methodology of directive correlations, which is central to STSD, will be discussed. - In paragraph 5.4 the development of systems concepts will be analyzed, and its influence on STSD modelling. - In paragraph 5.5 STSD methods will be looked upon. The discussion is concentrating on the evolution of models for analysis and design. - In paragraph 5.6 STSD practice will be described starting from the controversy on design content versus process. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 71 5.2 Scientific-Philosophical Points of Departure and the Nature of STSD Explanatory Diagrams Although very implicit in the publications of the pioneering phase, the scientific-philosophical foundations of the STSD paradigm were anything but absent. Above all it was Fred Emery who at first actually did articulate on this. Already in his thesis he had reached on the major epistemological and metho dological questions that concerns social scientists (Emery, 1946). In line with American pragmatism, in Tavistock Document 527 (Emery, 1959), he employed these ideas to create a firm and solid basis for the evolving STSD paradigm, using contextualism as a root metaphor: "My position was realism versus nominalism and materialism versus idealism; in one word, contextualism. That position is very clear in my publications before Doc 527. In Doc 527 the opposition to nominalism is apparent in the stress that is placed on systems theory; the opposition to idealism in the critique on the Human Relations schooL The latter point is strongly reinforced in Part III of Doc. 527- 'psychological requirements'. Here, short-shrift was given to individualistic psychology and the answers sought in the reciprocal relations between persons and the objectively structured task environm~nt. Implicitly rejecting Lewin's subjective 'life space' and explicitly using the conceptual framework introduced in Social Structure and Personality, 1954. Methodologically I was well and truely convinced, by 1946, of Lewin's arguments in his paper on I Aristotlean and Galilean modes of thought' (1935). Phil Herbst in those days was well into Formism (Pepper's term) and peripheral to our thinking". Emery 1990), p. 7 personal communication Later, Herbst also contributed to the scientific grounding of STSD. He fully considered and published the consequences of developments in science philo sophy for his own discipline (cf. Herbst 1970/1974/1976). According to Herbst (1976) the philosopher Spencer-Brown made an important discovery with his 'primary distinction', whose consequences for the formulation of theories should not be underestimated. Whereas classical epistemological schools such as Platonism, (Neo-)Positivism and (Neo-)Kantianism all depart from axioms in the form of dichotomies (d. 'phenomena-constructs', 'external-internal', 'object ive-subjective'), Spencer-Brown establishes a triad set of elements (d. 'internal boundary-external'). This trichotomy is proclaimed an 'unexamined given' of each conceptual system, on the basis of which Herbst (1976) derives the following axiom: Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 72 "The primary conceptual unit is given as a triad of distinguishable undefined components, which are definable in terms of one another." From this axiom he subsequently derives a theorem: "It is not possible for a single entity or a pair of entities to exist by itself or to be definable." Herbst (1976), p. 90 In a next step he checked to see if the systems concepts could be derived from the definitoric entities. This appeared to be possible by using an operational interpretation. It is not difficult to grasp the relevance of a similar contribution to a developing systems theory in general, and to STSD in particular. Ackoff and Emery published a revealing study in 1972 on scientific philosophical and methodological principles bearing the title 'On purposeful systems'. It took Ackoff more than 30 years to finish the manuscript! In this book, which is an absolute must for methodologists, actually the insights that in the fifties and sixties proved to be usable metaphors from biology and cybernetics are rewritten and developed further. According to Emery (personal correspon dence, 1990) this book "enabled me to clear up some conceptual problems with the level of purposeful systems but it neither arose from mainstream STSD work nor fed back into it. Our methodology in STSD had been firmly based on Sommerhoff's directive correlation since 1963" (p. 10), d. paragraph 5.3. Nevertheless, this publication offered a lot of conceptual digging up, which is of major importance for the development of the paradigm. 42 meticulously formulated definitions aptly illustrate the evolution of structural principles into functional systems concepts, followed by another ten statements elaborating seven classes of functional systems (d. table 5.1). As this table shows, from now on there is a solid systems basis for distinguishing man from machine. In an inimitable way the vital concept of the 'adaptive, purposeful system' is derived, one of the building stones of the STSD approach. The development from closed into open systems concepts also influences the nature of the explanatory diagrams used according to Ackoff & Emery (1972). These authors place the traditional positivist principle of causality, whereby the cause is both necessary and sufficient for a certain consequence (deterministic relation), right opposite a new explanatory diagram in which a cause, albeit necessary, is not considered sufficient (producer /product relation). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 73 Table 5.1 Seven classes of functional systems FUNCTIONS OF OUTCOMES A. UNI-UNI B. UNI-MULTI C. MULTI-MULTI One function in all One function in anyone Different functions environments environment. Different in same and different environments 1. UNI-UNI lA. PASSIVE lB. PASSIVE One structure in all FUNCTIONAL MULTlFUNCTIONA environments ~ (meters) (waste emitters) b- 2. UNI-MULTI 2A. REACTIVE 2B. REACTIVE -< One structure in any on FUNCTION A MULTIFUNCITONA ~ 0 environment, different u:l p::; structures in some (servomechanisms) (industrial robots) ::> different environments b 3. MULTI-MULTI 3A. ACTIVE 3B. ACTIVE 3C. ACTIVE MULTI- ~ Different structures FUNCTIONA MULTlFUNCTIONA FUNCTIONAL AND f-< (J) in same and different ENVIRONMENT ALL environments INDEPENDENT GOAL-SEEKING MULTI-GOAL-SEEKING PURPOSEFUL (single program automata) am automata ( 0 Ie) Ackoff & Emery (1972), p. 29 Following Charles Peirce's (1898) 'logic of relations', in which there is made a clear difference between 'class membership' (subsuming the individual particular to a class of such particulars; containment) and 'class inclusion' (inclu sion by definition; inclusion of one class in another), Emery later came to distinguish four basic rules that govern the process of defining observables by classification: "U-l similarity (familiarity) relation: classifying universals as nominalistic collections of particulars. U-2 proximity (in time and space) relation: classifying by relative frequency, or tendency (frequency of interaction or co-occurance). U-3 cause-effect (producer-product) relation. U-4 relation of part-part within a whole (e.g. siblings)." Emery (1990), p. 7 Early STSD was classifying particulars in terms of cause and effect (U-3 relation) whereas contemporary STSD also is classifying particulars in terms of its function (U-4 relation). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft August 1992 74 According to Emery (1989) the basic form of logical inference STSD is using, is neither deduction nor induction but abduction (retroduction). This form of inference yields in Peirce's terms 'reasonable ex post-facto hypotheses'. Emery typified it as 'a logic of discovery': "In the laboratory sciences we might know and be able to control 80-90 percent of the variance. The small indeterminate element can then be systematically explored by varying our experimental controls even if, as in the isolation of salvarsan, 606 variations are needed. In field experiments with sociotechnical systems in a non-isolable environment we would be lucky to know and be able to control 20 percent of the variance. A radically different situation. It is a situation that does not permit a strategy of systematically exhausting possibilities because a} there are too many permutations and combinations, b} we do not know enough to establish the controls for such systematic variation and c} we want to know what the system does in its characteristic environment, not what it does in laboratory. We have to follow scientific strategies appropriate to our special circumstances. Thus we need to judge our theories by their fruitfulness in directing our inferential processes of retroduction. That is we need sketch maps that convey the prominent features of the territory we are trying to traverse. We check those maps by following up on the hypotheses they suggest. It is the only way we can go. Deductive and inductive inferences will always be very secondary for us and the only forseeable future is a fistful of grubby sketch maps. Call them theories of the middle-range (Merton) or local theories it does not matter. It adds up to the fact that any science of developing systems is limited to local logics - a grand logic would necessarily deny the qualitative changes that alone warrant our attention as scientists." Emery (1990), p. 10/11 personal communication The use of an open-system approach also affects the way in which theories are formulated, as Melcher (1975) aptly illustrates: "Normally, model building involves defining independent and dependent variables. One of the minimum logical tests of the model is whether the variables are conceptualized and measurable in independent terms. Otherwise, any relationships are tautological. The thrust of research studies is to determine the degree of influence the independent variables exert over the dependent variables. The strategy of building a systems model, on the other hand, is sharply different. The thrust is to define variables in relationship terms. ( ... ) The adequacy of the definitions is tested in terms of the degree to which useful Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 75 relationships can be described. Since the entire thrust is on relationships, it is considered essential to build the model in these terms." Melcher (1975), p. 7 It has been not a simple task to find a schematic representation of such a new fundamental diagram in the literature. After much effort only one example could be discovered, Le. Fry's variant of a system 'regulated by feedback' (d. figure 5.1). Figure 5.1 Fry's variant of a system 'regulated by feedback': a schematic represen tation of the basic explanatory diagram of STSD, Fry (1975), p. 57 ENVIRONMENT 1------. RELATION RELATION Fry (1975) explains this diagram as follows: !fA goal drive causes a 'determining' relationship to influence a 'determined' relationship. At the same time, the determining relationship is also being influenced by other factors while it simultaneously influences the multiple factors wor ing on it". Fry (1975), p. 57 This kind of constructions are highly complex, but allow for both static and dynamic analyses. 5.3 The Problem of the 'Openness' of Systems and Von Bertalanffy's Con ceptual Leap As said before, of crucial importance in STSD methodology is the notion of the 'open system' (Von Bertalanffy, 1950). Emery defines this construct by a set of four types of relations (d. figure 4.1 in paragraph 4.2.1): Lll-system functions; L22-autonomous, independent environment functions; L21-input functions and L12-output functions. Emery is proclaiming a dualistic relation between system (Le. organism) and environment: "As a general proposition we are saying that the organism cannot be character ized without characterizing its environment, and that the environment cannot Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 76 be characterized without characterizing the kinds of organisms for whom it is an environment. We will go one step further, following Shaw & Turvey (1981), and argue that this symmetrical compatibility implies that the laws governing one must have some invariant relationship with the laws governing the other, i.e. Lll s L22, where s symbolizes symmetry. This can be termed the Postulate of Duality or the Postulate of Reciprocal Contexts." Emery (1989), p. 9 Emery is stating (1989, p. 10) that when the temporal dimension is added to the basic earlier mentioned four types of relations: "this expanded set corresponds to the form of the directive correlation postulated by Sommerhoff (1950/1969) to characterize the biological concept of adaptive behavior". According to Emery: "this same set effectively defines the root metaphor of Contextualism (Pepper, 1942)". In the early fifties, indeed Emery did help in the breaking of new ground by developing a methodology of directive correlation. Because of the centrality of this epistemological pioneering work, we quote Emery's argument at full length here: "There was a further epistemological problem inherent in the position I had taken. This was the problem of the 'openness' of systems (what Pepper, following Peirce, terms dispersiveness versus integratedness). I was made aware of this by Bertalanffy's 1950 article in Science. I brought it to the attention of the Tavvy when I was there on the Bolsover experiment 1951-2. The solution of this problem was in the 'Progress in conceptualization' papers, 1963, and made public in the summer of 64. This was the conceptual leap from Bertalanffy's: Lll (L12, L21) .. ?, to L11 (L12, L21) L22. That is a leap that most so-called systems theorists have still not been able to make. A leap they cannot make because it is academically unacceptable to deny Kantianism and accept that the L22 can be known for what it is. However, it is only thus one can get from Formism, Organicism or crude forms of Inter actionism to the genuine contextualist position of Trans-actionalism; acknowl edging that L11 and L22 are complementary, mutually determining. Neither can be adequately characterized without characterizing the other. A system and, particularly, the system principle, cannot be characterized without characterizing what is environment for it. Conversely, an environment cannot be characterized without specifying what sort of systems it is an environment for. (Which gives some idea of how far the concept of environment is from physics textbooks). Staying with Bertalanffy's immature concept of an open system had several Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 77 serious consequences. Within that framework our only knowledge of the L22 comes from the interaction L21. L12 is confined to efforts to adapt to what that L21 discloses of L22. The purposes of L11 can then be no more than internal equilibrium that defines systems survival. This same model forces us to define the relation of Ll1 - L22 by inference from the observed interactions i.e. L12, L21. This level of interaction is no advance on Newton and the planets. The definition of open system that we advanced explains the interactions in terms of the relation of Lll and L22. In this model we can rigorously define 'active adaptation', Because the L22 exists for Lll then L12's can be purposefully selected to induce L21's that L11 can turn to its adaptive advantage. All of this was spelt out in Doc 527 before it was formalized in 1963. In that same document it was repeatedly spelt out that when we speak of organizational missions, objectives or 'primary tasks' we are only using linguistic shorthand to refer to special forms of interdependence between the Lll and its L22. I do not know how often I have reasserted this but it has fallen on deaf ears because those who should have been listening think that the L22 is what the CEO, or his personal consultant, think is 'the world out there'. As the debate has spread to the physical sciences, due to ecological concerns, I have realized that the model we have used since the late fifties had to be elaborated. A case of dotting the i's and crossing the t's for those for whom this was not their native language. To adequately represent their mutual determination we should use the following symbolization: Lll (L22') - L22 (Ll1'), Such mutual determination can only be a result of a process of co-evolution. Our perceptual and affective systems have evolved so that we are, as a species adapted to living in the environment the world provides. We have shaped that world with a view to it supporting the purposes we consistently pursue. (OK we did not respect the time scales for adequate 'feedback'!), To accomodate the notion of active adaptation/purposefulness (Emery, 1967) the paradigm has to have an intrinsic temporal dimension: L12 L12 L11(L22)/" L11 (L22)' L11 (L22)" L22 (L11)" ".11" L22 (L1t)' L22 (Lll)" L21 /'~ " L21 /" Time to ...... t1 ...... t2 ...... t3 ...... t4 With this step the relation of the basic conceptual paradigm and the metho dology of directive correlation is explicit. Note that if we consider the L11 chain in isolation we can speak only of producer-product relations. Only the totality of Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 78 the joint action provides the necessary and sufficient conditions. This step also makes it clear that we are already into ontology as we are talking about facts of development. Not surprising, as it only when you assume an unknowable L22 that you have a free-floating epistemology. Inability to make this conceptual leap to recognizing a knowable L22 has prevented system theorists from recognizing how advanced Sommerhoff's methodology of directive correlation is compared with Ashby, Prigogine and Ilk. The latter use as much mathematical formalism as Sommerhoff but have been highly popularized, and prescribed as university texts. Sommerhoff, however, demanded that the L22 be given equal status with the L11 and that the asymmetry of the concept of adaptation be replaced by the logically symmetrical concept of directive correlation. The concept of directive correlation made no presuppositions about whether the relation of L11 - L22 was being determined by L12 or L21; that was a matter for empirical determination in each case. As Sommerhoff spelt out this concept of directive correlation provided a rigorous methodological framework for contextualism. Something that RA. Fisher's 'Design of Experiments' fell far short of doing. Something that has still not been equalled." Emery (1990), p. 7-9 personal communication From its start, Classical STSD has been firmly based on the methodology of directive correlation. 5.4 The Development of Systems Concepts and its Influence on STSD Modelling From the very beginning STSD modelling has been strongly infuenced by systems thinking: - As is illustrated in table 3.1, paragraph 3.2.3, during the Pioneering Phase the Tavistock researchers adopted a whole array of systems concepts from biology, logic and cybernetics. In those early years the STSD pioneers hardly have had any aspiration to develop their own coherent, STSD-specific theory of concepts (personal communication with Van Beinum, 1989). They became mere fascinated by systems concepts as they emerged from other disciplines and enthusiastically tried them out in actual practice. - As described in paragraph 3.2.4, it is not before the end of the fifties that the first systematic attempts have been made to develop what is called here the Classical STSD theory of concepts (cf. table 3.2). In the sixties this conceptual framework further has been refined to the system of analysis and design principles as we know it today (cf. table 3.3 and 3.4, paragraph 3.3.4). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 79 - Up till the present time it is not generally known that consecutive STSD concept development has been redefined in the light of evolved systems thinking. In this paragraph two contributions to the modernization of (Classical) STSD concepts are presented: De Sitter's 'Balance Model' for routine work systems, and Purser and Pasmore's 'Organizing for Learning' approach for non routine work settings. As an extension to the epistemological work of Luhmann (1968a/b) and Elias (1970), and taking into account the results of the Habermas/Luhmann (1971) debate, De Sitter, in cooperation with other business sociologists, produced a new theoretical foundation for Classical STSD from Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, in the mid-seventies (cf. De Sitter, 1974a/b; Van der Zwaan & Vermeulen, 1974; Van der Zwaan et ai., 1974; Smets & Van der Zwaan, 1975; De Sitter & Heij, 1975), which was adjusted in the early nineties regarding some minor points. First, De Sitter broadly describes STSD as the study and explanation of the manner in which technical instrumentation and the division of work determine [system behaviour, capacity and functions] in their mutual connection and in relation to given (but changing) environmental conditions, as well as the application of this knowledge in (re)designing production systems (De Sitter, 1974a, p. 76). Fifteen years later he replaces the part between brackets in the previous sentence by lithe possibilities for the production of internal and external functions" (De Sitter, 1989, p. 232). For a graphic representation of the core variables from this complex definition and their relationships, see figure 5.2. Technical instrumentation is defined here as the technical equipment of people and means (in terms of capacity). Work division is defined as the grouping, allocation and coupling of executive and regulative functions. This is concerned with the separation of executive and regulative tasks on the one hand, and the splitting or division of executive and regulative tasks in sub-operations and subregulations respectively. De Sitter (1980/1981a) speaks of lithe architecture of production control" and distinguishes four basic types of work division which he does not specify in more detail (p. 44/p. 119). In the above description of STSD, De Sitter stresses that in particular, it is the nature of the interdependence between technical instrumentation and work division which influences the behaviour of the system, in terms of internal (directed towards purchase, preparation, manufacturing and sales) and external system functions (directed towards various 'markets'). Basically, De Sitter develops a process theory of change, which he designates with the term 'Model of Balance', in which the dynamics of cyclic interdependencies (both cause and Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 80 result, compare the principle of the servo-controlled mechanism) is put central. given, ever changing tubulent environment ..- conditions I j ~ technical ... possibilities for the instrumentation -- production of internal and , r external system ... functions " work division - object of study and (re)design Figure 5.2 STSD, a graphic representation Legend: ...... interdependence ---....- determining relationship Adapted from: Van Eijnatten (1985), p. 55 An explicit point of attention of the balance model is the structure of the selective labour process. The quantitative aspect of the labour process is the volume of goods and services exchanged, the qualitative aspect is the continuity and development of work relationships (De Sitter, 1989a). The labour process is viewed as an intersection of various institutional and private exchange processes; needs and values are considered as being changeable social processes cultivated by society and brought into the work situation by individuals and groups. According to De Sitter, giving meaning is a function which is inherent in selective social processes which is closely connected to the regulation of the labour process: "What structural conditions must my labour process comply with in general, in order for me to solve changeable numbers and types of problems in time and participate in the process of giving meaning?" (De Sitter, 1978, p. 9). Although rather abstract concepts are being used, this quote shows strong resem blance with Emery's (1977) 'general psychological requirements' (d. paragraph 4.2.1). Without regulative components in work, alienation occurs; but on the other hand, regulations provide involvement in work. Stress occurs when someone has problems and is unable to solve them. Using this model, which Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 81 basically is applicable to all kinds of social systems, thus including firms, one is able to describe the dynamic process in a simple and economical manner, in which open system and environment follow from each other's change in a constant manner again and again, in different ways. As such, the model is a system-theoretical alternative to Emery's directive correlation methodology. In his elaboration, De Sitter concentrates primarily upon interaction conditions, upon conditions for structure. The operational problems in production control are the explicit point of departure. Once again: De Sitter makes a conceptual contribution here which breaks new ground. In 1973, he had already published a well-defined and coherent system concept framework, including the 'empty cartridge' concept of I aspect system' unknown to Tavistock (d. De Sitter, 1973). In the same article, a strongly condensed effort can also be found to fill the 'mould' of systems approach in terms of its content, by means of what is referred to as Ita scheme of interaction strategy" (p. 138). De Sitter directs his theory towards social interaction in which he integrates segments of value, regulative and power theory. He calls the product "a theory of qualitative system dynamics" (p. 113). After 1973 this scheme was converted into a more verbal model (De Sitter, 1978). Central in the balance model is the so-called 'interference' phenomenon, an effect which occurs in a situation where one process operation is disturbed or even totally obstructed by another. De Sitter describes interference as follows: "C .. ) the chance that two or more interaction processes meet each other in the labour process, and as a result of their normative and/or material incompatibility, cause a disturbance which tends to affect the interaction possibilities which come into being through the labour process". De Sitter (1978), p. 15 The core of the new process model for Classical STSD is either preventing or curing interference and its diffusion in the system. This can be effected by means of regulation. Regulation can be broadly defined as keeping in balance processes which fulfill different functions in a system. The balance model uses the feedback loop as a basic model of the labour process. In the feedback loop, it is preferable not to separate and divide implementation (realizing connections) and regulation (selecting connections), but rather to integrate them (principle of minimal labour division). The balance model, as well as Classical STSD, depart from the so-called 'latitude premise', an assumption regarding control scope which is founded on the cybernetic 'Law of Requisite Variety' used as an axiom (Ashby, 1956a). This law roughly states that the external variability of the environment (turbulence) as input can be only compensated for or cancelled by a proportional internal Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 82 variability of the open system (unprogrammed production control/latitude). De Sitter (1978) defines the variability of the input as control need, and the potential open systems variability as control possibilities. The balance between control need and control possibilities is defined as the quality of work. A key concept in the balance model is 'control capacity'. According to De Sitter (1978), this concept does "not refer to authority but to control possibilities resulting from the objective nature of the labour process" (pp. 20/21). In 1980 he briefly defined control capacity as the problem-solving of disturbance reduction capability: "In actual practice the control capacity present manifests itself in the disturbance sensitivity of the process, thus in the extent to which a disturbance is reproduced without the possibility of reducing it through regulative action" (p. 69). According to Van Eijnatten (1985, p. 402) (internal) control capacity as a concept refers to a structure condition of the labour system in which it is possible to choose from alternative activities in order to achieve the production norms in different situations and under changing circumstances. A similar choice from possible situation leads to actual regulation (fulfilling a function). De Sitter states that latitude provides control capacity in order to reduce interference. As pointed out earlier, in an objective sense there exists an adequate quality of work when the control capacity is relatively high and aligned with the existing control need (the complexity of the exchange relationship in terms of work orders, process specifications, time and work pressure). Karasek (1979) defines this combination as "the active work with social and technical learning opportunities". This American researcher made use of two sample surveys - the Quality of Employment Survey (USA, 1979, N=1016); and the Living Conditions Survey (Sweden, 1968/1974, N=2281) - to check the impact of work pressure (the amount of work, variance, and precision of assignments) and 'control capacity' (knowledge, skills, available technical resources and consultation possibilities) on absenteeism and dissatisfaction with work. He found that in the condition of combined high work pressure together with various control possibilities the scores regarding both dependent variables were lowest. De Sitter predicts - and this has been confirmed in a large number of cases in practice (d. De Sitter, 1981a; Joosse et al., 1990) - that the production result in this situation would also be optimal. Karasek (1990) demonstrated that there exists a negative relationship between 'job control' and health risk in a sample survey of 25% of all office staff in Sweden (4481 men and 3623 women). Measuring instruments for control capacity (and latitude) have been developed in the course of time by De Sitter & Heij (1975), Egmond & Thissen (1975), Van Eijnatten (1985), Pot et al. (1989a/b) and De Sitter (1989c). Conceptually based on Miller & Rice (1967) and methodologically depart ing from a non-equilibrium-oriented, dynamical model of open systems {Laszlo, Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 83 1987/1990; May & Groder, 1989; Nicolas & Prigogine, 1977) in which change is an integral aspect of organizational life, Purser & Pasmore (1991) re-interpreted Classical STSD analysis and design concepts to be of use in non-routine knowledge work settings. They came to define a couple of new STSD concepts (cf. table 5.2). Table 5.2 STSD concept development for non-routine knowledge work settings STSD concepts for routine STSD concepts for non-routine work settings (manufacturing process) work settings (knowledge work process) - joint optimization - dynamic synchronization - redundancy of functions - redundancy of rhythms - multi-skilling - multi-phasing - semi-autonomous work group - multi-disciplinary, highly differentiated technical group I - controlling variances at their - removing barriers to learning during source developmental phases in knowledge work - quality of working life - quality of thinking life Adapted from: Purser & Pas more (1991) - According to Purser & Pasmore (1991), dynamic synchronization: "is an ever active, renormalizing movement in which nonoptimal permutations are dampened and phasic mismatches in knowledge development conversion cycle are brought into harmony" (p. 11/12). Dynamic synchronization is based on a new theoretical framework, i.e. the 'catastrophe' /'order through chaos' theory (Prigogine, 1976; Jantsch, 1980; Briggs & Peat, 1984). According to De Greene (1990) catastrophe models and chaos theory already have been applied successfully in physics (Grebogi et al., 1987), chemistry (Prigogine & Stengers, 1984), meteorology (Lorenz, 1963) and ecology (May, 1976). Devaney (1987) states that chaotic systems (Le. which show turbulence) are unpredictable, indecomposable and recurrent. In this view self-organizing systems adapt to turbulent environmental conditions by admitting increasingly complex in puts. As complexity has reached a critical level, the system reorganizes itself into smaller parts through a process of 'willful bifurcation' (Abraham, 1988; Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 84 Montuori, 1991). - Another related concept, described by Purser & Pasmore (1991), is the process of 'rhythmical organizing of temporally dynamic structures' (Warner, 1988), which is attuned to phase-specific cyclically varying equilibrium levels in non routine systems. Instead of redundancy of functions, in sociotechnically re designed knowledge work situations there should be 'redundancy of rhythms'. - According to Pava (1983) multi-skilling is not a viable option in non-routine work systems, because of the high training level of knowledge work pro fessionals. Instead of multi-skilling, Purser & Pasmore (1991) suggest 'multi phasing' which "has a variety-increasing effect as contradictions and divergent perspectives are surfaced, coupled, and managed in deliberations" (p. 15). - Instead of semi-autonomous work groups Purser & Pasmore (1991) suggest 'multi phased groups': "highly differentiated technical groups to plan and solve problems in parallel with each other" (p. IS), in a highly participative manner. - The STSD concept of variance control does not apply in non-routine systems (Taylor, 1989; Purser & Pasmore, 1990) because process deviations are not easily detectable or traceable. Instead of controlling variances at their source, STSD in non-routine systems should aimed at removing barriers for learning during developmental phases in knowledge work. - Because the whole knowledge work process is occuring in peoples' minds, Purser & Pasmore (1991) suggest to adjust the notion of 'quality of working life' to 'quality of thinking life'. Thus the Classical STSD theory of concepts has become very much differentiated in the course of time. 5.5 STSD Methods and the Evolution of Models for Analysis and Design This is also true for the development of methods. Table 5.3 represents an outline of the complete range of STSD methodologies distilled from the liter ature. Van Strien's so-called 'regulative model cycle' (1975/1978/1986) was used as criterion for division here. - The pioneering work is characterized by the application of 'action research'. No specialized methods for analysis and design have been used. - The development of more formal methods of analyses began at the start of the 'Industrial Democracy' project in Norway. Around 1964 Engelstad applied the so-called 'traditional variance analysis' technique for the first time in the Hunsfos paper mill. Two years later this technique was repeated by the Tavistock institute in the Stanlow oil refinery of Shell UK (d. Foster, 1967; Emery et al., 1967; Hill, 1971). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 85 Table 5.3 Outline of the development of STSD method * Whole cycle: problem definition, diagnosis, plan, intervention, evaluation: - strategy for industrial change: '10 step method' (Norwegian Industrial Democracy Project) Thorsrud, 1966; Emery & Thorsrud, 1976 - strategy for implementation: '8 step method' (all organizations) Cummings, 1976/1978; Cummings & Srivastva, 1977 - change model: '9 step method' (redesign situations) Pasmore, 1988 - IOR model: '17 step method' (all organizations) De Sitter et al., 1990; Van Eijnatten et al., 1991/1992 * Problem definition and diagnosis: 'technical system analysis' - traditional variance analysis: '10 step method' (linear conversion processes) Engelstad, 1969 alb; Engelstad et al., 1969 -analytical model A: '6 and 9 step method' "') (linear conversion processes - continuous process) Foster, 1967; Hill, 1971; Emery & Trist, 1978; Pasmore, 1988 - analytical model B: '7 step method' *) (non-manufacturing systems - office/service processes) Foster, 1967; Hill, 1971; Emery & Trist, 1978 - deliberation analysis: '5 step method' (non-linear technical systems) Pava, 1983 - sociotask approach: '17 propositions' (non-linear systems) Pasmore et al., 1978 '" Diagnosis, plan for redesign and evaluation: - ETHICS method: '7 step method' (computer system design) Mumford & Weir, 1979 * Process of change: - participative design (all organizations) Emery & Emery, 1974; Emery, 1974/1976 - participative design workshop (all organizations) Emery & Thorsrud, 1976; Thorsrud, 1977 - search conference (all organizations) Emery & Emery, 1974; Emery, 1982/1987 - the change process in innovative work designs (all organizations) Kolodny & Stjernberg, 1986 - organizational change as a societal multi level strategy (all organizations and their industrial relations settings) Van Beinum, 1986 - large scale change process in broadly based societal context with democratic dialogue as vanguard (all organizations) Gustavsen, 1985/1988 *) also in Cummings (1976); Cummings & Srivastva (1977); Emery, Foster & Woollard (1976/1978). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 86 In the literature this method is known as the '9 step method', although - as table 5.3 shows - the number of sub-steps varies for each author. The method, which was initially developed to be applied in the processing industry, was later - very much to the dissatisfaction of Emery & Trist (1978) - also used for the analysis of other (discrete production) situations and for mapping out administrative processes. According to Taylor (1989) the 'technical systems analysis methodology' was seldom or no longer applied in England after 1970, with the exception of Hedberg & Mumford (1975) and Mumford & Henshall (1979). The 'variance analysis' was much more widespread in other European countries and the United States to map out various manufacturing processes in the production sector (d. Cummings & Srivastva, 1977; Pasmore et al., 1982; Taylor & Asadorian, 1985), in insurance companies (Taylor, 1977; Allegro & De Vries, 1979), in the health care sector (Macy & Jones, 1976; Friss & Taylor, 1981; Boekholdt, 1981; Glor & Barko, 1982; Chrisholm & Ziegenfuss, 1986), in the service sector (Taylor, 1978; Pava, 1983), in the development of MIS-systems (Bostrom & Heinen, 1977) and in R&D (Taylor et al., 1986). Although Emery had already solved the problem of non-linear processes in 1974 by means of his 'participative redesign and search method' (d. table 5.3), and although Van Beinum had successfully applied this method at the technical department of Shell laboratory in Amsterdam, additional variants for non-linear processes were developed in the United States around 1980 (d. Pasmore et al., 1978; Pava, 1983). Technical systems analysis, which places much emphasis on process, product and their functions in a wider whole, has thus made a large-scale and crucial contribution to the diffusion and recognition of Classical STSD as an alternative to Scientific Management. - The development of sociotechnical methods certainly did indeed go further than just the phase of problem definition and diagnosis. The plan for (re)design and implementation were laid down in 'step diagrams' (d. table 5.3). An illustration of the first 10-step method can be found in paragraph 3.3.3 (box 3.3), which represents the basic approach in Norway (Emery & Thorsrud, 1976). Later, this method was refined further for the entire (re)design cycle (d. table 5.3: Cummings, 1976/1978; Cummings & Srivastva, 1977; Pasmore, 1988). The ETHICS method (Mumford & Weir, 1979) deserves separate mention. This method was the first of its kind to support explicitly the design of information systems. - At last, the process of change also received more and more attention (cf. table 5.3). Participative design workshops, search conferences and the change process itself have been elaborated in methodical terms (d. Emery & Emery, 1974; Emery 1974/1976; Emery, 1982/1987; Emery & Thorsrud, 1976; Thorsrud, 1977; Kolodny & Stjernberg, 1986; Van Beinum, 1986; Gustavsen, 1985/1988). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five Draft - August 1992 87 In an attempt to briefly summarize the method of Classical STSD, Taylor (1989) developed a 'master procedure', which is represented in figure 5.3. The separate place assigned to the analysis and design techniques can be clearly recognized here. Some special attention is paid here to the lOR model, developed in The Netherlands, to support Integral Organizational Renewal (De Sitter et al., 1990j Van Eijnatten et al., 1991). This Modern STSD method further elaborates the issue of (re)design implementation logic. A multi-level model for more integral organizational (re)design is proposed, containing a mixture of (re)design ends, (re)design means and (re)design processes (d. figure 5.4). Central in the model is the so called '(re)- design interface' in which means, ends and processes are tied together to lead up to the factual (re)- design intervention. The model specifies three main entries to this (re)design interface: environmental, knowledgal and methodological. The environmental entry is producing market requirements and functional claims to guide design ends for the (re) design intervention. These claims are normative in character . . The knowledgal entry specifies theories, practices and conceptual organizational paradigms to deliver design means for the (re)design intervention. These content-theories are supportive in character. The methodological entry consists of action planning procedures and partici pative methods/ techniques for (re)designing, in order to support the process of (re)design intervention. Modern Dutch STSD method - here it is stressed again - is a mixture of content and process: it contains both rules and procedures based on structural paradigms sprung from several key disciplines (including management science, industrial engineering and accountancy), and (re)design strategies based on participative methods and techniques within a regulative action cycle framework. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 88 DISCOVERY 1. The model 2. The map 3. The Method 4. The paradigm shif 1. Initial decisions 2. Transition structure 1. Boundary specification 2. Environmental demands 3. Purpose definition 1. Role network 1. Variance matrix 2. Social system grid 2. Variance control table 3. QWL critena IDEAL ORGANIZATION 1 .. FEEDBACK PROBLEMS ------ 1. Planning 2. Execution 3. Evaluation 4. Redesign Figure5.3 A schematic representation of the Classical STSD method. Taylor (1989), p.28 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 89 ENVIRONMENT FUNCTIONAL CLAIMS STRUCTURAL PARADIGMS THEORIES PRACTICES KNOWLEDGE METHODOLOGY Figure 5.4 An analytical model for more integral organizational redesign (JOR approach) After: Van Eijnatten et al. (1988), p. 13 Van Eijnattenet al. (1991), p. 8 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 90 What is 'really new' in contemporary Dutch STSD method is the re-introduction of a proper balance of up to date structural system paradigm with participative process paradigm, explicitly stressing both content and process on the same advanced level. The resulting holinic participative (re)design activities are guided by the normative multiple environmental claims, which have been analyzed and given a concrete form to. The model stresses the multi-level quality of organization (re)design: the interface problem must be simultaneously dealed with at macro, meso and micro level, in order to count for the actual complexity of the (re)design intervention. This Modern STSD method follows the five methodological steps of Van Strien's regulative cycle. Each of those steps will be divided into smaller portions in such a way, that the method contains a total of 17 steps (d. figure 5.5 and box 5.1). The new method not only emphasizes the micro level, but also incorporates the meso and macro level to guarantee an integrative approach. It also is explicitly participative in character: a (re)design team of organizational members is trained to do the self-design. The proposed method for Modern STSD primarily has been developed as a practical tool, which can be used in (re)design projects. As said before, it is an intricate part of the Dutch STSD package, which also contains elaborated structural systems concepts, (re)design principles advocating more integration of aspects, and procedures supporting participative self- (re)design process. At first sight the proposed method looks very much the same as it famous predecessors like the admired and abused 'nine step method' (Foster, 1967; Emery & Trist, 1978). But at a closer look there are some striking differences: - The proposed method for Modern STSD clearly has an iterative character (see figure 5.5). This is true for the cycle as a whole, as for the constituting phases. Therefore, in practice each project can have an unique intrigate pattern of specific iterations of 'successive' steps and phases. In each stage already available techniques and instruments can be used and may improve the efficiency of the distinguished steps. We list some of them briefly for illustra tion purposes. Systems Analysis (SA) can support the problem identification and diagnostic phase. A Dutch steady state system model (In It Veld, 1978; Van Eijnatten, 1987b) governs the descriptive and evaluative process on all the levels of aggregation (macro, meso, micro). Socio-Technical Process Analysis (STPA) and Socio-Technical Task Analysis (STTA) can be used for task analysis at the micro level during diagnosis and evaluation (Van Eijnatten, 1985/1986). Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 91 A. Identification 1. Global 2. Global 3. Identification of strategical system's of bottle-necks core problems ...... analysis fIJ-- analysis (macro leveD (meso level) ... 4 I ------}------B. Diagnosis 4. Demarcation of system's boundaries y S. Detailed 6. Detailed 7. Diagnosis and ... specification of strategical fI- system's ~ analysis analysis (re)design objec- (macr.o level) (meso / micro tives (all levels) , I ------C. Action 8. (Rekonsideration Planning of the product ---a.. deshm , 9. Production to. Productior 11. Production structure structure ..... structure (re)design • (re)design (re)design (macro level) (meso level) (micro level) t I...... 14. Control 13. Control 12. Control+ structure .... structure structure (re)design (re)design f-I- (re)design (macro level) (meso level) (micro level) , 15. (Re)design of the information structure (all levels) - - -- - f" ------ti 16. Implementation :- L of the new structure (all levels) ------f------E. Evaluation 17. Evaluation of (re)design, checking of bottle-necks ------Figure 5.5 A method for Modern STSD, Dutch lOR approach after: Van Eijnatten et al. 1991), p. 10 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 92 Box 5.1 Modern STSD method: Dutch lOR approach A) Identification of the problem 7) Diagnosis and Specification of (Re)Design Objectives 1) Global Strategical Analysis The data collected in step 6 are used to determine the exact causes of the The first step contains a glob.l strategical analysis of the system at hand on a bottle-necks specified in step 3. At this point the semi..... utonomous macro level. In this stage it is important thalthe system boundaries.re widely (re)design team has very detailed knowledge of the environmental chosen, preferably on the level of what Kotler (1988) has caned 'strategic business demands (step 5) and of the causes of current problems. The.. inSights in unit' (p. 39). Basicany a strategic business unit is a single business or collection of the system can be used to detail the (re)design objectives even further. related bu.inesses that can be planned separately and, in principle, can stand alone With this full description of the (re)design objectives the diagnostic (rom the rest of the company. It has its OWn competitors which it is trying to equal phase is completed. Or .urp.... For the selected strategic busine.. unit a global.nalysis has to be done with respect to environmental demands, and the consequences of these for the (re)design of the system. It is important in this step to actually start specifying the C) Adion Planning envi~~ment.1 demands in terms of market claims with respect to controllability, 8) Reconsideration 01 the Produd Design fleXIbIlity .nd quality of work. In the succeeding ph... s of the regulative cycle these functional claims serve as design objectiVes. A good and efficiently constructed prod uct is of vital importance. In this step it is tried to reduce the number of parts and components of the 2) Global System's Analysis product al\d to minimize the number of manufacturing steps, or to The second step is a global system's analysis of the busine.. unit on a meso or prepare for easier maldng (design for production). department.llevel. startillg with a pure description and ending with an estimation 9-1l} Planning the (Re)Design of the Production Structure of the current achievement in already specified design objectives. The purpose of The (fO)design of the production structure has to be done on aU levels, the description ~ t~ provide insiders as well as outsiders with a global picture of the system contaInIng matters as layout, organizational structure, main inputs, planned in .Iop-down order. To start the planning olthe action proce.. , firstly the macro level has to be (re)designed (step 9). Next the tra.n.f~rmations and outputs. An estimation of the current achievement in design production structure 011 the meso level is prepared for (re)construction ob)CctlVes can be made by analyzing if and how much the system conforms to the (step 10). Finally the micro level production organization is requirements of the design objectives as specified in the previous step. (re)structured (step 11). In general the (re)design team will parallelli2e on 3) Identification of Bottle-Necks the macro leveL segmentize on the meso level and build in operational flexibility on the micro level. Cont~ting the design objectives of step 1 with the current state of affairs in step 2, results 11\ an inventory of bottle-necks. Herewith phase A of the regulative cycle is completed, i.e. the problems are identified. 12-14) Planning the (Re)Design of the Decision and Control Structure The (to)design of the decision and control structure is .Iso done on all levels, but in reversed order ~! Starting on the micro level B) Diagnosis (step 12), the planning of the (re)design is continued on the meso level (step 13). The (re)design of the decision and control structure is 4) Narrowing the System's Boundaries completed on the macro level (step 14). In general the (re)de.ign team To start the diagnostic phase. the system's boundaries are definitely demarcated. will allocate respective decision power as dose to the point where the Accurately demarcating the boundaries i. an important step. A too wide boundary problems origifiate. results In unnecessary extra work. A too narrow boundary results in incorrect design choices. The boundaries should be chosen thus. that the (re)design can 15) Planning the (Re)Design of the Information Structure prOVIde a solullon for all bottle-necks. Often this will imply that the originally The (re)design of the information structure should not be started before chosen system has to be (re)designed entirely. the planning of the new production and control structure satisf.ctorily have been finished. How this can be done, is still the subject of study 5) Detailed Strategical Analysis (Van Eijnatten &: Loeffen. 1990). With this step the action pl.nnil\g phase Step 1 is repeated in detail for the demarcated system. The parts of the is completed. orga~ization which were possibly deleted from the original system, are now conSIdered to be additional parts of the environment. Environmental demands 0) Intervention and the design objectives belonging to them are to be recorded as detailed and as specific as possible. 16) Implementing the Plans 6) Detailed System's Analysis This step has many lacets. From a sociotechnlcal point of view this step eontain. the actual bUilding up of the planned production and decision Now step 2 is repeated in detail lor the demarcated system. A complete inventory i.e. control structures and information systems, in close cooperation with has to be made of material and information inputs, transformations and outputs. It users and specialists. has to be established how materials and informations flow through the organization. All decision tasks have to be specified within the context of regul.ti~n loops. An inventory has to be made of all norms and of .11 supportive E) Evaluation tasks. WIth the help of all these data it h •• to be established who performs what tasks. Finally a detailed description has to be made of layout. organization.1 17) Checking of Bottle-Necks structure and units, and product design. After implementing the new system, an evaluation has to take place in terms of the (re)design objectives. If discrepancies are found, adjustments have to be made by starting a new regulative cycle. A training program to master modern STSD concepts, rules and procedures supports the (re) design team in the same way as used to be done in the participative design tradition. Tr.ining of process and content matter is seen as an essential condition for effective self-(re)design and organizational learning (De Sitterelal., 1990). Van Eijnatten et al. (1991), p. 9-13 Recently alternative Dutch task analysis instrumentation has been become available (Pot et al., 1989a/b). Stream Analysis (Porras, 1987) may be of great help in identifying core problems during the diagnostic phase as well as in planning Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 93 the (re)design actions and tracking the interventions in the action planning and intervention phase. Very useful in the action planning stage is TIED analysis (Schumacher, 1975/1979/1983; Van Amelsvoort, 1987). This (re)design technique governs segmentation of production flows, while controlling for machine interaction, process interaction and interferences. A similar technique to plan the parallelization of factory/manufacturing flows is Group Technology (Burbidge, 1975/1979; Aguren & Egren, 1980). Production Flow Analysis (Burbidge, 1975; De Witte, 1980) can be used to recognize routes of production flows in the planning phase. The Semi-Parallel Streams (SPS) design technique (Hoevenaars, 1991) is a recently developed lOR tool for parallelization of the production structure (cf. table 5.4 a/b). We want to stress here the importance of technical (re)design of the production process. Therefore technical analysis once again has become vital in Modern STSD. But also the analysis and redesign of the coordination and control structure are high on the agenda. Van Amelsvoort (1992) developed a practical model for the redesign of the control structure in which responsibility is re-allocated to self-managing production and staff groups. Of course, also the whole array of OD techniques are good supporters of the diagnostic, action planning and intervention stages in a regulative design-oriented cycle, ranging from process consultation (Harvey & Brown, 1988) to user participation and quality circle techniques (Juran, 1978; Dewar, 1980) such as Pareto Analysis, Ishikawa's 'fishbone' and Brainstorming. Also Soft Systems Methodology (Checkland, 1979a/b/1990a/b) can be used by all parties to organize and manage the process in each stage of the regulative cycle. - The proposed method for Modern STSD basically promotes controllable organi zations and democratic work structures as the same time. Although for tradi tional sociotechnologists there is something of a paradox in that statement, Dutch STSD is trying to find a proper balance between variety increasing measures like segmentation of flows constituting 'whole tasks' and variety decreasing measures like inputs selection by means of parallelization of process flow. The argument is discussed in more detail in De Sitter et al. (1990). - The proposed method for Modern STSD is basically supporting a multi-level approach. The parallelization of flows is advocated on the next higher level than segmentation is carried out. Also a strategical analysis of the system at a macro level is actually stimulated to discover the environmental demands of the very near future. In this context of course there is acknowledgement of the Search Conference (Emery, M., 1989) as a network approach for creating desirable futures under turbulent field conditions using 'vertical slices'. In Holland a STSD (re)design tradition is gaining ground in which technological, social and organizational innovation are going hand in hand. A series of more integral organizational renewal projects is being carried out along the theoretical and method(olog)icallines of The Approach to Flexible Productive Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 94 Systems (AFPS). Table 5.4a The application of the Semi-Parallel Streams (SPS) technique: diagnosis of the existing production structure prior to parallelization. Dutch JOR approach SPS technique List of symbols: unit operations: product code numbers: production dusters: a, b, c, d, e, f, g 1,2,3,4,5 old: A, B, Cj new: I, II Main structural characteristics of the production situation: product production financial required sequence Existin& allocation of unit code nr. volume interest of unit operations operations to production dusters: 1 20 300 c-f-a-d prod. allocated unit 2 50 100 b-c-e-g cluster operations 3 30 250 a-c - g A a-c-f 4 40 350 b-d-f-g B b-d 5 10 400 a-b-e-f C e-g total 150 (100%) 1400 (100%) Diagnosis of the existing production structure: product routing of products code nr. (specific duster sequence) 1 A-B 2 B-A-C 3 A-C 4 B-A-C 5 A-B-C-A synopsis of existing production structure Computation of slack accretion in control demands:1 Computation of total amount of control demands: Number of products interchanges between dusters: I Number of different products runs within dusters: from to assortment volume fin.interes· I cluster assortment volume fin.interest A B 2 30 700 A 6 160 1800 A C 3 120 700 B 4 120 1150 B A 2 90 450 C 4 130 1100 B ClIO 400 total 14 (280%) 410 (273%) 4050 (289%) CAL .JQ .JQQ total 9% (180%) 260 (173%) 2650 (189%) Hoevenaars (1991), p. 36 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 95 Table 5.4b A schematic illustration of the use of the Semi-Parallel Streams (SPS) technique as applied to the elaborated production structure example of table 5.4a. Dutch lOR approach SPS technique Recapitulation of the existing production structure of table 5.4a: number of divisible machine capacities per unit operation: unit operation code: abc d e f g ReQuired seQuence of unit operations per product Product code nr. sequence of unit operations number of divisible 6 3 3 2 1 2 2 1 c-f-a-d machine capacities 2 b-c-e-g 3 a-cog 4 b-d -fog 5 a-b-e-f First step in the parallelization process: Tentative outcome of the first step in the sorting out of indivisible capacities: parallelization process: unit operation e required unit operations per duster: products calling at unit operation e: 2,5 (new duster 1) new duster! : a b - c - e - f - g new cluster II: a - b c - d - f - g products not calling at unit operation e: 1, 3,4 (new cluster II) Second step in the parallelization process: further analysis of the distribution of the specific number of product calls per unit operation for new dusters: unit new duster I new duster II total number selected operation number of number of of calls per distribution calls per unit calls per unit unit operation of machine operation for operation for capacities fOt products 2 and 5 products 1, 3 and 4 clusterI/ll a 1 2 3 2/4 b 2 1 3 2/1 c 1 2 3 1/2 d 0 2 2 0/2 e 2 0 2 1/0 1 2 3 0/2 g 1 2 3 0/2 Third step in the parallelization process: specific duster product code nr. definite allocation of unit seqyenre 1 operation per duster. 2 2 1-2 duster I: a b - c - e 3 2 c~derI~a-b-c-d-f-g 4 2 5 1-2 synopsis ofSPS production structure redesign Computation of slack accretion in control demands: Computation of total amount of control demands: Number of products interchanges between new dusters: Number of different products runs within new clusters: from to assortment volume fin.interest duster assortment volume fin.interest I II 2 60 500 I 2 60 SOO total 2 (40%) 60 (40%) 500 (36%) II ..!L 15!l.. WI) total 7 (140%) 210 (140%) 1900 (136%) Achieved Achieved reduction of reduction slack accretion in total in control control demands: 7 (140%) 200 (133%) 2150 (153%) demands: 7 (140%) 200 (133%) 2150 (153%) Hoevenaars (1991), p. 39 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Five - Draft - August 1992 96 - The proposed method for Modern STSD is not necessarily linear in nature. The 'successive' steps do not insistently represent a prescribed time order. They also can be used as a checklist to manage aspects interconnections. The order of steps first of all are indicative of available degrees of freedom for change. For instance, a change in production structure necessarily will urge major forward changes in control and information structure, while a change in information structure is not expected to affect the production and control structure that much (see figure 5.5). The steps stress dependencies in the (re)design process. - The proposed method for Modern STSD is of course highly political in nature. Although it must be stimulated that the different parties are using it as a connecting and integrative device, insufficient democratic control of that process easily can result in coalition formation. Also there will be some sort of paradoxical self-selection process going on among firms with respect to adoption. Because the method basically supports a democratic approach, organizations which want adopting it already feel sympathy or have invested in the type of change which Modern STSD intents to accomplish. 5.6 STSD Practice and the Controversy on Design Content versus Process In the course of its development STSD paradigm has placed seesawing importance on design content versus process: - During the period of Classical STSD much emphasis has been put on content design principles. STSD practice was dominated by an expert approach. - During the period of Modern STSD the accents have been placed more and more on the process of change. STSD practice was guided by a participative approach. The main reason for this change in design strategy was the disappointing diffusion of the new work structures in the sixties. Although the shift in approach is all but absolute in consecutive projects, it significantly has stagnated the additional development of design concepts. Only in Holland the further designing of content principles flourished in the seventies (cf. paragraph 5.4), but without much apprehensibility from the international forum. In the seventies and eighties both STSD content and process design approaches simultaneously were practised many times (cf. chapter four), in rather distinct geographic areas (e.g. countries/continents), but seldom in a well balanced combination. STSD modelling itself prevented such endeavours for many years. In the mid eighties the first 'mixed content/process models' became available to facilitate an integrative approach. Figure 5.6 shows Kolodny & Stjernberg's (1986) 'change process in innovative work designs' model. r--- feedback function design work process process :', . I feedback function feedback function feedback function -' J proactive search (+) shared vision (+) learning strategy (+) everyday rationalizations (+) or or or or reactive response (-) encapsulation (-) expert strategy (-) resistance to change (-) (affects long-term (affects management (affects employee committment (affects ongoing survival of the committment and diffusion) and system viability) performance) organization) Chapter Six A Critical Evaluation of the STSD Paradigm Table of contents Page 6.1 Introduction 98 6.2 Constructive Criticism versus Widespread Pre-Judgements 99 and Knowledge Gaps 6.3 Further analysis of the STSD Paradigm 102 6.3.1 A Systematic Comparison of Development Tracks 102 and Variants 6.3.2 A Tentative Classification of STSD Approaches 111 6.4 Starting the Debate 114 6.4.1 Methodological Renewal of the STSD Paradigm 114 6.4.2 Degree of Elaboration in Terms of an (Open) 116 Systems Approach 6.4.3 A Further Examination of Basic concepts and 120 Theory Formation 6.4.4 Some Closer Look at the Diversity of Socio- 126 technical Methods 6.4.5 A Concise Critique of STSD Practice 127 6.1 Introduction In chapter six a cautious start is made to critically analyse and evaluate the STSD paradigm, using the historical context and carefully evading the widespread pre-judgements and knowledge gaps, caused by the use of secondary sources. Reviewing STSD methodology, constructive criticism is put forward with respect to its basis, the open-systems approach, basic STSD concepts and analysis/ design methods. Also a concise critique of STSD practice is provided. To rightly and fairly evaluate some 40 years of STSD theory and practice is no sinecure. But it is just an easy job in comparison with the almost divine mission to do equal justice to the many authors from all over the world who contributed to the field of STSD with a wide range of ideas and elaborations. No Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 99 critique can meet all these requirements at the same time. So, our contribution ought to be modest in every respect. This is not to say that this critical evaluation does not make a stand. It does, while at the same time avoiding too much conservatism or chauvinism. But the reader should bear in mind the author, operating in a Dutch context, inevitably cannot fully escape from such bias. 6.2 Constructive Criticism versus Widespread Pre-Judgements and Know ledge Gaps As is mentioned in chapter two, on the basis of the literature three phases can be distinguished: the Pioneering Phase of Tavistock, Classical STSD and Modern STSD. An important characteristic of these trajectories is that in terms of time they partly overlap. They are also illustrative of the discontinuous development of STSD in different countries and continents. Each development trajectory more or less concerns specific concepts, individual methodologies and views. Constructive criticism should take into account the peculiarities of these distinctive phases. Our criticism of the STSD paradigm in many respects contradicts what has been written before. According to Van Eijnatten et al. (1991) in the literature there seems to be only slow progress in system-theoretical, methodological and conceptual debates concerning what is generally known as core STSD. Probably one or more of the following circumstances are accountable for this: "STSD key publications have been highly dispersed in heterogeneous volumes and in exotic international journals, while a number of conceptual papers never reached these media at all. Prolonged difficulties in obtaining such documents have urged authors to copy older or non-original sources, resulting in inaccurate or incomplete discussions of the subject matters; STSD literature is hardly organized with respect to the paradigmatic generations. Each author implicitly represents his/her country with its own idiosyncratic time schedule of STSD phases and specific mixture of conceptual developments. STSD lacks an universal approach; STSD paradigm is mainly a strategy. Originally it has been developed as a method, not as a theory. STSD method can produce a whole array of concrete, highly situation-specific end results which are not always reported as STSD inspired endeavours. STSD has been strongly based on (a narrow version of) the open-systems Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 100 concept. Early design principles lacked appropriate conceptual profoundness. As said before, part of the problem inevitably had to do with the severe immaturity of systems thinking in the fifties and sixties. It is not before the seventies start, that more basic solutions are put forward. Paradoxically these new insights have not been picked up accordingly in STSD literature. In the same period of time STSD paradigm shifted gradually from an expert approach to participative process. Because of this, further development of more specific and accurate structural design concepts faded and moved more and more into the background." Van Eijnatten et al. (1991), p. 5-6 Because of these circumstances, potential supporters of the STSD paradigm find it hard to acquire untainted phase-specific knowledge. But also experienced practitioners often will be bogged in polemic discussions about STSD's scientific status and methodology. Because of the fact primary sources are not easy available, and systematic handbooks or specialized sociotechnical journals are lacking, STSD knowledge is rather fragmented. Consequently many knowledge gaps exist among practitioners. The literature is full of 'small mistakes' which add up to a highly inappropriate body of knowledge. Take for instance the critical analysis by Kelly (1978). He 'discovered' some differences in emphasis in the search for theoretical explanations for the semi autonomous work group phenomenon. According to Kelly both Trist and Rice gave the group work a socio-cultural basis by stressing the social organization of production and the local and industrial culture. Kelly wrote that Emery & Thorsrud (1964/1969), also supported by Davis (1957/1962), later turned away from this explicit view-point in favour of a more individually oriented task design within a group context. But he was wrong, because he was not acquainted with the splitting of the Tavistock into the HRC and CASR, or the reasons for the split (personal communication with Emery, 1990). Kelly's 'distortion' in Human Relations up till now went uncorrected. Another instance is the centrality of some STSD publications. Although Herbst's (1962) Autonomous group functioning provided an attempt to ground STSD paradigm in a deductive way, according to Emery (1990, personal correspondence) it was unhelpful and misleading. Rice's (1963) Enterprise and its environment was not the spearhead of Tavvy's work on STSD, as Kelly (1978) suggested, but only a sort of 'hang-fire' after the split. As Emery wrote me, the same is true for Miller & Rice's (1967) Systems of organization. Being a mere 'copy' of the Tavistock work on STSD, Katz & Kahn's (1967) The social psychology of organizations was by no means an original contribution. It contained no new information, but indeed it very much helped the introduction of Classical STSD Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 101 in the United States. In attempting to 'de-mythologize' STSD and simultaneously putting it into the broader cultural context of social architecture, Van Beinum (personal communication, 1989) pays attention to central points of confusion, summarized in the following three statements: - "Sociotechnical systems design is used as a tautology: all work organizations have the characteristics of some sociotechnical system, both those that function well and those that are inefficient. It is thus a tautology and therefore it makes no sense to state that work systems should be designed as sociotechnical systems; - The sociotechnical concept is used as a 'straw man', Le. it is a metaphorical way of speaking. Sociotechnical systems thinking is the core of a conceptual strategy. It is a method whose aim is to map out the interdependencies between a social and a technical system; Tavistock never presented it as a theory. By elevating the sociotechnical method to a theory, and subsequently labelling it a bad theory, one follows the disastrous route of non argumentation with Don Quichotte-like characteristics. In addition, one also discourages the use of a perfectly suitable method; - Sociotechnical systems design is used in such a way that it is given the meaning of 'misplaced concreteness'. STSD is applied correctly when the sociotechnical systems characteristics of work organizations are mapped out by means of STSD, that is to say as a descriptive and analytical model that can be used for design purposes in a much broader and different context. However, if the logic of sociotechnical analysis is identified with the logic dealing with organizational change, and as a result if it is used to understand and handle processes of organizational change and learning, one becomes the victim of the 'deception of inappropriate concreteness'. This causes the most critical form of confusion, whereby two different realities are mixed up. The process of cultural change - which is the core of the radical conversion from the old to the new organizational paradigm, which is based on the design principle of 'redundancy of functions', can neither be merely understood, nor just be led by the sociotechnical systems way of thinking. This will inevitably lead to a form of 'social engineering', which implies that we reduce the subject to ob ject. Despite our good intentions we then throwaway the baby with the bath water." Van Beinum (1989), personal communication The above misconceptions are described as simple ideal types. In reality they occur in numerous combinations, varieties and gradations. The socio- Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 102 technical way of thinking has developed in the course of time into a subtle approach which extends far beyond the original method. Nevertheless it does happen that the way of thinking described in the misconceptions are inherent in the advanced design approach as assumptions (which are not visible at first sight) (Van Beinum, 1990b). Trying to escape from those delusions, and setting the stage for more balanced evaluations, a further analysis of STSD tracks and variants is made, using the SSM-inspired framework developed in chapter two (d. figure 2.1). 6.3 Further Analysis of the STSD Paradigm 6.3.1 A Systematic Comparison of Development Tracks and Variants In order to enable a rough comparison, the different STSD approaches are further analyzed as far as their applied purposeful conceptual holon and their purposeful human activity holon are concerned (d. figure 6.1). In paragraph 6.3.2 we will refer to this distinction as content versus process of research. used in the (perceived) reality itself systemic process of research/ enquiry purposeful human activity holon yields systemic content of research/ enquiry purposeful conceptual holon Figure 6.1 A SSM-inspired framework for a rough comparison of STSD approaches For each approach also the perceived problem situation and dominant world view will be specified. The results of the examination, which are summarized in figure 6.2 to 6.6, are as follows: - The STSD Pioneering Phase (d. figure 6.2) uses as its purposeful conceptual Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 103 holon some earlier developed open-systems models and concepts from biology, logic and cybernetics (cf. table 3.1). As its normative design theory it uses the composite work group as a successful theory of practice, des tilled from the English mining studies. Originally Tavistock uses as its purposefUl human activity holon action research-based rules of thumb aimed at work group and department level. This fabric developed later into the Classical STSD approach. Dominant world view: not specified used in the (perceived) reality itself problem situatioru at work group/ department level (type 1) ystemic process of research/ enquiry purposeful human activity holon - descriptive open-systems yields model I - normative design theory I - models and concepts from other disciplines - composite work group as theory of practice Figure 6.2 A rough SSM-inspired analysis of the Pioneering Phase of STSD - Classical STSD (cf. figure 6.3) uses as its purposefUl conceptual holon a further developed descriptive variant of the original open-systems models from the above mentioned disciplines (cf. chapter five, paragraph 5.3), including a typology of different environments and the methodology of 'directive corre lations' (cf. chapter five, paragraph 5.2, and chapter three, paragraph 3.2.3/ 3.2.4). As its normative design theory it uses task redesign principles (cf. box 3.4) to create semi-autonomous work groups, stressing predominantly the quality of work aspect. Classical STSD uses as its purposeful human activity holon an expert analysis and design methodology using the nine-step method, Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 104 including the analysis of variances, and the joint optimization approach of both the technical and social 'system' (cf. chapter six, paragraph 6.4.3, and chapter three, paragraph 3.2.4/3.3.3). Classical STSD defines the problem situation at work group/department level (type 1, cf. chapter two, paragraph 2.5), while its dominant world view is participative democracy (cf. chapter one, paragraph 1.2). Dominant world view: participative democracy the (perceived) reality ---.;..:...:.used in itself problem situations at work group/ department level - expert analysis and design (type 1) methodology II - nine-step method (variance analysis) - jOint optimization approach - descriptive open-systems yields model II -normative design theory II - environment - social typology system - directive correlation - technical - task redesign system principles - quality of - semi-autonomous work workgroup Figure 6.3 A rough SSM-inspired analysis of Classical STSD/North American consultancy - Participative Design (d. figure 6.4) uses as its purposeful conceptual holon a further refined variant of the Classical STSD open-systems model which is capable of supporting active adaptive planning of desirable future scenarios (cf. chapter four, paragraph 4.2.1). As its normative design theory it uses the democratic organizational genotype, the general psychological requirements, Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 105 the concept of self-managing groups and the redundancy of functions/skills philosophy (d. chapter four, paragraph 4.2.2). Participative Design uses as its purposeful human activity holon a participative analysis and self-design method ology accompanied by skills and process training (participative design work shop, multi-skilling table, development of human researchers workshop, skills training programme, search conference; d. chapter four, paragraph 4.2.2). Participative Design defines the problem situation at work group, department, enterprise and inter-organizational domain level (types 1 to 3, d. chapter two, paragraph 2.5), while its dominant world view is participative democracy (d. chapter one, paragraph 1.2). Dominant world view: participative democracy the (perceived) reality .----used in itself problem situatio at work group/ -participative analysis and self department/ enter design methodology III-A prise / inter-organi - skills and rocess trainin III- zational domain leve - participative design workshop (all types 1 to 3) - multi-skilling table - development of human resources workshop - skills training programm ...... __--'- ___---, - search conference - descriptive open-systems yields model III-A -normative design theory III-A - organizational - PD open-systems genotypes model - general psychological - active adaptive requirements (work planning values) - desirable - redundancy futures of functions/skills Figure 6.4 A rough SSM-inspired analysis of Modern STSD, Variant A: Participative Design Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 106 - Integral Organizational Renewal (cf. figure 6.5) uses as its purposeful conceptual holon a broad and integral PCI open-systems model, which has benefitted clearly from new system-theoretical insights (cf. chapter four, paragraph 4.3.1 and chapter five, paragraph 5.4). As its normative design theory it uses the balance model based on social interaction and aimed at integral design of flexibility, controllability and quality of work, with interference and demands for control/ control capacity as its main concepts, and whole task groups/ oper ational groups as its main organs (cf. chapter four, paragraph 4.3.2). Integral Organizational Renewal uses as its purposeful human activity holon a participa tive integral organizational renovation methodology, supported by training courses (design strategies and rules, informed self-design including all aspects, at all levels, with all parties, parallelization and segmentation of the produc tion structure, reduction of complexity, and control capacity built in every task; d. chapter four, paragraph 4.3.2/4.3.3). Integral Organizational Renewal defines the problem situation at work group, department, and enterprise level (types 1 and 2, cf. chapter two, paragraph 2.5), while its dominant world view is a functional variant of participative democracy (cf. later in this paragraph and in paragraph 6.4.2). Dominant world view: the (perceived) reality participative democracy; used in itself problem situations at work group/ -participative integra organizationa department/ enter renovation methodology III-B prise level - training courses III-B (types 1 and 2) - design strategies and rules - informed self-design: including all aspects, at all levels, with all parti - parallelization/segmentation of P - reduction of complexity - control capacity built in eV,...1::t=a=sk=t::===:;--, - descriptive _____---'l~ie~lEd~s ____---I~ open-systems model III-B -normative design theory III-B - PCI-model - interference - Production structure - integral design - Control structure - controllability balance - Information structure whole task group - operational group Figure 6.5 A rough SSM-inspired analysis of Modern STSD, Variant B: Integral Organizational Renewal Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 107 - Democratic Dialogue (cf. figure 6.6) has not specified its purposeful conceptual holon as far as its systems model is concerned. It uses as its normative design theory a mixture of criteria for participation and some critical theory, and applies democratic dialogue, local theories and everyday language as central concepts (cf. chapter four, paragraph 4.4.2). Democratic Dialogue uses as its purposeful human activity holon a participative development methodology and career training (development organization approach, dialogue conference method, restructuring of language/communication, development phases/ cycle; cf. chapter four, paragraph 4.4.3). Democratic Dialogue defines the perceived reality as complex meta-problem situations at inter-organizational domain level (type 3 and beyond, cf. chapter two, paragraph 2.5), while its dominant world view is participative democracy (d. chapter one, paragraph 1.2). Dominant world view: participative democracy the (perceived) reality used in itself complex meta- problem situations at - participative development method inter-organizational ology III-C domain level (type 3 - career trainin III-C and beyond) - development organiza tion approach - dialogue conference method - restructuring of language/ communication - development phases/ cycle not yields specified - critical theory - democratic dialogue - criteria for participation - local theories - everyday language Figure 6.6 A rough SSM-inspired analysis of Modern STSD, Variant C: Democratic Dialogue Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 108 - An analysis of North American consultancy principally follows the same lines as Classical STSD, although this approach also combines elements of other variants as well, and is by doing so actually somewhat broadening its design theory and the perceived problem situation. Perhaps a short note should be made about Morgan's (1986) classification of STSD. Entirely based on its descriptive holonic concept only, while disgarding its pivotal analytical human activity holonic process, Morgan's (1986) classifica tion of STSD as a systems approach using mainly a organism-kind of metaphor, is rather limited and further do not take into account its explicit action research context. On the basis of the SSM-inspired analysis we now can make a rough comparison between the different STSD approaches, excluding the pioneering phase because of centrality reasons: - With respect to the content of enquiry (purposeful conceptual hoi on) each approach has its own typical descriptive model and normative design theory. Open-systems models and concepts are clearly different in terms of content, actually arousing considerable confusion of tongues. Also the design concepts are highly approach-specific, although all share the key construct of auton omous groups. - Regarding the process of enquiry (purposeful human activity holon), all approaches use some sort of training programme and a specified (re)design method, although the peculiarities are rather distinct and often only compar able on paper. Each approach uses a ideosyncratic methodology towards change, which is not easily understood by the respective adherents, or is increasingly criticized as erroneous. - Looking at the several definitions of the problem situation it should be noted that the approaches could be supplementary to each other. Participative Design covers the broadest range, but could still be extended with some aspects of the larger societal problem definition of Democratic Dialogue and the reverse. Integral Organizational Renewal also could gain from Democratic Dialogue and the other way around. American consultancy could profit from all other approaches, and actually is increasingly trying to do so. - Although there are some differences in emphasis, conceptual articulation and wording, all approaches share the dominant world view of participative democracy. This means some proclaiming of the paragon in which the preferred power relation is delineated as symmetrical dependence between workers, supervisors and managers (d. Emery, 1982). Emery (1977, p. 77) suggested the ideals of beauty, humanity, homonomy and nurturance are Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 109 important ingredients of such a world view. He also is enumerating the pattern of causal determination inducing the transition from the old to the new organizational paradigm (d. figure 6.7). Emery (1989) states: "The critical problem is the introduction of a form of work organization that both demands and creates new skills for an obvious return in higher productivity" (p. 85). productivity democratization committment multi-skilling of work itself quality Figure 6.7 The pattern of causal determination which express the dominant world view of participative democracy. Emery (1989), p. 90 Although the Dutch approach of Integral Organizational Renewal is rejecting the pushing forward on any specific values or ideals as postulates because they are constantly changing through social interaction, the declared reduction in the division of labour actually serves the same function in that approach. Other authors also have tried to contrast the different (Modern) STSD approaches. We will elaborate on two such attempts. Babiiroglu (1992) articulates that the development of STSD as a paradigm has been influenced by the systemic-pluralistic problem contexts action re searchers have experienced. Although he is discriminating somewhat divergent tracks and variants and is labeling them differently, his basic mapping out of STSD approaches is almost identical to ours. According to Babiiroglu (1991) in STSD's pioneering phase "it was the development of the technical system that moved faster than the developments in the social system" (p. 42), whereas in Classical STSD IParticipative Design "it was the realization that social systems had to cope with turbulent environments produced by the increasing rate of change, uncertainty and the complexity of multi-directional interdependencies between and within the social system and its environment" (p. 42-43). Concern ing Democratic Dialogue Babiiroglu (1991) states that it has "emerged owing to the societal problems that were clearly outside in the domain of one single orga nization" (p. 43). He did not mention Integral Organizational Renewal in his comparison attempt. All key authors have tried to contrast their own approach with one or two significant others. A compilation of those attempts is shown in table 6.1. The four final aspects have been added by Karlsen (1992). As can be seen in this table, each Modern STSD variant has developed its own typical approach as a reaction to Classical STSD. Aspect Classical STSD Participative Integral Organiz- Democratic Design ational Renewal Dialogue ~ ~ ;:s basic methodological experimentally diffusion professionally dialogue ~ ~ -('I) &;< orientation oriented oriented oriented oriented 0'1 ..Q.. view on functional '"-l IJ) requirements: ~ ~ tJ definition of relationships between g , initial conditions zero point future production structure ~ "'1;':1 search and control structure ongoing ..... ~ ;::a ~ - relationships between processes -.... ;:s o· tT1 structure and problem ;.:s ~: definitions by inside and ..Q., .....~ outside interest groups gs ~;:s ~ the logic of the linear self-generati ve iterative learning interactive ('I) () ;::ro (re) design project learning ;:::-~ ;::a ~ chief theoretical socia-technical theory / open-systems model the theory of integral theory of ~ ~... sources socia-psychological for diffusion/ open-systems design participative ....~ IJ) ~ H-. theory / theory of redundancy of (sociotechnology ) democracy ....co' t organization skills R' ...tJ legitimacy the content of the active adaptive the functional participation in til ~ ..Q., I solution planning requirements process which creates ;:::- ~ the solution -('I) ~ ll:: leading actors few vertical slice at the start: the given many ~ ..... 6.3.2 A Tentative Classification of STSD Approaches Van Beinum (1990a) presented a model for classification of organizations on the basis of democratic principles and valuesl expressed in both organiz ational structures and social processes (c.f. table 6.2). Table 6.2 A model for classification of organizations democratic values/principles expressed in SOCIAL PROCESS low high TYPE 4 TYPE 2: high social participative engineering democracy TYPE 1: TYPE 3: low bureaucracy parochial democracy Van Beinum (1990a)1 p. 9 He distinguished four types of organization: 1. bureaucracy: organization with undemocratic structures and undemocratic processes. 2. democracy: organization with democratic structures and democratic processes. 3. parochial democracy: organization with democratic processesl but with un democratic structures. 4. social engineering: organization with democratic structuresl but with undemo cratic processes. On the basis of this categorizationVan Beinum identified type 2 as the new organizational paradigml which he called 'Participative Democracyl. A type 2 organization should be the ultimate goal of Socio-Technical Systems design (STSD). According to Van Beinum, type 1,3 and 4 are mere alternative readings of the old organizational paradigm. This simple but elegant model can be used to classify the following four Anno.ls of STSD - F.M. van Eijno.tten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 112 main STSD appraoches: a. Classical STSD: The STSD approach, which has been developed and used by Fred Emery in Norway in the sixties. b. Participative Design: The STSD approach, which has been developed and used by Fred and Merrelyn Emery in Australia starting from the seventies on wards. c. Democratic Dialogue: The STSD approach which has been developed and used by Bjorn Gustavsen in Sweden from the eighties onwards. d. Integral Organizational Renewal: The STSD approach which has been developed and used by Ulbo de Sitter in The Netherlands from the eighties onwards. Figure 6.8 summarizes the attempt to classify these main STSD approaches in terms of Van Bein urn's model. Each approach is showed as a 'vector' in the two- dimensional space spanned by the structural and process dimension. The notation suggests the approaches are so to speak 'on the move'. In the course of their development they are moving in a certain direction. As can be seen in figure 6.8, the Classical STSD approach created moderate democratic structures (only on shopfloor and departmental level), and started as an external consultative or expert approach (democratic process is nearly absent), which gradually had changed in the direction of a more participative approach (moderate internal democratic process). Figure 6.8 also illustrates, that Participative Design started as a design approach with a moderate democratic process (organizational deep slice), and a minimal democratic structure (the 'little golden book' contains just the archetypes). In its developmental course there is further improvement of the democratic process (PD-workshop; Search Conference), but no more guidance with respect to democratic structures (for instance design suggestions for supportive staff structures are absent). As can be read from figure 6.8, the strong point of the Democratic Dialogue design approach is its more than moderate democratic process (inter / intra organizational network-oriented activities/conferences) which is still improv ing, while the weak point is its initial neglect of democratic structure. This weakness is recognized and is accounted for. Figure 6.8 is also explicit in stating that Integral Organizational Renewal approach is just the other way around. Strong in democratic structures (all sorts of suggestions on micro, meso and macro level), but initially weak in democratic process (expert-driven developments and implementation). A more parti cipative approach is recently developed. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 113 democratic structure social engineering INTEGRAL DE SITTER LASSICAL SD 1ST/EMERY PARTICIPATIVE DESIG';O,lN____ ...- EMERY undemocratic democratic process process DEMOCRATIC DIALOGUE GUSTAVSEN Ibureaucracy I undemocra tic parochial structure democrac Figure 6.8 A tentative classification of main STSD approaches. Van Eijnatten (1992) The developmental vectors of the first two approaches are exclusively located in the 'participative democracy' quadrant of Van Beinum's model: in a way one can say Classical STSD and Participative Design are pure Participative Democracy design approaches. But the length of their development vectors is restricted, which is indicating their developmental trajectories are limited. The developmental vectors of the second two approaches are not exclusively located in the Participative Democracy quadrant. It seems plausible to state Democratic Dialogue started from the Parochial Democracy quadrant, while Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 114 Integral Organizational Renewal started from the Social Engineering quadrant. These approaches are so to speak not pure in their Participative Democracy origin. But their developmental vectors are much longer and more sloped, indicating there is serious improvement on both dimensions towards ideal STSD. Of course this is not an attempt to look for the best STSD approach. All mentioned approaches are well-established and highly valued in their own world context. This tentative classification is only made to help clarifying the positions authors from the respective lines of development are taking in polemic discussions and scientific debate. 6.4 Starting the Debate 6.4.1 Methodological Renewal of the STSD Paradigm Of course it is impossible to present an exhaustive listing of all potential methodological discussion items. Let's take the innovation issue to start the debate. Pava (1986) complains that "methodologically, little has been developed beyond the conventional 'nine step method' forged by the pioneering efforts of Emery (1959/1977) and of Davis and Canter (1956) based on early change projects" (p. 202). But he is wrong. There has been significant methodological innovations in the last two decades. Although most problems concerning methodology and systems theory have already been solved, international diffusion is hampered by the fact that a majority of studies is stated in the own national language. Take for instance the Dutch approach of Integral Organizational Renewal of the firm. Almost twenty years of age now, the visibility in the international literature is still minimal, despite the fact that its contribution to the methodological renewal of STSD has been quite significant, as we shall illustrate: . With respect to system-theoretical aspects, there have been two major develop ments. First, at the time that Ackoff & Emery (1972) published 'On purposeful systems', De Sitter (1973) presented a system-theoretical paradigm of social interaction, in which there is a systematical thorough definition of systems concepts. Second, In 't Veld (1978) developed an elaborated analytical model of a system in steady state with equifinality, which also have made it possible to systematically differentiate between succeeding systems levels in an ordered way. Both contributions can be characterized as 'empty cartridge' approaches, constituting some neutral system-theoretical framework on which the Classical STSD view can be more firmly based. . With respect to methodological aspects there also has been significant Dutch contributions. In an attempt to support the process of giving full scientific Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 115 c Limited generalizing: from N=l to N=K Knowledge faults Local Skill faults theory of Selection faults practice (N = 1) ~ LITERATUREu-r D B Figure 6.9 A schematic representation of developed 'temporary' methodology: a basic scheme for design-oriented research after: Van Eijnatten & Hoevenaars (1989), p. 295; Van Eijnatten (1990), p. 54; Van Eijnatten (1992), p. 2 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 116 status to the action model, Van Strien (1975) proposed the 'regulative cycle of diagnostic and consultative thinking'. This cycle contains five phases: identification of the problem, diagnosis, action planning, intervention and evaluation. The unique aspect here is not the action cycle as such, but the epistemological and methodological treatment of action research as an equal alternative to the traditional scientific method (Van Strien, 1986). Central in it is the 'theory of practice'. According to Van Strien (1975) "the view of science as a system of statements is making place for a view of science as a set of conceptual and methodological tools in approaching reality" (p. 601). Modern STSD interventions can be methodologically treated as theories of practice. On the basis of Van Strien's (1986) regulative cycle and Den Hertog's (1988) knowl edge cycle Van Eijnatten (1989/1990/1992) developed the so-called 'basic scheme for design-oriented research', a tentative conceptual framework to describe the multi-cycled methodology of STSD (d. figure 6.9). The action-based STSD knowledge production starts always within companies/enterprises with the design of new practice (d. Box A in figure 6.9), eventually - if so minded - supported by (process) consultancy (d. box B in figure 6.9). Successful new prac tice can be seen as an N=l local theory of practice which can be collected in different settings and evaluated by research in order to try to generalize them to middle range theories of practice (d. box C in figure 6.9). Those theories will be documented in the literature and communicated to practitioners and consul tants (d. box D in figure 6.9) . . With respect to design aspects, in Holland in the last decade Modern STSD paradigm widened towards an integral approach, covering more relevant systems aspects (production, control, information), including different levels of aggregation (micro, meso and macro level in the organization and its relevant environment) and at the same time combining design content (integration of tasks in self-controlled organizational units) and process (training for self design, participation, organizational learning). Certainly it is the individual researcher's own responsibility to present important findings to an international scientific forum. Paradoxically, despite the ever increasing international scientific networks, language barriers still prevent scholars to take full notice of the work of colleagues for whom English is not their native language. 6.4.2 Degree of Elaboration in Terms of an (Open) Systems approach Another Dutch contribution to the development of STSD, which helped in the breaking of new ground, was provided by Ulbo de Sitter. He was the first to formulate objections against the original paradigmatic elaboration of Classical Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 117 STSD both in terms of content and methodology. The most important items of his fundamental criticism are briefly summarized in box 6.1. Box 6.1 A summary of the most relevant objections against the original foundations of Classical STSD II _ The inadequacy of static structure concepts used. - the logical contradiction of sociological value and psychological need postulates proclaimed into axioms, which exclude one another. - the impossibility of the use of models which are partial in their cores at different aggregation levels, and as an extension, the impossibility to arrive at an integral approach. - the logical insolubility of a, once assumed to be unambiguous, relation between the form of behaviour and its function. - the impossibility to trace so-called 'operational disturbances' caused by processes obstructing each other, within a static, partial mode1." Adapted from: De Sitter (1974a), p. 70-72 Source: Van Eijnatten (1985), p. 53 De Sitter's objections are concerned with, among other things, the original system-theoretical foundation of the paradigm and with its partial and static elaboration as socio-scientific approach in the aspect area of the quality of work. Van der Zwaan (1970/1971/1973) also points to the lack and insufficient specificity of the definitions used. These should, in his view, be determined by the exchange axiom of social systems. In view of the minimum availability of numerous 'Tavvi' documents in which Fred Emery in particular has performed much significant conceptual digging, one may wonder whether all this criticism is justified. It is my conclusion that, even after having read these development papers and considering the directive correlations methodology, the above mentioned points of criticism do actually cut ice. Let me elaborate two central points for illustration purposes. From The Netherlands comes the reproach that (the American variant of) Classical STSD has used a partial problem definition, stressing too much the human conditions: "The (... ) point of criticism concerns the theoretical elaboration on the open system characteristic of production systems in traditional STSD. This principle implies that a production system cannot be autonomous in its choice with respect to technology, industrial relations, social values, products and services because it is at all sides tied to time-dependent and changing, technological, political, cultural, economic and environmental conditions that govern the Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 118 relationships between a system and its environment. It seems that traditional sociotechnical systems design has departed from this point of view by stressing the primary importance of the human conditions which production systems should meet: the 'Quality of Working Life'. It is this bias that has given a dominant branch in sociotechnical systems design the image of a specialism in the area of QWL and Industrial Democracy. As such, it had to base its identity in fulfilling a critical function, by contending that the quality of work is important and should no longer be kept in disregard. This rather unconditional stress on QWL cannot be reconciled with a truly 'open' theory of systems. The theoretical problem is not to formulate a plea for a reshuffling of priorities, but to acquire insight into the manner in which structures impede or foster the balance between a differentiated set of functions to be performed. This implies that from a sociotechnical point of view, functional requirements with respect to customers, the physical environment, the labour market, suppliers of capital, workers etc., should be regarded as functionally equivalent. Sociotechnical systems design should be as good in shortening delivery times and in designing effective information systems as in improving jobs. An open systems model presupposes a comprehensive or integral rather than partial problem definition. As a partial theory with respect to a partial set of functions, sociotechnical systems design would simply join the range of already too numerous managerial specialisations such as informatics, production technology, logistics, auditing, maintenance, marketing, quality control and so on." De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 5-6 Also the systems basis of STSD has not been adapted to new insights on time: liThe (... ) point of criticism concerns the definition of a sociotechnical system as a combination of social and technical 'systems' viewed as sub-systems [Emery, 1959; Trist, 1981]. As an applied science, STSD holds the view that the approach to organizational (re)design must be an integral one: social as well as technical aspects are involved and insight into their mutual interdependence is the designer's key to strike a balance between the two. In (social) systems theory, a system structure is defined in terms of relationships between sub-systems and aspect-systems and their couplings to the system's external structure. A sub-system is defined as the complete set of all functional relationships between a subset of system elements, and an aspect-system is defined as a subset of functional relationships between the complete set of system elements. Thus, conceived as a sub-system, the social (sub-)system would contain all Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 119 human elements (and their attributes such as attitudes, values and norms), and the technical (sub-)system would represent mostly human artifacts such as chairs, tables, telephones, (... ), machines, buildings, and so on. Clearly, the relationships between elements grouped in such a manner are nominal. The conventional sociotechnical definition of the social and technical 'systems' as sub-systems contradicts the notion of a production system as an integral functional system. The relations which constitute a real production system are functional relationships in which matter, energy and time are involved. The separation of social and technical system-elements into sub-systems transform these functional relationships into nominal ones. In consequence, the concepts destroy the very object of analysis and impede rather than foster a comprehens ive understanding of organizational dynamics. The twin concept of the social and technical system can also be used in a functional instead of nominal sense. In this case, its meaning changes drastically. No longer the nominal difference between subsets of 'social' and 'technical' elements is used as the basic distinction, but the functional difference between 'social' or 'technical' relationships between the same set of elements are used as the fundamental criterion. In terms of systems theory, social and technical systems would thus be conceived as aspect-systems. In principle, this redefinition would open the opportunity to view organizational dynamics as a set of inter active relationships between functionally differentiated processes within and between sub- and aspect-systems. In social systems theory, however, in each functional relationship cognitive, as well as normative and technical dimen sions would of course be implied. This is so, because in order to 'close' an interaction cycle - whatever its function - three sets of correlated norms must be implied: cognitive (semantic) norms (in order to map a state of affairs), pragmatic norms (in order to attach value to cognitions), and technical norms (in order to make a choice of action based on insight into 'if ... then' relationships). Aspect systems, as they come into being in the form of subsets of interactions engaged in the production of a specific input-output function, do not differ in this respect, as they always contitute a configuration of social (semantic and pragmatic) as well as technical (syntactical) functions. In other words, the choice for an integral approach implies that the focus should be on studying the manner in which a system's structure determines its capacity to select, develop, coordinate, reconcile and balance a multitude of input-output functions with respect to a multitude of interaction partners within and between systems in each of which cognitive as well as evaluative and technical dimensions are implied." De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 6-7 One might wonder what sort of reactions this statement should elicit from Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 120 the other main actors. In this case we have one received from Emery: "The social 'elements' (people!) are organized in social systems and the technical elements into technical systems. 'The social elements' behave, the technical elements only act or interact. The laws governing technical elements 'are functional relationships in which matter, energy and time are involved': they are rate-dependent laws, the variables are epistemically dependent and they lead us to the integral, closed systems models for which we can thank Descartes, Newton and Laplace. The laws or 'rules' governing biological, psychological and sociological behaviors are time independent and hence epistemically indepen dent of the variables of matter, energy and time (Pattee, 1977; Sommerhoff, 1950). In the year 1950 Ashby was trying to sell us a cybernetic model that enabled feedback (and hence learning, adaptation etc.) to be described in Skinnerian terms of physically defined stimuli, or messages, and responses. In Science (1950) Von Bertalanffy introduced us to a pseudo-model of open systems (for which Prigogine would subsequently get a Nobel). That same year Sommerhoff and Trist were grappingly with the fact that we had to cope intellectually with different, but coordinated levels. In 1954 Nicolas Rashevsky publicly renounced the strategy he had himself pioneered of trying to reduce biological phenomena to integral metrical models. In trying to revive this strategy De Sitter and his mates are, to use a nautical phrase, pissing up-wind; they are simply replaying a cracked recording. De Sitter's theory is a reversion to General Systems Theory and I think I made clear what I think of that in the introductions to my Penguin collections, Systems Thinking (1969/1982). It is not related to STSD and its development except for representing what STSD rejected and sought to replace. It would certainly be misleading to label it 'Modern STSD' as it has nothing to do with STSD, it is just straight industrial engineering systems theory. Of course the concept of 'joint optimization' only becomes meaningful if one is studying the coupling of different kinds of systems. The coupling of unlike systems is inherently non-linear but, as Sommerhoff has demonstrated, their study need not be less scientific, just different." Emery (1992), author's personal communication Even the unexperienced reader would notice the polemic potentials in these two statements. 6.4.3 A Further Examination of Basic Concepts and Theory Formation In the literature STSD most often is associated with the early Tavistock Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 121 pioneering work. Several authors have been criticizing the initial conceptu alisations which indeed suffer from the growing pains of systems thinking in the fifties and sixties. The conceptual roots of traditional STSD paradigm lay in biology, cybernetics and neurophysiology (Litterer, 1963; Herbst, 1974; Lilienfeld, 1978). Although epoch-making insights like the open-system conception, steady state and equifinality (Von Bertalanffy, 1950), the law of Requisite Variety (Ashby, 1958) and learning in random networks (Beurle, 1962) have had considerable impact on STSD scholars, an adequate translation and incorporation of these new concepts in early STSD models is problematic. In his commentary to the historical review by Trist (1981) Hackman (1981) has pointed to the elusive character of STSD's basic notions. According to Van der Zwaan (1975) in general definition of concepts is poor. Also, the system-theoretical model hasn't been worked out properly. For instance, the vital concept of 'steady state' is not much elaborated. A main point of theoretical critique is that traditional STSD has not reached a satisfying level of maturity. Conceptual clarity as well as coherence is cri ticized especially. Sociotechnical design principles mainly have been borrowed from 'natural occurring field experiments'. Although Cherns (1976/1987) did try twice to summarize those principles, the resulting theory never has become a very coherent one. According to Kuipers and Rutte (1987) the principles haven't been clearly attributed to different kinds of organizational structure (production, control, preparationt while design application order has been totally neglected. Also the scope of traditional STSD theory has been judged as too narrow. In addition, conventional STSD is not as integral as it claims to be. According to Van der Zwaan (1975) traditional STSD has occupied itself almost exclusively with psychological needs, resulting in unacceptable reductionism with respect to the social aspect of the system. In addition, there is the controversy over techno logy and organizational structure. According to Van Dijck (1981) this concerns a tautology, because the system-theoretically founded technology concept of traditional STSD includes some organizational-structural characteristics. In terms of concepts there are more points of criticism, for example Van der Zwaan's (1975) reproach regarding the fact that Classical STSD had refrained from giving a precise definition of central concepts. An analysis of norms, values and structure of the social system is also lacking. Finally (perhaps the reason for the first two statements), the available knowledge is too fragmented. In his view a good handbook on Classical STSD has never been published. One can ask if this criticism is justified. This is an anonimous version of Emery's reply: "One would expect an upholder of either the Mechanist or Formist versions of Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 122 , ------. General Systems Theory (GST) to feel uneasy with the imprecision, and apparent lack of logical rigour, that characterizes contextualist approaches such as STSD. Both of the former are analytical and the latter is synthetic. The dispersiveness of STSD would also conflict with the integrative aspirations of the Mechanist (Pepper, 1950, p. 146). Engineers tend to favour the mechanistic version of GST; mathematicians the formist. I have no wish to leave the matter with this argument ad hominen. ( ... ) As a baseline reference I will take "Some Characteristics of Sociotechnical Systems (SCSTS) (Emery, 1959). Although some commentators judge that 'a good manual for sociotechnical research workers has never appeared' this document has served this purpose for us. It was deliberately labelled 'Some characteristics' because it was the first manual of its kind and much more practical and theor etical work was obviously needed. It was, in fact, designed to elicit funds for such research from the DSIR (UK). 1. Industry or organization as system. The very first matter discussed in SCSTS is why the enterprise is taken as the reference for STSD; not the industry, comJT any nor organization. 'It has more of the connotation of an organization of men and materials about some human endeavour' (SCSTS, p. 38). We were concerned with the logic of sets of concrete systems i.e. with concrete logics (as we would now describe what we were trying to do); not with the formal logics of sets of abstract systems (see J.K. Feibleman, 'Assumptions of Grand Logics'). Commentators simply did not notice the critical choice that was being made about 'the unit of analysis'. They simply assumed that we were waffling because, as mechanists/formists, they 'knew' that all science has to do with abstract universals. 2. Commentators think that the first new point we are making is about 'open ness'. They are not impressed. (. .. ) But it simply summarized the ways in which 'enterprises' has to sustain mutual interdependencies with their environments if they were to survive, or survive and grow. The document returns to this on pages 70-75. (. .. ) We were then, as now, grateful for Bertalanffy's demonstration (Science, 1950) that even thermodynamics had to go beyond closed systems dominated by the second law of thermodynamics. No more than that. In SCSTS we were already going beyond the restrictions that Bertalanffy bequeathed to GST. Specifically, we were pointing to the fact that for enterprises openness required us to specify the environment (soon to be labelled by me as the L22); we were not satisfied to simply take Bertalanffy's transport equations (L12 & L21) as arbitrary givens. 3. Boundary conditions. (. .. ) We had already broken out of the conceptual restric tions that had focused on boundaries as if they were like cell boundaries in physiology, or walls and fences in geography. We saw boundaries as defined, dynamically, by the set of processes L12 & L21; not by structural properties Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 123 such as permeability or rigidity. We saw boundary control as explicitely in volving new forms of interdependency with the L22, which was the other term of the mutual interdependency of system and environment. We did not see it as plugging holes in dykes, fixing fences or building fortress walls (all of which are just L12 activities). Some commentators missed this conceptual leap. 4. (... ) Steady state. Would elaboration have helped? Commentators read us as saying that 'The abstract definition of this is: that form of mutual dependence between system and environment that guarantees that the potential energy to reach a goal is utilized to its maximum, despite changes in the environment'. I can never imagine writing a proposition like that, unless, maybe, I was describing a reflex-bound system in a Type I environment. What we were postulating in saying that enterprises seek steady state conditions rather than equilibrium conditions is that 'The enterprise seeks to establish and maintain those forms of interdependence that enable it to maximize its potential energy or capacity for work' (Emery, 1960/1969). I can see a difference in these formulations. ( ... ) How non-concisely and non-vague does one have to define concepts so that critics can see the differences? (. .. )" Emery (1992), author's personal communication After a delay of more than 10 years, STSD spread to the United States, There, the sociotechnical approach was renamed 'Quality of Working Life'. In the seventies, this approach was used in a large number of (North) American companies (d. Davis & Cherns, 1975; Taylor, 1990). The problem with the poor availability of STSD's basic papers and the specific characteristics of the blue and white collar consultancy environments abroad, urged American researchers to re-work/ re-publish Classical STSD concepts for their own convenience (d. Taylor, 1975/1989; Susman, 1976/1983/1987; Cummings & Srivastva 1976/1977; Pasmore & Sherwood, 1978; Davis & Taylor, 1979; Pava, 1979/1983/1985; Taylor & Asadorian, 1985; Pasmore, 1988). Unintentionally their ambitions sometimes evolved into some conceptual ambiguity, prompting Pasmore et al. (1982) to state STSD has become eclectic. Take for instance the fundamental Classical STSD design principle of 'joint optimization' (Trist et al., 1963; Emery, 1963). Shani & Elliott (1988) quoted their own lecture in 1985 in which they point to the variety of definitions American scholars developed with regard to this concept: "Elliott, Shani and Hanna (1985) (... ) note that 'best-match' (Pava, 1983), 'best-fit' (Susman, 1975), and 'optimal alignment' (Golomb, 1981) are all used to describe (... ) that an organization will function optimally if the social and technological Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 124 subsystems are designed to fit the demands of each other and the environment. A closer examination of the constructs used, further revealed the influence of a variety of disciplines such that it somewhat alters this essence of the STSD theory and its focus." Shani & Elliott (1988), p. 54 Taylor & Asadorian (1985) defined 'joint optimization' most accurately, using the same terminology as Emery (1963) and Emery & Thorsrud (1976) did, while visualizing the principle as a 'goodness of fif-approach regarding process alternatives (d. figure 6.10). Combined Socio-technical Results Technical Approaches A B C Organizational Approaches ...... PROCESS ALTERNATNES Figure 6.10 The concept of Joint Optimization. Results are best when the technical system and social system are jointly optimized Taylor & Asadorian (1985), p. 14 Chrisholm (1988), p. 46 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 125 Obviously, at that time they were unaware of the Dutch novelty of the basic STSD aspect-systems of production and control structure (d. paragraph 4.3.2). Communication and language barriers apparently prevented the unhindered flow of new ideas, resulting an no 1985 in a dated American Classical STSD approach. The Dutch criticism is straightforward and at the same time cautiously spelled out: "The 'best match' approach toward 'joint optimization' of the social and technical system in traditional STSD contradicts both the concepts of an open and integral system. The openness of the system refers to its external structure. The focus is here on the problem of adaptive and innovative control and balanced coordination of a multitude of separate external functions (better: input-output transactions or transformations), where each function contains social as well as technical dimensions. The integral character of the system refers to its internal structure. The focus here is on the problem of adaptive and innovative control and balanced coordination of the relationship between external functions and a multitude of functionally differentiated internal functions, where, again, each function contains social as well as normative and technical dimensions. In the 'best match' approach, however - apart from being unclear how the supposed social and technical system should be conceived - the problem of compatibility is treated as a matter of counting pluses and minuses attached to alternative partial designs of separate social and technical aspect-systems. You cannot design a whole starting with the parts, but you can design (integral) parts starting from a vision of the whole." De Sitter et ai. (1990), p. 7 Evaluating the (American) STSD paradigm, Pava (1986) is sighing the sociotechnical systems design approach is decaying. The concepts that were considered revolutionary at one time, have become 'old-fashioned'. But evi dently also he is unaware of the modernization of systems concepts and of the inauguration of alternative Modern STSD tracks. Box 6.2 illustrates how far apart traditional STSD concepts are from contemporary ones. The sociotechnical message still remained the same, but the theory of concepts changed dramatically over the course of time. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 126 Box 6.2 The most relevant differences in terms of content between the mainstream approach and the Dutch variant of STSD SOME CONCEPTUAL DIFFERENCES TRADITIONAL 5T5D DUTCH5TSD definition of system social system (5) production structure (P) components (aspect technical system (n control structure (C) systems) information structure (I) main (re)design quality of work (partial flexibility (integral objective(s) improvements) controllabili ty renewal) quality of work (re)design scope/ workgroups total organisation aggregation micro micro-meso level of intervention basic concepts open system integral design responsible autonomy controllability self-regulation interference control capacity main (re)design minimum critical specification parallelisa non of P principles redundancy of functions segmentation of P requisite variety unity of time, location and action (C) incompletion uncoupled control cycles whenever possible (C) human values control capacity built in every task main (re)design reaching the 'best match' between reduction of complexity by obtaining a balance strategies technology and organisation between required variation and available (ideal of joint optimization) opportunities for process variation, both by using: brought back to acceptable minimum levels, - search conference advocating informed self-design: - 9-step method (variance control) - including all aspects - participant design - at all levels - with all parties form of work semi-autonomous work group whole-task group organization discretionary coalitions semi-autonomous work group (self-regulating operational group units) result-responsible unit business unit De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 27 6.4.4 Some Closer Look at the Diversity of Socio-Technical Analysis and Design Methods Considering the different steps in the methodological 'regulative cycle', the separation of the analytical and design models in Classical STSD is problematic. This point focuses on the improper use of the Variance Control Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 127 Matrix for redesign purposes. As De Sitter et al. (1990) underline, an analysis of disturbance sources coupled to disturbance controllers is only useful to explain the operation of the existing architecture of the production system, but is absolutely unsuitable for giving shape to a renewed structure, since it is organized in a totally different manner: "Conceptually nested within the wrongly assumed 'technical subsystem', traditional STSD relies almost exclusively on variance control as both an analysis and design technique (Emery & Thorsrud, 1989; Pava, 1983; Pasmore, 1988). Because there is no clear distinction/procedural separation between the analytical and action models (Van der Zwaan, 1970), variance analysis activities carried out in the diagnostic phase are easily contaminated with variance control activities in the (re)design phase, making it very unlikely or even impossible to actually change the interaction of the system, with the environment. We would like to stress that, in our opinion, the Variance Control Matrix [Engelstad, 1970; Hill, 1971] as used in STSD projects, can only be used as an inventory of prevailing types of variance or disturbance in a current architecture in order to analyse how system members try to cope with such variance and with what results. The next step should be to explain recurring variance by relating it to the specific 'architectural' characteristics of the prevailing structure. Redesign, however, cannot be based on current variance displayed in the matrix, but only on insight into the quantity and quality of variance in a future architecture of structure and the expected emergent opportunities to improve variance control. The designers' goal should be to design an architecture of structure sustaining and reinforcing the development of interactive relationships which support and reinforce each other with respect to all functional requirements such as flexibility, delivery time, throughput time, product quality, innovative capacity, pollution control, quality of work and industrial relations. Modern STSD can only open new perspectives by fulfilling a truly compre hensive function with respect to the question of how sets of differentiated and purposive functions can be grouped and coupled into an organizational structure in such a manner that they mutually sustain and reinforce each other." De Sitter et al. (1990), p. 7 The above-mentioned statements raise more questions that they possibly can resolve. The debate has only just begun. 6.4.5 A Concise Critique of STSD Practice Now, what exactly are the results of the 'normal research' period of STSD? In Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 128 order to answer this question we had another look at the literature, particularly the voluminous review of Pasmore et al. (1982), which encompasses some 134 sociotechnical experiments unti11980, including the projects evaluated earlier by Friedlander & Brown (1974), Srivastva et al. (1975), Taylor (1977), and Walton (1979). The results are summarized in Figure 6.11. Figure 6.11 The use of 18 sociotechnical (re)design criteria in 134 reported projects. Pasmore et al. (1982), pp. 1192/1193 (This figure has been integrally borrowed from Pas more, 1988, p. 104) % studies using this feature 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 Autonomous Groups (53%) 10 Minimum Critical Specification (9%) 2 Technical Skill Development (40%) 11 Performance Feedback (9%) 3 Action Group (22%) 12 Interface with Customers (9%) 4 Change Reward System (21%) 13 Self-Supply (8%) 5 Self-inspection of Quality (16%) 14 Information Sharing (7%) 6 Technological Change (16%) 15 Group Selection of Peers (6%) 7 Non-rating Teams (16%) 16 Status Equalization (4%) 8 Facilitative Leadership (14%) 17 Pay for Knowledge (4%) 9 Operators Perform Maintenance (12%) 18 Peer Review (3%) - Although the design criteria listed in Figure 6.11 are usually applied in specific combinations, it clearly illustrates that the formation of semi-autonomous groups and the induction of employees to new tasks are most popular in the 134 projects examined. An important point of criticism is therefore that despite the ideal of 'organizational choice' it is remarkable how often the 'one best way' solution of the semi-autonomous group is turned to in actual practice. Pava (1983) is one of the few exceptions here. In particular the Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992. 129 automatism with which this happened time and again sparked off a great deal of criticism, from both the inside (d. Kelly, 1978) and the outside (d. Hackman, 1981). The sociotechnical type of organization is thus given the character of a 'trick', a 'deus ex machina', an 'off-the-shelf' solution (Pava, 1986). - Another aspect coming to the fore in Pasmore's et al. (1982) study is that almost exclusively successful projects are reported in the literature, making mention only of those output indicators which had shown improvements. However, more than half of the studies that mention improvements regarding all output indicators evaluated (productivity, costs, absenteeism, employee turnover, attitudes, safety, and quality) introduced the semi autonomous group as form of organization. - In this connection Wall et al. (1986) observe that few of the research designs applied allow for causal deductions and that the research designs cover too limited a time span. A longitudinal study performed by the authors mentioned above themselves showed that at the micro level the formation of autonomous work groups in a greenfield situation has a very specific effect on the behaviour and attitudes of colleagues. Although intrinsic satisfaction increases, intrinsic work motivation, performance and attitudes do not show a noticeable increase! The advantages were said to concentrate one-sidedly on organizational level. Kelly (1978) more or less shares this view when he states that the principle of 'joint optimization' at Tavistock led to more intensified labour more than once. Rather than adapting the technical system, the social system was changed one-sidedly, which eventually resulted in a heavier work load and higher work pace. In their review of 30 years STSD Pasmore et al. (1982) also draw the conclusion that on balance only little was contributed to technological innovation. As Figure 6.11 shows, only 21 out of the 134 studies examined made mention of changes in the technical system. Thus, machine design and process layout were apparently considered - in spite of all good intentions - unchangeable much more often than was to be assumed on the basis of the socio-technical design philosophy. The Volvo Kalmar plant is probably one of the few really favourable exceptions here. - Moreover, according to Kelly (1978) a large number of sociotechnical projects involve an increase in financial remuneration. In his view observed improvements might be attributed especially to this. The study by Pasmore e t al. (1982) provides some insight into the actual use of wage increases, at least insofar as this aspect was reported. Looking at Figure 6.11 we see that Kelly's observation should be somewhat put in perspective: in only 22% of the successful studies the remuneration system altered. - Finally, we would like to point to the methodology used in the projects, which was of course much criticised. According to Cummings et al. (1977) socio technical studies generally score badly in regard to internal and external Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 130 validity. The necessity to operate in field situations with the associated restrictions is undoubtedly to blame for this. However, this point of criticism too should be put into a broader perspective. Already in the early sixties 'hard' field experiments were carried out in the Netherlands, complete with experimental and control groups, as well as pre- and post-measurements (cf. Van Beinum, 1963; Van Beinum et ai., 1968). Nevertheless, quasi-experimental designs (Campbell & Stanley, 1966; Cook & Campbell, 1976) could be applied more often. Although this is sometimes in contrast with the objective of organizational change, Cummings et al. (1977) provide some suggestions to improve on the research itself: 1. "Assess whether and to what extent the treatment took effect; 2. Use multiple measures where possible; 3. Use unobtrusive measures where possible; 4. Seek to avoid changes in instrumentation; 5. Where the selection of experimental and control groups on a random basis is not possible, the use of a control group - even an unmatched or non equivalent control group - represents a considerable improvement in design; 6. Avoid bias in the choice of groups, and especially avoid the selection of experimental or control groups because they manifest some characteristic to an unusual degree; 7. Use statistical tests in order to eliminate the threat from instability; 8. Collect time series data; 9. Protect the experiment; 10. Record all occurrences and circumstances that might reasonably be expected to pose a threat to internal and external validity, or would otherwise qualify the findings." Cummings et al. (1977), p. 703-706 However, since sociotechnical research is operating at the crossroads of different parties of interests, as pointed out above, the question remains whether scientific interest of thoroughness and well-considered choice - as put forward in points 2 through 8 - always and completely corresponds with the various practical business interests. The first quantitative evaluation study concerning the effects of STSD interventions has been published by Beekun (1989). He carried out a meta analysis on 17 Classical STSD studies from the Pasmore et al. (1982) review. He developed seven so-called 'contingency hypotheses' (cf. box 6.3) and tested them using the original statistical data which he converted into a common metric. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 131 Box 6.3 Beekun's (1989) meta-analysis of the effectiveness of Classical STSD inter ventions Research hypothesis Research outcome 1. Sociotechnical interventions involving autonomous Fully confirmed work groups (a) will be more effective than socio (a) showed 38% more productivity than (b) technical interventions involving non-autonomous (a) showed 35% less improvement in escape work groups (b) behaviour than (b) 2. Sociotechnical interventions involving Rejected technological changes (c) in conjunction with social (d) showed 160% more productivity than systems changes will be more effective than (c) sociotechnical interventions involving no (d) showed 42% less escape behaviour than technological changes (d) (c) 3. Sociotechnical interventions involving a change in Partly confirmed pay (e) will be more effective than soeiotechnical (e) showed 67% more productive than (0 interventions involving no change in pay (0 (e) showed 56% less decrease in escape behaviour than (f) 4.1 The longer the duration of the intervention, the less Confirmed only for productivity first 25 effective the sociotechnical intervention years (linear work), later trend reversal 4.2 The duration of a sociotechnical intervention will Confirmed only for escape behaviour not affect organizational effectiveness 5. Sociotechnical interventions taking place in a blue Rejected collar work setting (g) will be more effective than sociotechnical interventions taking place in a white-collar work setting (h) 6.1 Sociotechnical interventions involving a large Rejected number of employees (i) will be more effective than sociotechnical interventions involving a small number of employees (j) 6.2 Sociotechnical interventions involving a small Confirmed for productivity (j) up to 40 number of employees (j) will be more effective than employees sociotechnical interventions involving a large number of employees (0 7. The effectiveness of sociotechnical interventions Confirmed will vary as a function of cross-cultural differences Beekun (1989), p. 880-BB2/p. 890-893 Outcomes have been categorized as related to two measures of effectiveness: 'productivity' (changes in the volume of output, costs of input, and quality and skills required) and 'escape behavior' (changes in turnover, absenteeism and tardiness), As box 6.3 is showing, most hypotheses were confirmed. With the Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Six - Draft - August 1992 132 assertion that most STSD failures are underreported Beekun (1989) concluded: "These estimates are important because they support most of the claims that STSD researchers have been making for three decades concerning the beneficial nature of this organizational redesign strategy" (p. 893). With respect to the Modern STSD variants such evaluation studies are lacking. As is argued in chapter four, the documentation of PD and lOR projects is poor and does not allow for any quantitative analysis. In the case of DD a quali tative evaluation study was going on at the time of completion of this manu script (d. Naschold, 1992). Chapter Seven The Future of the Socio-Technical Systems Design Paradigm Socio-Technical Systems Design (STSD) is now more than 40 years old. In the four decades of its existence, the paradigm has developed from a coincidental re-discovery of a flexible form of work organization in a British coal mine, into an integral alternative to Taylorism. The open system and self-regulation are its key concepts. In the course of its existence, the sociotechnical approach has been rejuvenated and renewed time and time again: - In the pioneering phase of Tavistock, the mine studies were globally founded in theoretical terms with a hybrid system of concepts, derived from the rapidly emerging revolutionary systems approach. - In the period of Classical STSD these conceptualizations were expanded, adjusted in more detail in terms of content, made logically consistent, and founded in method(olog)ical terms. - During the period of Modern STSD, models and methods were brought into line with developments in systems 'do-it-yourself' method, are directed to the formation of inter-organizational networks and integral production renewal. However, despite these external metamorphoses, the ultimate objective of STSD never got lost; the integration of aspects was and still is of paramount importance. This integration thinking will continue to be prevalent in the future. But what are the chances for STSD in the nineties? Van Beinum (1990b) predicts a shift from sociotechnical to socio-ecological design. The organization plus its environment will be both object and objective of change. In Sweden, the LOM programme (d. chapter four, paragraph 4.4) is possibly a forerunner of such an approach. De Sitter (1990, personal communication) speaks of a similar develop ment. He points to pollution control as a relevant new function demand for the integral design of production organizations, and to integration of the information aspect (d. Van Eijnatten & Loeffen, 1990; Loeffen, 1991b). Emery (1990a) is foretelling the next phase in STSD will be concerned "with the development of organizational forms for the managing of 'self managing groups'." (personal communication, p. 6-7). He also is suggesting that Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Seven - Draft - August 1992 134 middle managers should "plan their own department's work for a much larger time span". (d. Emery, 1989d, p. 3). He foresees new prospects for management by objectives (cf. Emery, 1990b, p. 2), suggesting concretely the setting of 3-7 negotiable objectives, explicitly defined and objectively assessed, while serving hierarchically-ordered operational, managerial and corporative functions: ItAt the higher levels of management more objectives may need to be spelt out but if they are organized in levels, e.g. with respect to time span, there need be no more than seven at any level" (Emery, 1990b, p. 3). If Emery is right, the Dutch Modern STSD variant of Integral Organizational Renewal (JOR) is a serious candidate for, and could get win the race in the fourth-milestone contest. Dutch experiments with the setting of goals by self-managing groups, using the American Producti vity Measurement and Enhancement System (ProMES) (cf. Pritchard, 1990; Pritchard et al., 1988/1989), are promising (d. Pleij, 1992). Also the creation of 'operational groups' as self-managing teams composed of both decentralized staff members and line managers, is put into practice in The Netherlands (cf. Van Amelsvoort, 1992a). New accountancy systems (activity-based costing) have been introduced to support the sociotechnical restructured organization (d. Roberts e t al., 1991b/c; Kunst & Roberts, 1990; Den Hertog & Roberts, 1990). New personnel policy and management, and career development systems are being set up (d. Van Sluijs et ai., 1990/1991; Den Hertog et al., 1991; Van Sluijs & Van Terwisga, 1991). Also product and process innovation are on the research agenda (cf. Cobbenhagen et al., 1990; Cobbenhagen & Van Reeken, 1990; Cobbenhagen et al., 1991a/b) as well as labour relations (d. Dankbaar, 1991; Buitelaar, 1991; Dankbaar et al., 1991; Buitelaar & Dankbaar, 1992). Babiiroglu (1991), following Trist, displayed a rather pessimistic vision about the next phase in STSD. Based on his additional distinction of a 'vortical environment' as a fifth category to the original Emery & Trist (1965) typology (cf. Babiiroglu, 1988; chapter three, paragraph 3.3.4), he predicts an almost apocalyptic situation in which social systems act like closed systems. Because of inappropriate results in developing successful exchange relationships with turbulent environments, organizations find themselves stuck in a situation of hyper turbulence (cf. McCann & Selsky, 1984). According to Babiiroglu (1991): "The maladaptive responses to turbulent environments that rigidify all of the self regulating, self-governing, self-managing, self-planning and self-learning capabilities of social systems are represented by stalemate, polarization and dogmatism" (p. 29). If this prognosis is true, the STSD paradigm is bound to decease. According to Trist (1985), however, indeed there is an escape route away from hyper-turbulence. He called it 'action learning'. This is a combination of self-design, self-regulation and co-production, actively and intentionally created by all participants concerned. Action learning is the utmost agenda theme Morley and Wright (1989) distinguished on the basis of a thorough analysis of Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Seven - Draft - August 1992 135 Trist's complete works. Looking into the future, Morley and Wright (1989) predict a transition to 'contextual environments' (p.272). Meanwhile, the complexity and unpredictability of the environment in many instances do take 'vortical' forms. At the same time the new Swedish Volvo plant of Uddevalla experiments with full parallelization of the production process of the Volvo 740 (Janse, 1989), in which self-managing work place teams assemble a complete passenger car (learning time: one year and a half; cycle time: more than two hoursi construction kit: consisting of more than 1500 components and subassemblies), while in the United States one is more and more willing to pass into a more integral and participative STSD approach. Recently the English colleagues Flood & Jackson (1991) propagate total systems intervention, and from Japan comes the futuristic idea of 'Holonic Production Systems', i.e. decentralized adaptive assembly systems built up from autonomous cells, involving 'Human Integrated Manufacturing' (HIM), a concept in which man takes part in one or more holons, brings in the creativity and makes decisions, while the equipment provides the adaptive implementation (Sol, 1990). Another very important new development, which is increasingly discussed in Europe and the United States, is the Japanese organization concept of Lean Production (cf. Womack et ai., 1990), which came out of a comparative MIT study in the automotive industry. The main peculiarities of Lean Produc tion (LP) are summarized by Van Amelsvoort (1992b) (cf. box 7.1). Box 7.1 Some basic characteristics of Lean Production (LP) "I integration of business processes (purchase, 6. direct and close relationships with a production, sales, product development, restricted number of reliable process development) suppliers 2. integration of preparatory and supporting 7. direct and close relationships with a tasks and competences with production restricted number of main dealers 3. teams as building blocks in the primary 8. teams as building blocks in innovation process processes 4. minimal changes in volumes of production, 9. geographic integration of product-/ given much product variants process development with production 5. direct disturbance signalling and problem- 10. individual carriers aimed at gaining solving at its source broad insights in all business processes" after: Womack et ai. (1990); Van Amelsvoort (1992b), p. 6-7 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Seven - Draft - August 1992 136 A comparison between LP and STSD is not easily made. Kiviniitty (1992) contrasted the Nordic version of Classical STSD with Lean Production and with the Finnish Anthropocentric Production System (APS) variant (cf. Lehner, 1991; Wobbe, 1991). APS combines aspects of STSD and LP (cf. table 7.1). Table 7.1 A comparison between Classical STSD, Anthropocentric Production Systems and Lean Production Nordic Socio- APS Anthropocentric LP Technical Model Production System Lean Production ~Aspect Allocation of man-machine skilled worker skills in production Tasks/Skills system teams Main harmonization of orientation to shared destiny Orientation production require- customer needs ments and worker Aspect-System quality of work life specialization, quality wide variation in Emphasis of products products Scope of long life span short life cycle short life cycle Intervention Most Central optimization of optimization of no safety net Feature balance production Coordinating humanization of use of strengths pursuit of perfection Goal work (cultural benefits) after: Kiviniitty (1992), p. 25 As can be seen from the table, Lean Production is far removed from (the Nordic version of) Classicial STSD, especially concerning its goal and scope. With respect to the mentioned aspects in the table, the Finnish variant of Anthropocentric Production System (APS) seems to bridge the gap elegantly. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Chapter Seven - Draft - August 1992 137 A comparison between LP and Modern STSD (lOR approach) is made by Van Amelsvoort (1992b). He differentiated both approaches on six central aspects (d. table 7.2), Table 7.2 A comparison between Modern STSD (Integral Organizational Renewal) and Lean Production ModemSTSD Lean Production lOR LP ~Aspect Coordinating quality of work, quality of Goals organization and organization labour relations Production self-managing teams with small operational Units teams with tasks, controlled by a strong whole tasks hierarchical leader Required Availability optimal maximal of Personnel Preferred integral, using integral, using functional Type of Control organizational renewal management Degree of no clear high for both products and Standardization guidelines processes Desirable Career small discretionary job rotation broad job rotation over many Development within self-managing teams different business processes Van Amelsvoort (1992b), p. 8-9 From both juxtapositions one can conclude that the Japanese concept of Lean Production is very different from STSD both in its emphasis on Tayloristic control and in its one-sidedly stressing of organizational goals. These and other developments will largely co-determine what new appearance STSD will evolve into in the nineties. But it's only the form that will change, not its function! Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 140 References Abraham, R (1988). Chaos in myth and science. Santa Cruz, California: University of Santa Cruz, unpublished paper. Ackoff, RL. (1974). Redesigning the future: a systems approach to societal problems. New York: Wiley. Ackoff, RL., & Emery, F.E. (1972). On purposeful systems. London: Tavistock Publications. Agersnap, F., M0ldrup, P., Junge, F., Brinch, L., & Westenholz, A. (1974). Danish experiments with new forms of cooperation on the shop floor. Personnel Review, 3 (3),34-50. Aguren, 5., Hansson, R, & Karlsson, KG. (1976). The Volvo Kalmar plant: the impact of new design on work organization. Stockholm: The Rationalisation CounciISAF-LO. Aguren, S., & Edgren, J. (1980). New factories: job design through factory planning in Sweden. Stockholm: Swedish Employers' Confederation SAF. Aguren, 5., Bredbacka, c., Hansson, R., Ihregren, K, & Karlsson, KG. (1984). Volvo Kalmar revisited: ten years of experience. Stockholm: Trykert Balder. Alink, J.B., & Wester, Ph. (1978). Organisatieverandering in een gereedschapsmakerij (Organizational change in a machine factory). Eindhoven: Philips (Dutch language). Allegro, J.T. (1971). Sociotechnische organisatie-ontwikkeling en veranderend leiderschap (Sociotechnical organization development and changing leadership). Mens en Onderneming,25, 252-259 (Dutch language). Allegro, J.T., & Vries, E. de (1979). Project: Humanization and participation in Centraal Beheer. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden, O. Ortsman, & R van der Vlist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 223-237). Boston: Nijhoff, International Council for the Quality of Working Life. Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. (1982). Samen werken aan samenwerking: een sociotechnische proces-analyse van de sector werf van IHC-Smit b.v. te Kinderdijk (Working together to accomplish cooperation: a sociotechnical process analysis of the shipyard sector of IHC-Smit b.v. in Kinderdijk). Eindhoven: Technische Hogeschool, afdeling der Bedrijfskunde, vakgroep Organisatie-sociologie (Dutch language). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 141 Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van (1987). De Schumacher aanpak bij het integraal ontwerpen van stroomsgewijze produktiestrukturen vanuit de lijnsituatie: een bewerking en aanpassing van de oorspronkelijke Schumacher aanpak (The Schumacher approach to Integral Design of flow production structures starting from a line situation: a revision and adjustment of the original Schumacher approach). Den Bosch: Adviesgroep Koers b.v., intern rapport (Dutch language). Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van (1988). Rerontwerp van de organisatie Frans Swarttouw (Redesign of the organization at Frans Swarttouw). Rotterdam: Frans Swarttouw, intern rapport (Dutch language). Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van (1989). Een model voor de moderne besturingsstructuur vol gens de sociotechnische theorie (A sociotechnical model for the control structure according to modern sociotechnical theory). Gedrag en Organisatie,2 (4/5),253-267 (Dutch language). Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van (1992a). Ret vergroten van de bestuurbaarheid van produktie-organisaties (Increasing the controllability of production organizations). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, proefschrift (Dutch language). Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van (1992b). Het 'Lean Production' concept:Japanse sociotechniek of neo-Taylorisme? (The concept of 'Lean Production': Japanese sociotechnique or neo-Taylorism?). Panta Rhei,2 (1),6-9 (Dutch language). Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van, & Vossen, H.P. (1984). Voorstel voor een nieuwe fabricagestructuur (Proposal concerning a new fabrication structure). Roermond: Philips, intern rapport (Dutch language), Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van, & Vogelzangs, H. (1987). Analyse en heron twerp van regelkringen (Analysis and redesign of control loops). Maarheeze: Philips, intern rapport (Dutch language). Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van, & Vossen, H.P. (1987). Integrale kwaliteitszorg tabaksfabriek Van Nelle (Total quality management tobacco-factory Van Nelle). Rotterdam: Van Nelle (Dutch language). Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van, Scholtes, G., & Knol, G. (1988). Voorstel voor de produktie- en besturingsstructuur van MPRS (Proposal concerning the production and control structures of MPRS). Stadskanaal: Philips, intern rapport (Dutch language). Angyal, A. (1941). Foundations for a science of personality (pp. 243-261). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Angyal, A. (l965). Neurosis and treatment: a holistic theory. New York: Wiley. Anrulls of STSD - F.M. van Eijrultten - References - Draft - August 1992 142 Archer, J. (1975). Achieving joint organizational, technical and personal needs: the case of the sheltered experiment of the aluminium casting team. In: L.B. Davis, & A.B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life: cases and commentary (pp. 253-268). Free Press: New York. Argyris, C. (1970). Intervention theory and method: a behavioral science view. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. Argyris, C. (1976). Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 363-375. Argyris, C., & Schon, D.A. (1978). Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. Arnopolous, S. (1985). Participative management in an advanced technology plant: Canadian General Electric in Bromont. Montreal: McGill Human Resource Associates. Ashby, W.R (1952). Design for a brain. London: Chapman and Hall. Ashby, W.R (1956a). An introduction to cybernetics. London: University Paperbacks. Ashby, W.R (1956b). Self-regulation and requisite variety, introduction to cybernetics, chapter II. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.) (1969), Systems thinking: selected readings (pp. 105-124). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Ashby, W.R. (1958). An introduction to cybernetics. London: Chapman and Hall. Auer, P., & Riegler, C. (1990). Post-Taylorism: the enterprise as a place of learning organizational change. A comprehensive study on work organization changes and its context at Volvo. Stockholm/Berlin: The Swedish Work Environment Fund/Wissenschaftszentrum fiir Sozialforschung. Babiiroglu, O.N. (1988). The vortical environment: the fifth in the Emery Trist levels of organizational environments. Human Relations, 41 (3), 181- 210. Babiiroglu, O.N. (1991). Tracking the development of the Emery-Trist Systems Paradigm (ETSP). Ankara: Bilkent University, Management Department, preprint. Babiiroglu,O.N. (1992). Tracking the development of the Emery-Trist Systems Paradigm (ETSP). Systems Practice, 5 (2). Barker, R, Dembo, T., & Lewin, K. (1941). Frustration and regression: an experiment with young children. University of Iowa Studies in Child Welfare, 18 (2), 1-43. Barten, A.W.H.M. (1986). Vervanging van draaibanken gebruikmakend van groepentechnologie (Group technology to support decision-making concerning an Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 143 adequate replacement of lathes). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Bavelas, A. (1942). Morale and the training of leaders. In: G. Watson (Ed.), Civilian morale. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Beek, H.G. van (1964). The influence of assembly line organization on output, quality and morale. Occupational Psychology, 38 (3/4), 161-172. Beekun, RA. (1989). Assessing the effectiveness of socio-technical interventions: Antidote or fad? Human Relations, 42 (10), 877-897. Beer, M., & Huse, E.F. (1972). A systems approach to organization development (at Corning Glass). The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 8 (1),79-101. Beinum, H.J.J. van (1959). Interim-rapport over de proefafdeling Zaanstraat (Half term report concerning the test-department Zaanstraat). Den Haag: Post-cheque en girodienst (Pcgd), afdeling Sociaal-Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, intern rapport, februari (Dutch language). Beinum, H.J.J. van (1963). Een organisatie in beweging (An organization in motion). Leiden: Stenfert Kroese, proefschrift (Dutch language), Beinum, H.J.J. van (1966). The morale of the Dublin busmen. London: Tavistock. Beinum, H.J.J. van (1986). The warp and weft of QWL. Toronto: Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre. Beinum, H.J.J. van (1990). Over participatieve democratie (About participative democracy). Leiden: Rijksuniversiteit (tweede) intreerede (Dutch language). Beinum, H.J.J. van (1990a). Observations on the development of a new organizational paradigm. Stockholm: The Swedish Centre for Working Life. Beinum, H.J.J. van (1990b). Swedish workplace reform: from socio-technical to socio-ecological design. In: B. Viklund (Ed.), Information from the Swedish center for working life (pp. 6-7). Stockholm: Arbetslivscentrum. Beinum, H.J.J. van, Gils, M.R van, & Verhagen, E.J. (1968). Taakontwerp en werkorganisatie: een sociotechnisch veldexperiment (Job design and work organization: a sociotechnical field experiment). Den Haag: Commissie Opvoering Produktiviteit, COP /SER (Dutch language). Bertalanffy,1. von (1950). The theory of open systems in physics and biology. Science, 111,23-29. Betcherman, G., Newton, K., & Godin, J. (1990). Systems and people: managing socio-technical change at Pratt and Whitney Canada. In: Canadian Government Publishing Centre (Ed.), Two steps forward: human Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 7992 744 resource management in a high-tech world. Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing Centre. Beurle, R.L. (1962). Functional organization in random networks. In: H.V. Foerster, & G.W. Zopf (Eds.), Principles of self-organization. Oxford: Pergamon. Bion, W.R. (1949). Experiences in groups, III. Human Relations,2 (1), 13-22. Bion, W.R (1950). Experiences in groups V. Human Relations, 3 (1),3-14. Birchall, D.W., Carnall, CB., & Wild, R (1978). A study of experiences with new models for work organizations in the United Kingdom. Final project report for the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. Boekholdt, M.G. (1981). Invoeren van groepsverpleging (Implementation of team nursing). Utrecht: Rijksuniversiteit, proefschrift (Dutch language). Bolwijn, P.T. (1988). Continuiteit en vernieuwing van produktiebedrijven (Continuity and renewal of production enterprises). Enschede: Technische Universiteit Twente, Faculteit Bedrijfskunde, intreerede (Dutch language). Bolwijn, P.T., Boorsma, J., Breukelen, Q.H. van, Brinkman,S., & Kumpe, T. (1986). Flexible manufacturing: integrating technological and social innovation. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Bolwijn, P.T., & Kumpe, T. (1989). Wat komt na flexibiliteit? De industrie in de jaren negentig (Flexibility, what's next? Industrial development in the nineties). Mens en Onderneming, 43 (2),91-111 (Dutch language). Boons, A.N.A.M., Roberts, H.J.E., & Roozen, F.A. (1991). Activity-based costing: strategisch cost management voor vernieuwende bedrijven (Activity-based costing: strategic cost management for renewing enterprises). Deventer: Kluwer (Dutch language). Borrie, H.F. (1984). Kwaliteit van de arbeid in een industrieel bedrijf: een toepassing van de ST-methode in een afdeling aandrijfassen (Quality of work in an industrial enterprise: an application of the ST method in the truck shafts production department). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, Vakgroep Psychologie van Arbeid en Organisatie (Dutch language). Bostrom, RP., & Heinen, J.S. (1977). MIS problems and failures: a socio technical perspective. MIS Quarterly, 1, 17-32. Bostrup, L., & SOderberg, G. (1975). Flodesgrupper for Snuipartitill verkning (Flow groups in small batch production). Stockholm: IVF-Resultat (Swedish language). Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 145 Bregard, A., Gulowsen, J., Haug, 0., Hangen, F., Solstad, E., Thorsrud, E., & Tysland, T. (1968). Norsk Hydro: experiment in the fertilizer factories. Oslo: Work Research Institute. Briggs, J., & Peat, F. (1989). Turbulent mirror. New York: Harper & Row. Brouwers, A.A.F., Buitelaar, W.L., Verkerk, J., & Giittinger, V.A. (1987). Monotone arbeid nu en straks (Monotonous work now and later). Leiden/ Apeldoom/Den Haag: NIPG/STB-TNO/DGA/SoZaWe, HUMAR rapport nr. HA 330 (Dutch language). Buchanan, D.A. (1979). The development of job design theories and techniques. Westmead: Saxon House. Buitelaar, W.L. (1991). Industrial relations and environment. A Dutch case study report of DSM Chemicals Rotterdam. Apeldoorn: STB/TNO, Paper for the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. Buitelaar, W.L., Dankbaar, B., & Klaveren, M. van (1990). Philips Winterswijk: een casestudie-verslag over technologie en arbeidsverhoudingen (Philips Winterswijk: a case study report about technology and labour relations). Apeldoorn/Maastricht/ Amsterdam: STB-TNO /MERIT /STZ (Dutch language). Burbidge, J.L. (1975). Introduction of group technology. London: Heinemann. Burbidge, J.L. (1979). Group technology in the engineering industry. London: Mechanical Engineering Publications. Burden, D.W.F. (1972). Participative approach to management: Microwax Department. Shell UK, unpublished report. Burden, D.W.F. (1975). Participative management as a basis for improved quality of jobs: the case of Microwax department, Shell U.K. Ltd. In: L.E. Davis, & J.e. Taylor (Eds.), The quality of working life, vol. II. New York: Free Press. Butera, F. (1975). Environmental factors in job and organization design: the case of Olivetti. In: L.E. Davis, & A.B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life, vol. 2 (pp. 166-200). New York: Free Press. Buyse, J.J. (1987). Kwaliteit van werk en organisatie op de produktievloer: een integrale studie op mikro-nivo (Quality of work and organization of the shop floor: an integral study at the micro level). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, proefschrift (Dutch language). Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 146 Canon, W.B. (1932). The wisdom of the body. New York: Norton. Chadwick, M., & Clark, F. (1981). Design of a new plant at CSP Foods. Ottawa, Ontario: Labour Canada, KIA OJ2 Cat.No. L44-1188/83E. ' Checkland, P.B. (1975). The development of systems thinking by systems practice - a methodology from an action research programme. In: R. Trappl, & F.P. Hanika (Eds.), Progress in cybernetics and systems research, Vol. II. Washington: Hemisphere Publications. Checkland, P.B. (1979a). Techniques in soft systems practice. Part 1: systems diagrams - some tentative guidelines. Journal of Applied Systems analysis, 6, 33-40. Checkland, P.B. (1979b). Techniques in soft systems practice. Part 2: building conceptual models. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 6, 41-49. Checkland, P.B. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester: Wiley. Checkland, P.B. (1985a). Achieving desirable and feasible change: an application of soft systems methodology. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36 (9),821-831. Checkland, P.B. (1985b). From optimizing to learning: a development of systems thinking for the 1990s. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 36 (9),757-767. Checkland, P.B. (1988). The case for 'holon'. Systems Practice, 1 (3), 235-238. Checkland, P.B. (1990a). Techniques in soft systems practice. Part 3: monitoring and control in conceptual models and in evaluation studies. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 17, 29-37. Checkland, P.B. (1990b). Techniques in soft systems practice. Part 4: conceptual model building revisited. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 17, 39-52. Checkland, P.B., & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft systems methodology in action. Chichester: Wiley. Chein, I. (1972). The science of behaviour and the image of man. New York: Basic Books. Cherns, A.B. (1976). The principles of socio-technical design. Human Relations, 29 (8), 783-792. Cherns, A.B. (1987). The principles of socio-technical design revisited. Human Relations,40 (3), 153-161. Chevalier, G.G. (1972). Socia-technical experiment in casting department. Aluminium Company of Canada, unpublished report. Chisholm, R.E (1988). Introducing advanced information technology into public organizations. Public Productivity Review, 11 (4),39-56. Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 147 Chisholm, R.F., & Ziegenfuss, J.T. (1986). A review of applicati Cummings, T.G. (1978). Socio-technical systems: an intervention strategy. In: W.A. Pasmore, & J.J. Sherwood (Eds.), Socio-technical systems: a sourcebook (pp. 168-187). La Jolla, California: University Associates. Cummings, T.G., Molloy, E.S., & Glen, R (1977). A methodological critique of fifty-eight selected work experiments. Human Relations, 30 (8), 675-708. Cummings, T.G., & Srivastva, S. (1977). Management of work. A socio-technical systems approach. Kent, Ohio: State University Press, Comparative Administration Research Institute. Cunningham, J.B., & White, T.H. (Eds.) (1984), Quality of working life: contemporary cases. Ottawa, Ontario: Labour Canada, Ministry of Supply and Services, L82-48/1984E. Curle, A. (1949). A theoretical approach to action research. Human Relations,2, 269-280. Dankbaar, B. (1991). Dommels Bier, report of a case study on technology and labour relations. Apeldoorn/Maastricht/ Amsterdam: Memeo. Dankbaar, B., Buitelaar, W.L., & Klaveren, M. van (1991). Integrale organisatievernieuwing en arbeidsverhoudingen - een position paper (Integral organizational renewal and labour relations - a position paper). Maastricht: MERIT research memorandum 91-004 (Dutch language). Davis, L.E. (1957a). Job design and productivity: a new approach. Personnel, 33, 418-430. Davis, L.E. (l957b). Towards a theory of job design. Journal of Industrial Engineering, 8 (5), 19-23. Davis, L.E. (1962). The effects of automation on job design. Industrial Relations, 2,53-72. Davis, L.E., & Canter, RR (1956). Job design research. Journal of Industrial Engineering, 7 (4), 275-282. Davis, L.E., & Engelstad, P.H. (1966). Unit operations in socio-technical systems: analysis and design. London: Tavistock document T894. Davis, L.E., & Taylor, J.C. (Eds.) (1972), Design of jobs. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Davis, L.E., & Cherns, A.B. (1975). The quality of working life: problems, prospects and state of the art, Vols. I and II. New York: Free Press. Davis, L.E., & Taylor, J.e. (Eds.) (1979), Design of jobs. Santa Monica, California: Goodyear, second edition. Davis, L.E., & Sullivan, C.S. (1980). A labour-management contract and quality of working life. Occupational Behavior,l (1),29-41. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 149 De Greene, K.B. (1990). Non-linear management in technologically induced fields. Systems Research, 7 (3), 159-168. De Greene, K.B. (1991). Rigidity and fragility of large socio-technical systems: advanced information technology, the dominant coalition, and paradigm shift at the end of the 20th. century. Behavioral Science,36 (I), 64-79. Desmares, J.G.W. (1986). Groepsvormingsprocessen bij het formeren van P-cellen: een studie in de truck-eindassemblage (Group development processes accompanying the design of production cells: a study in truck final assembly). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, KWO-Research-Groep (Dutch language). Devaney, R.L. (1987). Dynamic bursts in non-linear dynamical systems. Science, 235, 342-345. Dewar, D.L. (1980). International significance of the QC drcle movement. Quality Progress, 13 (11), 18-22. Dijck, J.J.J. van (1981). De sodotechnische systeembenadering van organisaties (The sodotechnical systems approach of organizations). In: P.J.D. Drenth, H. Thierry, P.J. Willems, & Ch.J. de Wolff (Eds.), Handboek arbeids- en organisatiepsychologie (pp. 4.5.1-4.5.31). Deventer: Van Logchum Slaterus (Dutch language). Does de Willebois, J.L.J.M. van der (1968). Werkstructurering als organisatie ontwikkeling: een eerste en voorlopig overzicht na 3 jaar, deel I en II (Work structuring as organization development: a first and provisional survey after three years, part I and II). Eindhoven: N.V. Philips' Gloeilampenfabrieken, Sodale Zaken, afdeling onderzoek (Dutch language). Egmond, C., & Thissen, P. (1975). Een onderzoek ten behoeve van het ontwikkelen van regelprofielen, uitgevoerd op de shop-floor (A research project in behalf of the . development of regulation profiles, executed at shop floor level). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Afdeling der Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1981a). Sociale aspekten van de wijze van produceren en de organisatie van het werk in de koolweerstanden-fabrikage: een case study bij Philips in Roermond (Social aspects of production modes and work organization in coal resistor fabrication: a case study at Philips in Roermond). Nijmegen/Eindhoven: Katholieke Universiteit/Philips' Gloeilampenfabrieken N.V. (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1981b). Sociale aspekten van het Ohmega-fabrikageproces ontwerp/ontwerpproces: een case study bij Philips in Eindhoven (Social aspects of the Ohmega manufacturing process design/design process: a case study at Philips in Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 150 Eindhoven). Nijmegen/Eindhoven: Katholieke Universiteit/Philips' Gloeilampenfabrieken N.V. (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1985). STTA: naar een nieuw werkstruktureringsparadigma (STTA, towards a new work structuring paradigm). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, proefschrift (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1986). Benadering van Flexibele Arbeidssystemen (BFA). Methoden: 1. Ontwerpfilosofie; 2. Systeem-Analyse (SA); 3. Socio-Technische Proces-Analyse (STPA); 4. Socio-Technische Taak-Analyse (SITA); 5. Sodo Technisch ontwerp (STO) (Approach to Flexible Productive Systems (AFPS). Methods: 1. Design Philosophy; 2. Systems Analysis (SA); 3. Socio-Technical Process Analysis (STPA); 4. Socio-Technical Task Analysis (SITA); 5. Socio Technical Design (STD). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, KWO Onderzoeks- en Adviesgroep (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1987a). Benadering van Flexibele Arbeidssystemen (BFA): ontwerpfilosofie (The Approach to Flexible Productive Systems (AFPS): design philosophy). In: A.L.M. Knaapen, W.J.M. Meekel, R.J. Tissen, & R.H.W. Vinke (Eds.), Handboek methoden, technieken en analyses voor personeelsmanagement (pp. 101-112). Deventer: Kluwer, aflevering 5 (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1987b). Systeem-analyse van de PZ-manager (Systems analysis for the personell manager). In: A.L.M. Knaapen, W.J.M. Meekel, R.J. Tissen, & R.H.W. Vinke (Eds.), Handboek methoden, technieken en analyses voor personeelsmanagement (pp. 101-114). Deventer: Kluwer, aflevering 4 (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1990). Her-inrichting van het primaire proces: ontwikkelingen in onderzoek, theorie en methodologie (Re-designing the primary process: developments in research, theory and methodology). lezing op NIP thema middag Technologie, Arbeid en Organisatie, Utrecht, 26 januari (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van (1990a). A bibliography of the classical sodo-technical systems paradigm. Eindhoven: University of Technology, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, Report EUT /BDK/39, ISBN 90-6757- 041-9. Eijnatten, F.M. van (1990b). Classical socio-technical systems design: the sodo technical design paradigm of organizations. Eindhoven/Maastricht: TUE/MERIT, TUE Monograph BDK/T&A001, Merit Research Memorandum 90-005. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 151 Eijnatten, F.M. van (1991). From autonomous work group to democratic dialogue and integral organizational renewal: 40 years of development and expansion of the Socia-Technical Systems Design paradigm. Eindhoven / Maastricht: University of Technology, Graduate School of Industrial Engineering and Management Science / University of Limburg, MERIT, BDK/T&A 007, Research memorandum 91-015. Eijnatten, F.M. van (1992a). A tentative classification of main STSD approaches. Eindhoven: University of Technology, Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, internal report, first concept, January. Eijnatten, F.M. van (1992b). Ongoing R&D on new methodology and practical tools for holistic and participative (re)design. Paper presented at the International Conference Social Research as Support for Technological Development: Methodological Trends and Issues, April 10-13, Houthem Valkenburg, The Netherlands. Eijnatten, F.M. van, Buyse, J.J., Hendriks,H.J., & Desmares, J.G.W. (1986). Grenzen voor produktiecellen: ervaringen met het formeren van pseudo-autonome groepen in een truck-eindassemblage-fabriek (Boundaries for production cells: experiences with designing pseudo-autonomous work groups in truck-assembly). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, KWO-Research-Groep (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van, Hoevenaars, A.M., & Rutte, CG. (1988). Integraal ontwerpen van organisaties rond nieuwe technologieen (Integral organization design and new technologies). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van, & Hoevenaars, A.M. (1989). Moderne Sociotechniek in Nederland: recente ontwikkelingen in aanpak en methode ten behoeve van integraal organisatie (her)ontwerp (Modern Sociotechnique in The Netherlands: recent developments in approach and method on behalf of integral organization (re)design. Gedrag en Organisatie, 2 (4/5),289-304 (Dutch language). Eijnatten, F.M. van, Hoevenaars, A.M., & Rutte, C.G. (1990). Holistic and participative (re)design: a method for more integral designing flexible and productive systems. Contemporary Dutch sociotechnical developments. Eindhoven/Nijmegen: Technical University, Graduate School of Industrial Engineering and Management Science/Catholic University, Department of Administrative and Policy Sciences, The Netherlands, BDK/T&A-006. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 152 Eijnatten, F.M. van, & Loeffen, J.M.J. (1990). Some comments about information systems design for production control from the perspective of an integral socio technical organization philosophy. Eindhoven: University of Technology, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, BDK/T&A 003, Paper presented at the International Conference Computer, Men and Organization, Nivelles, Belgium, May 9-11. Eijnatten, F.M. van, Hoevenaars, A.M., & Rutte, e.G. (1992). Holistic and participative (re)design: STSD modelling in the Netherlands. In: D. Hosking, & N. Anderson (Eds.), Organizing changes and innovations: European psychological perspectives. London: Routledge. El Jack, A., Ketchum, L., & Kidwell, J. (1981). Sociotechnical study for locomotive maintenance workshop at Sennar, Sudan. Report for Sudan Railways Corporation. Elden, J.M. (1974). One week in a bank: some observations on task and social structure. Oslo: Work Research Institute, unpublished note. Elden, J.M. (1976). Bank employees begin to study and change their organization. Oslo: Work Research Institutes. Elden, J.M. (1977). Sharing the research work: researcher's role in participatory action research. Trondheim: Institute for Social Research in Industry. Elden, J.M. (1979a). Three generations of work-democracy experiments in Norway: beyond classical socio-technical systems analysis. In: C.L. Cooper, & E. Mumford (Eds.), The quality of working life in Western and Eastern Europe (pp. 226-257). London: Associated Business Press. Elden, J.M. (1979b). Participatory research leads to employee-managed change: some experience from a Norwegian bank. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden, O. Ortsman, & R. van der VIist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 240-250). Boston: Nijhoff, International Council for the Quality of Working Life. Elden, J.M. (1979c). Concluding notes. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden, O. Ortsman, & R. van der VIist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 371-377). Boston: Nijhoff. Elden, J.M. (1981). Political efficacy at work: the connection between more autonomous forms of workplace organization(s) and a more participatory politics. American Political Science Review, 75, 43-58. Elden, J.M. (1983). Democratization and participative research in developing local theory. Journal of Occupational Behavior,4 (1),21-34 (special issue). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 153 Elden, J.M. (1985). Varieties of participative research. In: A.B. Cherns, & M. Shelhav (Eds.), Communities in crisis. Brookfield: Gower Press. Elden, J.M., & Chisholm, R.F. (1991). Generating varieties of action research: an international perspective on enpowering inquiry. Draf of introduction to special issue of Human Relations on varieties of action research in work life I organizations, June. Elias, N. (1970). Was ist Soziologie? (What is Sociology). Miinchen: Juventa. Elliott, 0, Shani, A.B., & Hanna, D. (1985). Strategic thinking and socia-technical system design: a high tech merger. Paper presented at the 26th Annual Conference of the Western Academy of Management, San Diego, California. Emery, F.E. (1946). Prejudice toward Aboriginals. Canberra: Australian National University, Ph.D. thesis. Emery, F.E. (1952). The deputy's role in the Bolsover system of continuous mining. London: Tavistock Document Series. Emery, F.E. (1959). Characteristics of socia-technical systems. London: Tavistock Institute Document no. 527. Emery, F.E. (1963a). First progress report on conceptualization. London: Tavistock document T67. Emery, F.E. (1963b). In search of some principles of persuasion. London: Tavistock Document TID. Emery, F.E. (1963c). Second progress report on conceptualization. London: Tavistock Document T125. Emery, F.E. (1963d). Some hypothesis about the way in which tasks may be more effectively put together to make jobs. London: Tavistock Document T176. Emery, F.E. (1967). The next thirty years: concepts, methods and anticipations. Human Relations, 20, 199-237. Emery, F.E. (Ed.) (1969), Systems thinking: selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Emery, F.E. (1969). The next thirty years: concepts, methods and anticipations. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.), Systems thinking: selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Emery, F.E. (1974a). Bureaucracy and beyond. Organizational Dynamics,3, winter, 3-13. Emery, F.E. (1974b). Participant design. Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 154 Emery, F.E. (1976a), Searching for common ground. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.), Systems thinking, Vol. II. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Emery, F.E. (1976b). Participant design. In: F.E. Emery, & E. Thorsrud (Eds.), Democracy at work. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. Emery, F.E. (1977). Futures we are in. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. Emery, F.E. (Ed.) (1978), The emergence of a new paradigm of work. Canberra: Centre for Continuing Education, Australian National University. Emery, F.E. (Ed.) (1981), Open systems thinking, Vol. 1 & 2. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Emery, F.E. (1982). New perspectives on the world of work. Socio-technical foundations for a new order? Human Relations, 35 (12), 1095-1122. Emery, F.E. (1989a). Toward real democracy. Toronto: Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre/Ministry of Labour. Emery, F.E. (1989b). Toward a logic of discovery. Canberra: Australian National University, internal paper. Emery, F.E. (1989c). The light on the hill: skill formation or democratization of work. In: M. Emery (Ed.), Participative design for participative democracy (pp. 84-93). Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Emery, F.E. (1989d). The management of self-managing work groups. Canberra: Australian National University, note, november. Emery, F.E. (1990). Management by objectives. Canberra: Australian National University, note, October. Emery, EE., Oeser, O.A., & Tully, J. (1958). Information, decision and action. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. Emery, EE., & Trist, E.L. (1960). Socio-technical systems. In: C.W. Churchman, & M. Verhulst (Eds.), Management science: models and techniques, Vol. II (pp. 83-97). Oxford: Pergamon Press. Emery, F.E., & Marek, J. (1962). Some socio-technical aspects of automation. Human Relations, 15 (1), 17-26. Emery, F.E., & Trist, E.L. (1963). The causal texture of organizational environments. Paper presented to the International Psychology Congress, Washington D.C. Emery, F.E., & Thorsrud, E. (1964). Form and content of industrial democracy. Some experiments from Norway and other European countries. Oslo: Oslo University Press. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 155 Emery, F.E., & Trist, E.L. (1964). The causal texture of organizational environments. La Sociologie du Travail. Emery, F.E., & Trist, E.L. (1965). The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18 (1),21-32. Emery, F.E., Thorsrud, E., & Lange, K. (1966). Field experiments at Christiania Spigerverk. Industrial Democracy Project Paper 2, Phase B. London: Tavistock Document T807. Emery, F.E., Foster, M., & Woollard, W. (1967). Analytical model for socio technical systems. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.) (1978), The emergence of a new paradigm of work (pp. 95-106). Canberra, Australian National University, Center for Continuing Education. Emery, F.E., & Thorsrud, E. (1969a). Form and content of industrial democracy. Some experiments from Norway and other European countries. London: Tavistock. Emery, F.E., & Thorsrud, E. (1969b). Form and content of industrial democracy. Some experiments from Norway and other European countries. Assen: Van Gorcum. Emery, F.E., Thorsrud, E., & Lange, K. (1970). Field experiments at Christiania Spigerverk. London: Tavistock Document T807. Emery, F.E., & Trist, E.L. (1972). Towards a social ecology. Appreciations of the future in the present. New York: Plenum Press. Emery, F.E., & Emery, M. (1974). Participative design: work and community life. Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Emery, F.E., & Emery, M. (1975). Guts and guidelines for raising the quality of work life. In: D. Gunzburg (Ed.), Bringing work to life: the Australian experience (pp. 28-54). Melbourne: Cheshire Publications/Productivity Promotion Council of Australia. Emery, F.E., & Thorsrud, E. (1976). Democracy at work: the report of the Norwegian industrial democracy program. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. Emery, F.E., & Trist, E.L. (1978). Analytical model for socio-technical systems. In: W.A. Pasmore, & J.J. Sherwood (Eds.), Socia-technical systems: a sourcebook (pp. 120-131). La Jolla, California: University Associates. Emery, F.E., & Trist, E.L. (1981). The causal texture of organizational environments. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.), Systems Thinking (Vol. 1). London: Penguin Books. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 156 Emery, F.E., & Emery, M. (1989). Participative design: work and community life, part 1-3. In: M. Emery (Ed.), Participative design for participative democracy (pp. 94-113). Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Emery, M. (1982). Searching: For new directions, in new ways, for new times (revised edition). Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education, occasional paper no. 12. Emery, M. (1986). Toward an heuristic theory of diffusion. Human Relations, 39 (5),411-432. Emery, M. (1987). The theory and practice of search conferences. Paper presented at the Einar Thorsrud Memorial Symposium, Oslo. Emery, M. (1988). Further readings about participative design. In: M. Emery (Ed.), Participative design for participative democracy (pp. 114-126). Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Emery, M. (Ed.) (1989), Participative design for participative democracy. Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Emery, M. (1989a). Introduction. In: M. Emery (Ed.), Participative design for participative democracy (pp. 1-22). Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Emery, M. (1989b). Training search conferences managers. Canberra: Australian National University. Emery, M" & Emery, F.E. (1978). Searching: for new directions, in new ways, for new times. In: J.W. Sutherland, & A. Legasto Jr. (Eds.), Management handbook for public administrators. New York: Van Nostrand Rheinhold. Engelstad, P.H. (1969a). Sosio-teknisk analyse i prosessindustrien ved «Variasjonsmatrise»-methoden (Sociotechnical analysis in processing industries: towards a variance analysis matrix method). Tidsskrift for Samfunnsforskning, 3/4 (Norwegian language). Engelstad, P.H. (1969b). Sosio-teknisk analyse i prosessindustrien ved «Variasjonsmatrise»-methoden (Sociotechnical analysis in processing industries: towards a variance analysis matrix method). In: P.G. Herbst (Ed.) (1971), Demokratiserings prosessen i arbeidslivet (pp. 125-143). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget (Norwegian language). Engelstad, P.H. (1970). Sociotechnical approach to problems of process control. In: F. Bolam (Ed.), Papermaking systems and their control. British Paper and Board Makers Association. Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 157 Engelstad, P.H. (1972). Abstract of the Hunsfos case of the Norwegian industrial democracy project. In: L.E. Davis, & A.B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life. Vol. II: cases and commentary (pp. 334-335). New York: Free Press. Engelstad, P.H. (1990). The evolution of network strategies in action research supported socio-technical redesign programs in Scandinavia. Oslo: Work Research Institutes. Paper presented at the 1990 National Academy of Management Meeting, San Francisco, August 12-15. Engelstad, P.H. (1991a). The HABUT program and its development measures. Oslo: Work Research Institute. Engelstad, P.H. (1991b). The HABUT program in Norway: experiences and evolution of strategy. Paper presented at the Third 1991 Symposium on Arbeit und Technik, Bremen, Germany. Engelstad, P.H., Emery, F.E., & Thorsrud, E. (1969). The Hunsfos experiment. Oslo: Work Research Institute. Engelstad, P.H., & Haugen, R (1979). Sokekonferansen skjervfJY, i gar, i dag og i morgen (Search conferences, the past, the present and the future). Oslo: API (Norwegian language). Feibleman, J.K., & Friend, J.W. (1945). The structure and function of organization. Philosophical Review, 54, 19-44. Finlay, M.I. (1985). Democracy ancient and modern. London: The Hogarth Press. Flood, RL., & Jackson, M.e. (1991). Creative problem solving: total systems intervention. Chichester: Wiley. Foster, M. (1967). Developing an analytical model for socio-technical analysis. London: Tavistock Document HRC 7/ HRC 15. Foster, M. (1972). An introduction to the theory and practice of action research in work organizations. Human Relations,25 (6),529-556. Friedlander, F., & Brown, L. (1974). Organization development. Annual Review of Psychology, 25,313-341. Friss, L., & Taylor, J.e. (1981). Socio-technical systems: hospital application. In: C. Tilquin (Ed.), Systems science in health core. Toronto: Pergamon Press. Fruytier, B.G.M., Have, K ten, Peters, R, Bolk, H" Duren, A.J. van, Manen, M. van, Slagmolen, G., & Tack, P. (1988). De kwaliteit van mensen en machines: een kwestie van organisatie (The quality of people and machines: an issue of organization). Tilburg/Leiden/Den Haag: IV A/Intervisie/COB/SER (Dutch Language). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 158 Fry, D.E. (1975). A methodology for developing theory of feedback systems. In: A.J. Melcher (Ed.), General systems and organization theory: methodological aspects (pp. 57-85). Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press. Gabarro, J., & Lorsch, J.W. (1968). Northern Electric Company (A) (B) (C) (D), and (E). Harvard Business School, internal report. Gagnon, J.J., & Blutot, E. (1969). Autonomous groups in aluminium reduction. Unpublished report. Glas, G.A. (1980). Menselijker werken en meer te zegen hebben: een beknopte weergave van het verloop en de resultaten van het project Humanisering en medezeggenschap bij Centraal Beheer te Apeldoorn (Working more humanly and having more to say: a brief report on the course and the results of the project Humanisation and co-partnership at Centraal Beheer in Apeldoorn). Den Haag: COB/SER (Dutch Language). Glor, B., & Barko, W. (1982). Socio-technical systems using an industrial tested technology to design quality assurance standards in health care systems. Military Medicine, 147 (4),313-317. Golomb, N. (1981). A socio-technical strategy for improving the effectiveness and the QWL of three kibbutz plants and one governmental institute. Israel: The Ruppin Institute Kibbutz Management Centre (working paper). Grebogi, c., Ott, E., & Yorke, J.A. (1987). Chaos, strange attractors, and fractal basin boundries in non-linear dynamics. Science, 238,632-638. Grenier, V. (1979). L 'architecture industrielle et les conditions de travail (Industrial structure and labour conditions). Paris: ANACT, Collection experiences et realisations (French language). Groot, A.D. de (1980). Methodologie: grondslagen van onderzoek en denken in de gedragswetenschappen (Methodology: bases of inquiry in the behavioural sciences). Den Haag: Mouton, 7e druk (1e druk 1961) (Dutch Language). Gulowsen, J. (1972). Norsk Hydro. Oslo: Work Research Institute. Gulowsen, J. (1974). The Norwegian participation project. The Norsk Hydro Fertilizer Plant. Oslo: AI-Doc. Gulowsen, J. (1975). Arbeider-vilkar: et tilbakeblikk pa samarbeidsprosjektet LO/NAF (Worker resources: a review of the Norwegian industrial democracy project). Oslo: Tanum-Norli (Norwegian language). Gunzburg, D., & Hammarstrom, O. (1979). Swedish industrial democracy, 1977: progress and new government initiatives. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden, O. Ortsman, & R. van der Vlist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 35-43). Boston: Nijhoff. Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 159 Gustavsen, B. (1976). The social context of investment decisions. Acta Sociologica, 19 (3). Gustavsen, B. (1985a). Direct worker participation in matters of work safety and health. In: S. Bagnara, R. Misiti, & H. Wintersberger (Eds.), Work and health in the 19805. Berlin: Sigma. Gustavsen, B. (1985b). Workplace reform and democratic dialogue. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 6 (4),461-479, London: Sage. Gustavsen, B. (1988). Creating broad change in working life: the LOM programme. Toronto: Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre. Gustavsen, B. (1991). Dialogue and development: theory of communication, action research and the restructuring of working life. Stockholm: Arbetslivscentrum, preprint for book. Gustavsen, B. (1992). Dialogue and development: theory of communication, action research and the restructuring of working life. Assen/Stockholm: Van Gorcum/The Swedish Center for Working Life. Gustavsen, B., & Hunnius, G. (1981). New patterns of work reform. The case of Norway. Oslo: Norwegian University Press. Gustavsen, B., & SOrensen, B.Aa. (1982). Aksjonsforskning (Action research). In: Kvalitative methoder i samfunnsforskningen. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget (Norwegian language), Gustavsen, B., & Engelstad, P.H. (1986). The design of conferences and the evolving role of democratic dialogue in changing working life. Human Relations, 39 (2), 101-116. Gustavsen, B., Hart, H., & Hofmaier, B. (1991). From linear to interactive logics: characteristics of workplace development as illustrated by projects in large mail centers. Human Reiations,44 (4),309-332. Gustavson, P.W., & Taylor, J.C. (1984). Socia-technical design and new forms of work organization: integrated circuit fabrication. In: F. Butera, & J.E. Thurman (Eds.), Automation and work design: international comparative study of automation and work design (pp. 627-713). Amsterdam: ILO/North Holland. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, Vol. 1. Cambridge: Polity Press. Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action, Vol. II. Cambridge: Polity Press. Habermass, J., & Luhmann, N. (1971). Theorie der Gesellschaft oder Social technologie - Was leistet Systemforschung? (Societal theory or social technology - An'lUlls of STSD - F.M. van Eij'lUltten - References - Draft - August 1992 160 What accomplishes systems research?). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkampf (German language). Hackman, J.R (1981). Socio-technical systems theory: a commentary. In: A.H. van de Ven, & W.F. Joyce (Eds.), Perspectives on organization design and behavior (pp. 76-87). New York: Wiley. Hackman, J.R, & Lawler III, E.E. (1971). Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55 (3), 259-265. Hackman, J.R, & Oldham, G.R (1976). Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279. Haes, A.A. de, & Kalkman, W. (1982). Proces-innovatie en de kwaliteit van het werk: een onderzoek bij de machines voor de montage van scheerapparatenmotoren bij Kleine HuishoudeUjke Apparaten te Drachten (Process innovation and the quality of work: a research project in shaver motor assembly at Philips KHA in Drachten). Rotterdam/Eindhoven: Erasmus Universiteit/Philips' Gloeilampenfabrieken N. V. / Centrale Groep Organisa tie-Vernieuwing (Dutch language). Halpern, N. (1984). Socio-technical system design: the Shell Sarnia experience. In: J.B. Cunningham, & T.H. White (Eds.), Quality of working life: contemporary cases (pp. 31-75). Ottawa, Canada: Ministry of Supply and Services, L82-48/1984E. Hanssen-Bauer, J. (1991). Design or dialogue? A case to illustrate a multilevel strategy for work life development within a social-ecological framework in Norway. Oslo: The Norwegian Work Life Center (SBA), paper presented at the International Work Conference on Action Research and the Future of Work, August 28-30, Leeuwenhorst, The Netherlands. Harvey, D.P., & Brown, D.R (1988). An experiential approach to organization development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Hedberg, B., & Mumford, E. (1975). The design of computer systems. In: E. Mumford, & H. Sackman (Eds.), Human choice and computers (pp. 31-59). Amsterdam: North Holland. Hendriks, H.J. (1986). Kriteria voor produktiecellen: praktijk en theorie (Criteria for production cells: practice and theory). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, KWO-Research-Groep (Dutch language). Henry, 1. (1987). Reorganization at McCormack & Dodge: getting everybody in on the act. Personnel, November, 48-52. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 161 Herbst, P.G. (1958). Study of an autonomous working group. London: Tavistock Document 423. Herbst, P.G. (1959). Task structure and work relations. London: Tavistock Document 528. Herbst, P.G. (1962). Autonomous group functioning: an exploration in behaviour theory and measurement. London: Tavistock Publications. Herbst, P.G. (1970). Behavioural worlds: the study of single cases. London: Tavistock Publications. Herbst, P.G. (Ed.) (1971), Demokratiseringsprosessen i arbeidslivet: Sosio-tekniske studier (Democratization processes and work conditions: sociotechnical studies). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget (Norwegian language). Herbst, P.G. (1971). Socio-technical and psychodynamic variables in ship organization design. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1 (1),47-58. Herbst, P.G. (1974a). Socio-technical design: strategies in multidisciplinary research. London: Tavistock Publications. Herbst, P.G. (1974b). Some reflections on the work democratization project. Oslo: Work Research Institutes, AI-Doc. 13/1974, revised in Herbst (1976). Herbst, P.G. (1975). Omlegging til off-line systemet pa Dokka (Conversion to an off line system at Dokka). Oslo: Work Research Institute, AI-Doc 17/75 (Norwegian language). Herbst, P.G. (1975). The product of work is people. In: L.E. Davis, & A.B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life, Vol. 1 (pp. 439-442). New York: Free Press. Herbst, P.G. (1976). Alternatives to hierarchies. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. Herbst, P.G., & Getz, I. (1977). Work organization at a banking branch: toward a participative research technique. National Labour Institute Bulletin, 3 (1),29- 35. Hertog, J.P. den (1988). Technologie en organisatie, my the of missie (Technology and organization, myth or mission). Maastricht: Rijksuniversiteit Limburg, intreerede (Dutch language). Hertog, J.F. den, & Kerkhof, W.H.C. (1973). Experiment work structuring television receiver factory Eindhoven, Part II: evaluation of the social psychological effects of autonomous task-oriented production groups. Eindhoven: Philips Industrial Psychology Department, project 72-42. Hertog, J.F. den, & Wester, Ph. (1979). Organizational renewal in engineering works: a comparative process analysis. In: c.L. Cooper, & E. Mumford Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 162 (Eds.), The quality of working life: the European experiment. London: Associated Business Press. Hertog, J.F. den, & Dankbaar, B. (1989). De sociotechniek bijgesteld (The sociotechnique adjusted). Gedrag en Organisatie,2 (4/5), 269-287 (Dutch language). Hertog, J.F. den, & Roberts, H.J.E. (1990). Learning strategies for management accounting in unprogrammable contexts. Maastricht: MERIT, University of Limburg, research memorandum 90-011. Hertog, J.F. den, Sluys, E. van, Diepen, S. van, & Assen, A. van (1991). Innovatie en personeelsbeleid: de beheersing van de kennishuishouding (Innovation and personnel management: controlling the knowledge enterprise). Bedrijfskunde, 63 (2), 58-67 (Dutch language). Hertog, J.F. den, & Sitter, LU. de (1992). Cases in integral organization renewal. Den Bosch: Koers Consultants, preprint for book. Heuvel, R.E.F. van den (1992). Aspectmatige integrale organisatie-ontwikkeling: paradox of balans? (Partial integral organization development: paradox or balance?). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Higgin, G.W. (1957). Comparative study of mining systems. A conventional cutting longwall I: the technical system. London: Tavistock Document 466. Higgin, G.W. (1958). Comparative study of mining systems. A conventionallongwall II: task roles and social relationships. London: Tavistock Document 486. Hill, A.V. (1931). Adventures in biophysics. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press. Hill, C.P. (1971). Towards a new philosophy of management. London/Kent: Gower Press/Tonbridge. Hoevenaars, A.M. (1991). Produktie-struktuur en organisatievernieuwing: de mogelijkheid tot parallelliseren nader onderzocht (Production structure and organizational renewal: the possibility of parallelization further explored). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, proefschrift (Dutch language). Hulten, W.J.M. van (1990). Techniek en mensen: een keuze of synergie? (Technical systems and people: a choice or synergy?). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Jamestown Area Labor-Management Committee (1975). Three productive years. Jamestown, New York: City Hall. Jamestown Area Labor-Management Committee (1982). A decade of change. Jamestown, New York: City HalL Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 163 Janse, F. (1989). Werkplaats voor de nieuwe mens: Volvo sticht assemblagekliniek aan het Karregat (Workshop for the new employee: Volvo starts an assembly clinic at the 'Karregat'. CAD/CAM in Bedrijf, Augustus, 26-30 (Dutch language). Jantsch; E. (1980). The self-organizing universe: scientific and human implications of the emerging paradigm of evolution. New York: Pergamon Press. Jaques, E. (1951). The changing culture of a factory. London: Tavistock/Routledge. Jaques, E. (1964). Social analysis and the Glacier project. Human Relations,17, 361-376. Jenkins, D. (1975). Job reform in Sweden. Stockholm: Swedish Employers' Confederation SAF. Johansen, R. (1975). Nettverk der skip meter skip (Network: ship meets ship). Oslo: Work Research Institutes, AI-Doc. (Norwegian language). Johansen, R. (1976). Opplaering ombord M.S. Balao (Training on board the Balao), Oslo: Work Research Institutes, AI-Doc.(Norwegian language). Johansen, R (1979). Democratizing work and social life in ships: a report from the experiment on board M/S Balao. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden, O. Ortsman, & R. van der VIist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 117-129). Boston: Nijhoff. Joosse, D.J.B., Ykema-Weinen, P.M.L., Masselink, W.G., & Ris, B.G.M. (1990). Zelfstandig samenwerken in autonome taakgroepen: praktijk-ervaringen in industrie en dienstverlening (Self-supporting cooperation in autonomous task groups: experiences from practice in industrial and service organizations). Den Haag: SER/ AWV /NIA (Dutch language). Jordan, N. (1963). Allocation of functions between man and machines in automated systems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47 (3), 161-165. Juran, J.M. (1978). International significance of th QC circle movement: can non Japanese culture apply this concept of using work force creativity to improve company performance? Paper presented at theInternational QC Circle Convention, Tokyo, October. Jurkovich, R. (1974). A core typology of organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 380-394. Kanawaty, G., Thorsrud, E., Semiono, J.P., & Singh, J.P. (1981). Field experiences with new forms of work organization. International Labour Review, 120 (3), 263-277. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 164 Karasek, R (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain: implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285-307. Karasek, R (1990). Lower health risk with increased job control among white collar workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 171-185. Karlsen, J.1. (1992). Dialogue versus design. Paper presented at the International Conference Social Research as Support for Technological Development: Methodological Trends and Issues, April 10-13, Houthem-Valkenburg, The Netherlands. Karlsson, U. (1979). Alternativa produktionssystem tilllineproduktion (Alternative production system for line production). Gothenburg: Gothenburg University, doctoral dissertation (Norwegian language). Kasvio, A. (1991). Editorial to special English edition. Finnish Work Research Bulletin, 2 (b), 3-4. Katz, D., & Kahn, RL. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley. Katz, D., & Kahn, RL. (1967). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley. Katz, D., & Kahn, RL. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: McGraw-HilL Kauppinen, T. (1988). Technological change and worker participation: the JOY project in Finland. Stockholm: Arbetslivscentrum. Kauppinen, T. (1989). Management of change and the JOY project in Finland. Finnish Labour Relations Review, 3. Kauppinen, T. (1991). Leadership, organization and co-operation: the JOY-project in Finland. Helsinki: Ministry of Labour, Paper presented at the International Work Conference on Action Research and the Future of Work, 28-30 August, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands. Keidel, RW. (1981). Theme appreciation as a construct for organizational change. Management Science, 27, 1261-1278. Keidel, RW., & Trist, E.L. (1980a). Community economic development in Jamestown. In: D. Morley et al. (Ed.), Making cities work. The dynamics of urban innovation. London: Croom Helm. Keidel, RW., & Trist, E.L. (1980b). Decline and revitalization: the Jamestown experience. In: D. Morley et al. (Ed.), Making cities work: the dynamics of urban innovation (pp. 119-124). London: Croom Helm. Kelly, J.E. (1978). A reappraisal of socio-technical systems theory. Human Relations, 31 (12), 1069-1099. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 165 Ketchum, L.D. (1975). A case study of diffusion. In: L.E. Davis, & A.B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life, Vol. II. New York: Free Press. Ketchum, L.D. (1981). A sociotechnical study in a developing country. Paper presented at QWL and the 80's Conference, Toronto. Ketchum, L.D. (1983). A sociotechnical study in a developing country. In: H.F. Kolodny, & H.J.J. van Beinum (Eds.), QWL and the 80's (pp. 157-158). New York: Praeger, excerpt by A. Armstrong. Ketchum, L.D. (1984). Sociotechnical design in a third world country: the railway maintenance depot at Sennar in the Sudan. Human Relations,37 (2), 135-154. Ketchum, L.D., & Trist, E.L. (1992). All teams are not created equal: how employee empowerment really works. Newbury Park, California: Sage. Kidwell, J., El, J.A., & Ketchum, L.D. (1981). Sociotechnical study for locomotive maintenance workshop at Sennai, Sudan. McLean, Virginia: Parsons Brinckerhoff CENTEC International. Kiggundu, M.N. (1982). The quality of working life in developing countries: beyond the sociotechnical systems model. Paper presented at the 20th International Congress of Applied Psychology, Edinburgh, Scotland. Kiggundu, M.N. (1986a). Limitations of the application of sociotechnical systems in developing countries. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22 (3), 341-354. Kiggundu, M.N. (1986b). Sociotechnical systems in developing countries: a review and directions for future research. Ottawa, Ontario: Carleton University, School of Business, working paper No. WPS-86-01. Kiggundu, M.N., J6rgensen, J.J., & Hafsi, T. (1983). Administrative theory and practice in developing countries: a synthesis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28 (1),66-84. King, S.D.M. (1964). Training within the organization. London: Tavistock. Kirby, P. (1985). A socio-technical aproach to reducing manufacturing cycle-time: a case study. Dearborn, Michigan: Society of Manufacturing Engineers, technical paper MM 85-721. Kiviniitty, J. (1992). Work, culture and technology: focus on engineering workshops. Finnish Work Research Bulletin, 2 (b), 24-25. Klein, L. (1975). A social scientist in industry. Farnborough: Gower. Klein, M. (1932). The psycho-analysis of children. London: Hogarth Press. Klein, M. (1948). Contributions to psycho-analysis 1921-1945. London: Hogarth Press. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 166 Koehler, W. (1938). The place of value in a world of fact. New York: Liveright. Koen, M.M. (1991). Samen sterk: een nieuwe produktiestructuur in een bestaande organisatie-cultuur (Strong together: a new production structure in an existing organization culture). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Koestler, A. (1967). The ghost in the machine. London: Hutchinson. Koestler, A. (1978). Janus: a summing up. London: Hutchinson. Kohler, W. (1929). Gestalt psychology. New York: Liveright. Kolodny, H.F., & Stjernberg, T. (1986). The change process of innovative work designs: new design and redesign in Sweden, Canada and the U.S. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,22 (3),287-301. Kommers, J.C.M.J., Fransen, E., & Fruytier, B.M.G. (1991). Automatische produktiebesturing werkt niet vanzelf (Automated production control does not work automatically). Tilburg/Den Haag: IV A/COB/SER, no. 91-70/91-71 (Dutch language). Kotler, P. (1988). Marketing management: analysis, planning and control. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Kuipers, H., & Rutte, C.G. (1987). Sociotechnische ontwerpprincipes: een analyse (Principles of sociotechnical design: an analysis). Rotterdam: NOBO (Dutch language). Kuipers, H., & Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van (1990). Slagvaardig organiseren: een inleiding in de sociotechniek als integrale ontwerpleer (Quick-witted organizing: an introduction of sociotechnique as an integral design theory). Deventer: Kluwer (Dutch language). Kumpe, T., & Bolwijn, P.T. (1990). Fabrieken met een toekomst. De invloed van nieuwe markt-eisen en technologieen op produk ties (Factories which will make it in the future. The impact of new market claims and technologies on production). Informatie,32 (11), 837-847 (Dutch language). Kunst, P.E.}., & Roberts, H.J.E. (1990). Sociotechnical systems design and management accounting. Maastricht: MERIT 90-017, paper presented at the annual conference of the European Accounting Association, Budapest. Kuriloff, A.H. (1963). An experiment in management: putting theory Y to the test. Personnel, 40, 8-17. Kusterer, K.C. (1978). Know-how on the job: the important working knowledge of 'unskilled' workers. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Landen, D.L. (1977). The real issue: human dignity. Survey of Business, 12 (5), 15-17. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 167 Landen, D.L. (1978). Quality of work life and productivity. Detroit: General Motors Corporation. Paper presented at the 21st. National Automotive Division Conference, Februari. Landre, C.J.W. (1990). Een methode voor het inrichten van de besturing van de produktie met behulp van sociotechnische principes: van ontwerptheorie naar een concrete (her)ontwerpmethode (A method for the sociotechnical organization of production control: from design theory towards a practical (re)design method. Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Lang, R., & Hellpach, W. (Hrsg.) (1922), Gruppenfabrikation (Production with groups). Berlin: Springer (German language). Lansbury, R.D. (1992). JOY to the world? A brief analysis of the contributions of the JOY project to workplace change in Finland in the context of international developments. Finnish Work Research Bulletin,2 (b),8-10. Larsen, H.H. (1979). Humanization of the work environment in Denmark. In: C.L. Cooper, & E. Mumford (Eds.), The quality of working life in Western and Eastern Europe (pp. 124-158). London: Associated Business Press. Laszlo, E. (1987). Evolution: the grand synthesis. Boston, MA: New Science Library. Laszlo, E. (1990). Global bifurcation. New York: Gordon & Breach. Lefebvre, C., & Rolloy, G. (1976). L'amelioration des conditions de travail dans les emplois administratifs (Improving work in administrative organizations). Paris: Chotard et Associes Editeurs (French language). Legros, M. (1976). Experience de restructuration des taches dans un groupe de caisses de retraite (Experiences with the restructuring of jobs in pension scheme insurance). In: C. Lefebvre, & G. Rolloy (Eds.), L 'amelioration des conditions de travail dans les emplois administratifs (pp. 196-200). Paris: Chotard et Associ«~s Editeurs (French language). Lehner, F. (1991). Anthropocentric production systems: the European response to advanced manufacturing and globalization. CEC/FAST/APS Research Series, 4. Lewin, K. (1935). Aristotlean and Galilean modes of thought. Lewin, K. (1943). Forces behind food habits and methods of change. Bulletin of the National Research Council, 108,35-65. Lewin, K. (1946). Research on minority problems. The Technology Review, 48 (3). Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 168 Lewinl K. (1947). Group decision and social change. In: T.M. Newcombe, & E.L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology. New York: Holtl Rinehart and Winston. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science. New York: Harper and Row. Lewin, K. (1954). Social structure and personality. Lewin, K., Lippitt, R, & White, RK. (1939). Patterns of aggresive behavior in experimentally created 'social climates'. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271- 299. Lichtenberg, A., & Sinten, L. van (1986). Organiseren kan ook anders: een organisatie-analyse met behulp van de systeembenadering. Een pleidooi voor kwaliteit van werk en organisatie (Organizing differently: an organization analysis using the systems approach. A plea for quality of work and organization. Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, Vakgroep Psychologie van Arbeid en Organisatie (Dutch language). Lilienfeld, R (1978). The rise of systems theory: an ideological analysis. New York: Wiley. Lindholm, R (1975). Job reform in Sweden: conclusions from 500 shop floor projects. Stockholm: Swedish Employers' Confederation SAP. Lindholm, R (1979). Towards a new world of work. Swedish development of work organizations, production engineering and co-determination. International Journal on Production Research, 17 (5),433-443. Lippitt, R (1940). An experimental study of authoritarian and democratic group atmospheres. University of Iowa Studies in Child Welfare, 16, 45-195. Lippitt, R, & White, RK. (1939). The social climate of children's groups. In: RG. Barker, J.S. Kounin, & H.F. Wright (Eds.) (1943), Child behaviours & development. New York: McGraw-Hill. Litterer, J.A. (Ed.) (1963), Organizations: systems, control and adaptation, vol. I and II. New York: Wiley. Little, A.D. Inc. (1965). Analysis of automation potential by means of unit operations. US Department of Labor c-66411. Loeffen, J.M.J. (1991). Besturing en informatievoorziening bij Stork PMT in Boxmeer. Een verkennende studie (Control and information supply at Stork PMT in Boxmeer. An exploratory study). Eindhoven/Boxmeer: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde / Stork PMT, bedrijfsrapport (Dutch language). Loeffen, J.M.J. (1991b). Integral organizational renewal and resulting changes in the process of information exchange. In: A. van Harten, & B.G.F. Pol Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 169 (Eds.), Bedrijfskundigen informeren bedrijfskundigen (pp. 115-120). Enschede: NOBO. Loeffen, J.M.J. (1992). Informatievoorziening bij Holee-HAT in Hengelo. Analyse en heron twerp - werktitel (Information supply at Holee-HAT in Hengelo. Analysis and redesign - work title). Eindhoven/Hengelo: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde / Holec-HAT, bedrijfsrapport (Dutch language). Logue, G. (1981). Saab/Trollhattan: reforming work life on the shop floor. Working life in Sweden (no. 23), Stockholm: The Swedish Institute. Lorenz, E.N. (1963). Deterministic non-periodic flow. Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, 20, 130-141. Luhmann, N. (1967). Soziologie als Theorie Sozialer Systeme (Sociology as a theory of social systems). Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozial Psychologie, 196, 615-644 (German language). Luhmann, N. (1968a). Selbststeuerung'der Wissenschaft (Self-control of science). Jahrbuch /iir Sozialwissenschaft, 19, 147-170 (German language). Luhmann, N. (1968b). Zweekbegriff und Systemrationalitat: uber die Funktionen von Zweeken in Sozialen Systemen (The concept of goal and system rationality: about the functions of goals in social systems). Tuebingen: Mohr (German language). Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale Systeme: Grundriss einer allgemeinen Theorie (Social systems: foundations for a general theory). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (German language). Lytle, W.O. (1991a). Socio-technical systems analysis and design guide for linear work. Plainfield, New Jersey: Block/Petrella/Weisbord, Inc. Lytle, W.O. (1991b). Socio-technical systems analysis and design guide for non-linear work. Plainfield, New Jersey: Block/Petrella/Weisbord, Inc. Maassen, H. (1982). Samen op weg: een begin van werkstrukturering in de afdeling Voorberwerking van IHC-Smit b.v. Ie Kinderdijk (Setting off together: making a start with work structuring in the pre-manufacturing department of IHC-Smit b.v. in Kinderdijk). Eindhoven: Technische Hogeschool, afdeling der Bedrijfskunde, Vakgroep Organisatie-sociologie (Dutch language), Macy, B.A., & Jones, A. (1976). The socio-technical system at Bethesda hospital. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research. Maier, N.RF. (1946). Psychology in industry. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 170 Marek, J., Lange, K., & Engelstad, P.H. (1964). Report 1. Industrial democracy project. The wire drawing mill of Christiania Spigerverk. Trondheim: IFIM, Institute for Industrial Social Research. May, J., & Groder, M. (1989). Jungian thought and dynamical systems: a new science of archetypal psychology. Psychological Perspectives, 20, 142-155. May, R.M. (1976). Simple mathematical models with very complicated dynamics. Nature, 261,459-467. Mayo, E. (1933). The human problems of an industrial civilization. New York: Macmillan. McCann, J.E., & Selsky, W.J. (1984). Hyperturbulence and the emergence of type-5 environments. The Academy of Management Review, 9, 460-471. McGill Human Resource Associates Inc. (1985). Canadian General Electric in Bromont: participative management in an advanced technology plant. Montreal. Melcher, A.J. (Ed.) (1975), General systems and organization theory: methodological aspects. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press. Melman, S. (1958). Decision making and productivity. Oxford: Blackwell. Menzies, I.E.P. (1960). A case study in the functioning of social systems as a defence against anxiety. A report on a study of the nursing service of a general hospital. Human Relations, 13, 90-121. Miller, E.C. (1978). GM's quality of work life efforts. An interview with Howard C. Carlson. Personnel, juli-aug, 11-23. Miller, E.J. (1959). Technology, territory and time: the internal differentiation of complex production systems. London: Tavistock Document 526. Miller, E.J. (1975). Socio-technical systems in weaving, 1953-1970: a follow-up study. Human Relations, 28 (4), 349-386. Miller, E.J., & Rice, A.K. (1967). Systems of organization: the control of task and sentient boundaries. London: Tavistock Publications. Mills, T. (1978). Europe's industrial democracy: an American response. Harvard Business Review, 56 (6), 143-152. Montuori, A. (1991). Toward a theory base for evolutionary learning. San Francisco, California: Saybrook Institute, unpublished doctoral thesis. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organizations. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Mumford, E. (1979). Participative work design: a contribution to democracy in the office and on the shop floor. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden, O. Ortsman, & R. van der Vlist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 193-211). Boston: Nijhoff. Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 171 Mumford, E., & Henshall, D. (1979). A participative approach to computer systems design. London: Associated Business Press. Mumford, E., & Weir, M. (1979). Computer systems in work design, the ETHICS method: effective technical and human implementation of computer systems. London: Associated Business Press. Murray, H. (1957a). Changing from conventional to composite organization. London: Tavistock Document 484. Murray, H. (1957b). Comparative study of mining systems I: Composite cutting longwalls. London: Tavistock Document 462. Murray, H. (1957c). Composite cutting longwalls II: work organization. London: Tavistock Document 463. Murray, H. (1957d). Composite cutting longwalls III: the production record of two double unit longwalls. London: Tavistock Document 465. Murray, H. (1957e). Composite cutting longwalls IV: the assessment of performance. London: Tavistock Document 465. Murray, H. (1957f). Composite cutting longwalls VI: work roles and activity groups. London: Tavistock Document 473. Murray, H. (1957g). Composite cutting longwalls VII: social adaptation to increased work stress. London: Tavistock Document 472. Murray, H. (1957h). Composite cutting longwalls VIII: regulation of cycle progress. London: Tavistock Document 482. Nagel, E. (1956). Logic without metaphysics. A formalization of functionalism. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.), Systems thinking: selected readings (pp. 297-329). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Naschold, F. et al (1992). Evaluation das LOM-Programm. Berlin: Wissenschaftscentrum (German language). National Capital Development Commission (1973). How to build an utopia - or not bomb out by Much. Canberra: NCDC report. Nicolis, G., & Prigogine, I. (1977). Self-organization in non-equilibrium systems: from dissipative structures to order through fluctuations. New York: Wiley. Nieuwenhuizen, H.J. (1984). Speelruimte past iedereen (Latitude suits everybody). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, KWO-Research-Groep, Vakgroep Psychologie van Arbeid en Organisatie (Dutch language). Nilakant, V., & Rao, V.R. (1976). Participative design: the hardware experience. National Labour Institute Bulletin, 2 (8), 277-287, New Delhi. Nilsson, K., & Nilsson, P. (1990). The symbiosis of interorganizational and intra organizational learning. Umea: Umea Business School. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 172 Norstedt, J.P., & Aguren, S. (1973). The Saab-Scania report. Stockholm: Swedisch Employers' Confederation SAF, Technical Department. Otten, J.H.M., Poppel, G.C.J.M., Roosbroek, H.F.M., & Swiiste, W.H.T.M. (1984). Niet-technische aspekten van kantoor-automatisering bij het Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken: verslag van een voormeting (Non-technical aspects of office automation at the Ministry of Internal Affairs: a pre-measurement report). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, KWO-Research-Groep, Vakgroep Psychologie van Arbeid en Organisatie (Dutch language). Pasmore, W.A. (1988). Designing effective organizations: the socio-technical systems perspective. New York: Wiley. Pasmore, W.A., & Sherwood, J.J. (Eds.) (1978), Socio-technicalsystems: a sourcebook. La Jolla, California: University Associates. Pasmore, W.A., Srivastva, S., & Sherwood, J.J. (1978). Social relationships and organizational performance: a sociotask approach. In: W.A. Pasmore, & J.J. Sherwood (Eds.), Socio-technical systems: a sourcebook. San Diego: University Associates. Pasmore, W.A., Francis, c., Haldeman, J., & Shani, A. (1982). Socio-technical systems: a North American reflection on empirical studies of the seventies. Human Relations,35 (12), 1179-1204. Pava, C. (1979). State of the art in American autonomous work group design. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Management and Behavioral Science Center, The Wharton School. Pava, C. (1983). Managing new office technology: an organizational strategy. New York: Free Press. Pava, C. (1985). Managing new information technology: design or default? In: R.E. Walton, & P.R. Lawrence (Eds.), HRM: trends and challenges (pp. 69-102). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press. Pava, C. (1986). Redesigning socio-technical systems design: concepts and methods for the 1990s. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22 (3),201-222. Peirce, C.s. (1898). The rules of philosophy. In: M. Konvitz, & G. Kennedy (Eds.) (1960), The American pragmatists. New York: New American Library. Pepper, S.C. (1942). World hypotheses. Los Angeles, Berkely: University of California Press, second edition (1961). Pepper, S.c. (1950). World hypotheses. University of California. Pionet, F. (1979). Experiences de reorganisation au travail dans la communaute europeenne (Experiences with the reorganization of work in the European Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnaften - References - Draft - August 1992 173 Economic Community). Paris: Fondation Europeenne pour l'amelioration des condition et de travail (French language). Pleij, F.J.E. (1992). Prestatie-beoordeling van afdelinen en hele taakgroepen: controleren of sturen? (Performance appraisal in departments and whole-task groups: supervision or control?). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Pollock, A.B. (1954). Retail shop organization. London: Tavistock Documents Series. Pollock, A.B. (1957). Single place working. London: Tavistock Document 420a. Pollock, A.B. (1958). A composite hewing longwall unit. London: Tavistock Document 504a, 26 pp. Porras, J.1. (1987). Stream analysis: a powerful way to diagnose and manage organizational change. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. Pot, F.D., Chris tis, J.H.P., Fruytier, B.G.M., Kommers, H., Middendorp, J., Peeters, M.H.H., & Vaas, S. (1989a). Functieverbetering en organisatie van de arbeid (Job improvement and the organization of work). Voorburg: Directoraat Generaal van de Arbeid, Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid,S71 (Dutch language). Pot, F.D., Peeters, M.H.H., Vaas, 5., Christis, J.H.P., Middendorp, J., Fruytier, B.G.M., & Kommers, H. (1989b). Functieverbetering en Arbowet (Job improvement and the Work Environment Act). Gedrag en Organisatie,2 (4/5),361-382 (Dutch language). Poza, E.J., & Markus, M.L. (1980). Success story: the team approach to work restructuring. Organizational Dynamics, winter, 3-25. Prigogine,1. (1947). Etude thermodynamique des phenomenes irreversibles (The study of the termo-dynamics of irreversible phenomena). Durrod. Prigogine, I. (1976). Order through fluctuation: self organization and social systems. In: E. Jantsch, & C. Waddington (Eds.), Evolution and consciousness: human systems in transition. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. Prigogine, 1., & Stengers, 1. (1984). Order out of chaos: man's new dialog with nature. New York: Bantam. Pritchard, R.D. (1990). Measuring and improving organizational productivity: a practical guide. New York: Praeger. Pritchard, R.D., Jones, S.D., Roth, P.L., Stuebing, K.K., & Ekeberg, S.E. (1988). Effects of group feedback, goal setting, and incentives on organizational productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 73 (2),337-358. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 174 Pritchard, RD., Jones, S.D., Roth, P.L., Stuebing, K.K., & Ekeberg, S.E. (1989). The evaluation of an integrated approach to measuring organizational productivity. Personnel Psychology, 42, 69-115. Purser, RE., & Pasmore, W.A. (1990). Advances in non-routine socio-technical systems thinking: current applications and future implications for the design of knowledge-producing organizations. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Organization Development Meeting, San Francisco, California. Purser, RE., & Pasmore, W.A. (1991). Organizing for learning. Chicago, Illinois/Cleveland, Ohio: Loyola University/Case Western Reserve University, preprint. Qvale, T.U. (1975). Arbeidsmilje og arbeidsorganisasjon i et smelteverk (Work relations and work organization in a fusion). Oslo: Work Research Institutes Al Doc. (Norwegian language). Qvale, T.U. (1976). A Norwegian strategy for democratization of industry. Human Relations, 29 (5), 453-469. Qvale, T.U. (1978). Bureaucracy or productivity - experience with board level worker representation in Norway. Human Futures, 1,61-64. Qvale, T.U. (1989). A new milestone in the development of industrial democracy in Norway. In: c.J. Lammers, & G. Szell (Eds.), International Handbook of participation in organizations, Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Qvale, T.U. (1991). Participation for productivity and change: a multilevel, cooperative strategy for improving organizational performance. Oslo: Norwegian Work Life Centre, SBA, Paper presented at the Conference Workplace Australia, Melbourne, 24-28 februari. Radke, M., & Klisurich, D. (1947). Experiments in changing food habits. Journal of the American Dietists Association, 23, 403-409. Rapoport, RN. (1970). Three dilemmas in action research: with special reference to the Tavistock experience. Human Relations,23 (6), 499-513. Rashevsky, N. (1938). Mathematical biophysics. Chicago: University Press. Rice, A.K. (1953). Productivity and social organization in an Indian weaving shed: an examination of the socio-technical system of an experimental automatic loomshed. Human Relations,6 (4),297-329. Rice, A.K. (1958). Productivity and social organization: the Ahmedabad Experiment. London: Tavistock Publications. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 175 Rice, A.K. (1963). The enterprise and its environment. London: Tavistock Publications. Roberts, H.J.E., Boons, A.N.A.M., & Roozen, F.A. (1991). Strategische kostenanalyse (Strategic cost analysis). Maandblad voor Accounting en Bedrijfseconomie, 65 (9), 383-392 (Dutch language). Roberts, H.J.E., Boons, A.N.A.M., & Roozen, F.A. (1991a). Reflections on activity based costing. Paper presented at the fMA Congress, Erasmus University Rotterdam. Roberts, H.J.E., Boons, A.N.A.M., & Roozen, F.A. (1991b). The use of activity based costing systems in a European setting: a case study analysis. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Congress of the European Accounting Association, Maastricht. Robison, D. (1977). General Motors business teams advance QWL at Fisher Body Plant. World of Work Report, 2 (7). Roggema, J. (1968). Survey of interview data collected on the Hoegh Aurore and Hoegh Merchant. Groningen: Institute for Social Psychology. Roggema, J., & Thorsrud, E. (1974), Et skip i utvikling (A ship in development). Oslo: Tanum (Norwegian language), Roggema, J., & Hammarstrl2Jm, N.K. (1975). Nye organisasjonsformer till sjgS (New organizational forms in seafaring>. Oslo: Tanum-Norli (Norwegian language). Rogne, K. (1974). Redesigning the design process. Applied Ergonomics, 5 (4), 213- 218. Roos, J.P. (1974). Theoretical problems of democratic planning. Acta SOciologica, 17 (3),218-235. Roux, W. (1914). Die Selbstregulation (Self-regulation). Berlin (German language). Rundell, C.R. (1978). Quality of work life in General Motors. Paper presented at the 21st National Automotive Division Conference, Greater Detroit Section Annual Forum. Sandberg, A. (1976). The limits to democratic planning: knowledge, power and methods in the struggle for the future. Stockholm: Liber. Sandberg, A. (1979). The Demos project: democratic control and planning in working life. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden, O. Ortsman, & R. van der VIist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 292-302). Boston: Nijhoff. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 176 Schlitzberger, H.H. (1978). Planning von Arbeitssysteme mit Hilfe von Strukturierungsbausteine (Planning of labour systems with the help of structuring principles). Refa Nachrichten,31 (3), 131-134 (German language). Schrodinger, E. (1944). What is life? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schumacher, E.P. (1975). Small is beautiful: economics as if people mattered. New York: Harper Colophon Books. Schumacher, P.C. (1975). The Schumacher workstructuring method. London: Philips Electronic Industries, Central O&E Department, internal paper. Schumacher, P.e. (1979). Principles of work organization. London: Philips Electronic Industries, Central Organization and Efficiency Department. Schiitzenberger, M.P. (1954). A tentative classification of goal-seeking behaviours. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.) (1969), Systems thinking: selected readings (pp. 205-213). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Schumacher, P.C. (1983). Manufacturing system design: the Schumacher workstructuring methods, steps I to VI. Surrey ILondon: Philips Electronic Industries, Central O&E Department, training manual. Sena, J.A., & Shani, A.B. (1992). The technological component of sociotechnical system thinking: a case study of a local area network implementation. In: L.A. Masters (Ed.), Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Meeting of the Western Decision Sciences Institute (pp. 290-295). San Bernardino: California State University. Shani, A.B. (1983). The durability of sociotechnical systems approach to change. Grand Forks, North Dakota: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, technical report. Shani, A.B., & Eberhardt, B.J. (1987). Parallel organization in a health care institution: an exploratory action research study. Group and Organization Studies, 12 (2),147-173. Shani, A.B., & Elliott, O. (1988). Applying socio-technical system design at the strategic apex: an illustration. Organization Development Journal, 6 (2),53-66. Shani, A.B., Grant, RM., Krishnan, R, & Thompson, E. (1992). Advanced manufacturing systems and organizational choice: a sociotechnical system approach. California Management Review, 34. Shani, A.B., & Krishnan, R. (1992). Re-examination of STS: an empirical investigation. Paper presented at the IW AM Conference, Leuven, Belgium, June. Shepherd, V.W. (1951). Continuous longwall mining: experiments at Bolsover colliery. Colliery Guardian, 182. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 177 Sievers, B. (1971). System, Organisation, Gesellschaft. N. Luhmann's Theorie Sozialer Systeme (System, organization, society. N. Luhmann's theory of social systems). ]ahrbuch fiir Sozialwissenschaft, 22 (1) (German language). Simonse, L. (1992). De informatie-voorziening van Rolec Algemene Toelevering (The information supply of Rolec Algemene Toelevering). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Techniek en Maatschappij (Dutch language). Singer, E.A., Jr. (1959). Experience and reflection. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Sitter, L.U. de (1973). A system-theoretical paradigm of social interaction: towards a new approach to qualitative system dynamics. Annals of System Research, 3, 109-140. Sitter, L.U. de (1974a). Sociotechniek (Sociotechnique). Mens & Onderneming, 28 (2),65-83 (Dutch language). Sitter, L.U. de (1974b). Sociotechniek 2: aantekeningen bij een sociotechnisch model van een produktie-systeem (Sociotechnique 2: notes about a sociotechnical model of a production system). Mens & Onderneming, 28 (3), 163-176 (Dutch language). Sitter, L.U. de (1978). Kenmerken en funcHes van de kwaliteit van de arbeid (Characteristics and functions of the quality of work). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, afdeling Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Sitter, L.U. de (1980). Produktie-organisatie en arbeidsorganisatie in sociaal economisch perspektief: kanttekeningen rondom het vraagstuk van de kwaliteit van de arbeid en organisatie (Production organization and organization of work from a social-eonomic point of view: notes about the problem of the quality of work and of organization). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, afdeling Bedrijfskunde, vakgroep Organisatie-sociologie (Dutch language). Sitter, L.U. de (1981). Op weg naar nieuwe fabrieken en kantoren: produktie organisatie en arbeidsorganisatie op de tweesprong (Towards new factories and offices: production organization and work organization on a cross-road). Deventer: Kluwer (Dutch language). Sitter, L.U. de (1981). The functional significance of participation. Eindhoven: University of Technology, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Science, internal report. Sitter, L.U. de (1989a). Integrale produktievernieuwing: sociale en economische achtergronden van het TAO-programma (Integral production renewal: social and economic background of the TAD programme). Maastricht: MERIT (Dutch language), Annals of STSD - F.M. van· Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 178 Sitter, L.U, de (1989b). Moderne Sociotechniek (Modern Sociotechnology). Gedrag & Organisatie, 2 (4/5), 222-252 (Dutch language), Sitter, L.U. de (1989c). Kwaliteit van de arbeid: uitgangspunten, gevolgen, meten, beoordelen (Quality of work: points of departure, effects, measuring, judging). Den Bosch: Adviesgroep Koers, intern rapport (Dutch language), Sitter, L.U. de, & Heij, P. (1975). Sociotechniek 6: een sociotechnische analyse van arbeidstaken (Sociotechnique 6: a sociotechnical analysis of jobs). Mens & Onderneming, 29 (3), 133-155 (Dutch language). Sitter, L.U. de, Vermeulen, A.A.M., Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van, Geffen, L. van, Troost, p" & Verschuur, F.O, (1986). Het flexibele bedrijf: integrale aanpak van flexibiliteit, beheersbaarheid, kwaliteit van de arbeid en produktie-automatisering (The flexible business: an integrated approach of flexibility, controllability, quality of work and production automation), Deventer: Kluwer (Dutch language), Sitter, L.U. de, Hertog, J.F. den, & Eijnatten, EM. van (1990). Simple organizations, complex jobs: the Dutch socio-technical approach. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Academy of Management, San Francisco, 12-15 August. Sluijs, E. van, Assen, A. van, & Hertog, J.E den (1990). Personeelsbeleid en innovatie - TAO position paper (Personnel management and innovation - TAO position paper). Maastricht: MERIT research memorandum 90-024 (Dutch language). Sluijs, E. van, Assen, A. van, & Hertog, J.F. den (1991). Personnel management and organizational change: a sociotechnical perspective. European Work and Organizational Psychologist, 1 (I), 27-51. Sluijs, E. van, & Terwisga, H.B. van (1991). Training and development in an innovative context. Paper presented at the fifth European Congress on the Psychology of Work and Organization, Rouen, March 24-27. Smets, P., & Zwaan, A.H. van der (1975). Sociotechniek 5: twee systemen van produktiebesturing: een toepassing van de traceermethode (Sociotechnique 5: two systems of production control: an application of the tracing-out method). Mens & Onderneming, 29 (1), 27-50 (Dutch language). Smith, F. (1952). Switch board reorganization. London: General Post Office, unpublished monograph. Sol, E.J. (1990). Holonic production systems: systeemkeuze,opbouw en eigenschappen (Holonic production systems: system choice, construction and characteristics). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde (Dutch language). Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 179 Sommerhoff, G. (1950). Analytical biology. London: Oxford University Press. Sommerhoff, G. (1969). The abstract characteristics of living systems. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.), Systems thinking: selected readings (pp. 147-202). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Spencer-Brown, L. (1969). Laws of form. London: Allen and Unwin. Spiegelman, S. (1945). Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 20, 121. Srivastva, S., Salipante, P., Cummings, T., Notz, W., Bigelow, J., & Waters, J. (1975). Job satisfaction and productivity. Cleveland: Case Western Reserve University. Strien, P.J. van (1975). Naar een methodologie van het praktijkdenken in de sociale wetenschappen (Towards a methodology of consultative thinking in the social sciences). Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie, 30,601-619 (Dutch language). Strien, P.J. van (1978). Paradigms in organizational research and practice. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 51 (4t 291-301. Strien, P.J. van (1986). Praktijk als wetenschap: methodologie van het sociaal wetenschappelijk handelen (Practice as science: the methodology of social-scientific interventions. Assen: Van Gorcum (Dutch language). Sudbury 2001 (1979). A framework for action. Sudbury: Ontario. Susman, G.I. (1975). Technological prerequisites for delegation of decision making to work group. In: L.E. Davis, & A.B. Cherns (Eds.), The quality of working life, Vol. I. New York: The Free Press. Susman, G.I. (1976). Autonomy at work: a socio-technical analysis of participative management. New York: Praeger. Susman, G.I. (1983). Action research: a socio-technical systems perspective. In: G. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: strategies for social research. Beverly Hills, California: Sage. Taylor, F.W. (1911). Scientific management. New York: Harper & Row. Taylor, J.C. (1975). The human side of work: the socio-technical approach to work system design. Personnel Review, 4 (3), 17-22. Taylor, J.e. (1977a). Experiments in work system design: economic and human results. Part I. Personnel Review,6 (3),21-34. Taylor, J.C. (1977b). Experiments in work system design: economic and human results. Part II. Personnel Review, 6 (4),21-42. Taylor, J.C. (1977c). Job design in an insurance firm. Journal of Contemporary Business,6 (2),37-48. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 180 Taylor, J.C. (1978). Participative socio-technical work system analysis and design: three cases of service technology work groups. Los Angeles, California: Center for Quality of Working Life, UCLA. Taylor, J.c. (1989). An action basis of social theory. Looking at the product of our work: a new paradigm for designing effective organizations. Paper presented at the Conference A search for a paradigm of efficient social action, Charleton University, Ottowa. Taylor, J.C. (1990). Two decades of socio-technical systems in North America. Los Angeles, California: University of Southern California, Institute of Safety and Systems Management, Paper presented at the 1990 National Academy of Management Meeting, San Francisco, August 15. Taylor, J.c., & Asadorian, RA. (1985). The implementation of excellence: socio-technical management. Industrial Management, 27 (4), 5-15. Taylor, J.c., Gustavson, P.W., & Carter, W.S. (1986). Integrating the social and technical systems of organizations. In: D.D. Davis (Ed.), Managing technological innovations. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. Taylor, J.C., & Felten, D.F. (1993). Performance by design: socio-technical systems in North America. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Terra, N. (1988). Ruimte voor nieuwe inhoud: reorganiseren met menselijke maat (New job content: job redesign and humanization of work). Gedrag en Organisatie, 88 (4), 72-90 (Dutch language). Thorsrud, E. (1966). Industrial democracy: involvement, commitment, action: some observations during field research. London: Tavistock Document T 886. Thorsrud, E. (1968). Socio-technical approach to job design and organizational development. Management International Review,8 (4/5), 120-136. Thorsrud, E. (1970). A strategy for research and social change in industry: a report on the industrial democracy project in Norway. Social Science Information,9 (5), 65-90. Thorsrud, E. (1972a). Democratization of work organizations: some concrete ways of restructuring the work place (at Nobe-Hommelvik). Oslo: Work Research Institute working paper. Thorsrud, E. (1972b). Policy making as a learning process. In: A.B. Cherns, R Sinclair, & W.1. Jenkins (Eds.), Social science and government: policies and problems. London: Tavistock. Thorsrud, E. (1977). Democracy at work: Norwegian experiences with non bureaucratic forms of organization. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 13 (3),410-421. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 181 Tolman, E.C., & Brunswick, E. (1935). The organism and the causal texture of the environment. Psychological Review, 42,43-77. Tomkins, 5.5. (1953). Affect, imagery and consciousness, Vol. 1. Springer. Trist, E.L. (1953). Some observations of the machine face as a socio-technical system. A report to the area general manager, No. I Area, East Midlands Division. London: Tavistock Document 341 (restricted). Trist, E.L. (1956). Comparative study of some aspects of mining systems in a Northern coal field, progress report. London: Tavistock Document 434. Trist, E.L. (1957). Composite cutting longwalls I: their emergence and general characteristics. London: Tavistock Document 462. Trist, E.L. (1975). Planning the first steps towards quality of working life in a developing country. In: L.E. Davis, & A.B. Cherns (Eds.), Quality of working life: problems, prospects and the state of the art, Vol I (pp. 78-85). New York: Free Press. Trist, E.L. (1976). A concept of organizational ecology. Bulletin of the National Labour Institute, 12, 483-496. Trist, E.L. (1977). Private communication to Fred Emery. In: F.E. Emery (Ed.) (1978), The emergence of a new paradigm of work (pp. 5-10). Canberra: Australian National University, Centre for Continuing Education. Trist, E.L. (1981). The evolution of socio-technical systems. A conceptual framework and an action research program. Toronto, Ontario: Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre, occasional paper. Trist, E.L. (1983). Referent organizations and the development of inter organizational domains. Human Relations, 36 (3),269-284. Trist, E.L., & Bamforth, KW. (1951). Some social and psychological consequences of the long wall method of coal-getting. Human Relations, 4 (1),3-38. Trist, E.L., & Murray, H. (1958). Work organization at the coal face: a comparative study of mining systems. London: Tavistock Document 506. Trist, E.L., Higgin, G.W., Murray, H., & Pollock, A.B. (1963). Organizational choice: capabilities of groups at the coal face under changing technologies; the loss, re-discovery and transformation of a work tradition. London: Tavistock Publications, reissued 1987. New York: Garland. Trist, E.L., Susman, G.!', & Brown, G.W. (1977). An experiment in autonomous groups working in an American underground coal mine. Human Relations,30 (3), 201-236. Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten .. References .. Draft .. August 1992 182 Trist, E.L., Eldred, J., & Keidel, RW. (1978). A new approach to economic development. Human Futures,1 (1), 1-12. Trist, E.L., & Bradshaw, P. (1981). Feasibility of QWL. Projects in the Sudbury region. Toronto, Ontario: QWL Centre, occasional paper. Trist, E.L., & Clarke, L. (1981). Sudbury 2001: an evolutionary analysis. Toronto, Ontario: QWL Centre, occasional paper. Veld, J. in 't (1978). Analyse van organisatieproblemen: een toepassing van denken in systemen en processen (Analysis of organizational problems: an application of thinking in systems and processes). Amsterdam: Elsevier (Dutch language). Veld, J. in 't (1984). Organisatie en arbeidsplaats (Organization and work place). Amsterdam: Elsevier (Dutch language). Verschuur, F.O. (1985). Groepentechnologie bij IHC-Smit (Group technology at IHC-Smit). Kinderdijk: IHC-Smit, intern rapport (Dutch language). Verschuur, F.O., Groen, K., & Broek, J. van den (1989). Een toepassingsgerichte ontwerpstudie voor de vorming van hele taakgroepen bij DAF in Westerloo, Belgie (An applied design study to create whole task groups at DAF in Westerloo, Belgium). Doelmatige Bedrijfsvoering, 11, 24-30 (Dutch language). Vossen, H.P., & Zelst, J.B. van (1982). Kwaliteit van het werk in de horizon tale TL groepen: sociotechnische taakanalyse van het werk van de bedieningsvakman en de BM-onderhoudsmedewerker (Quality of work in horizontal TL production: sociotechnical task analysis of the jobs of machine tending specialists and BM maintenance operators). Eindhoven: Philips' Gloeilampenfabrieken, Centrale Groep Organisatie-Vernieuwing (Dutch language). Walfish, B. (1977). QWL project at GM plant cited as key to labor-management accord. World of Work Report, 2 (12). Wall, T.D., Kemp, N.J., Jackson, P.R, & Clegg, C.W. (1986). Outcomes of autonomous workgroups: a long-term field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 29 (2),280-304. Walton, RE. (1972). How to counter alienation in the plant? Harvard Business Review, 50 (6), 70-81. Walton, RE. (1977). Work innovations at Topeka: after six years. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 13 (3),422-434. Walton, RE. (1979). Work innovations in the United States. Harvard Business Review, 57 (4), 88-98. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 183 Warnecke, H.J.E., & Lederer, K.G. (1979). Neue Arbeitsformen in der Production (New forms of work organization in production). Dusseldorf: VDI-Verlag T52 (German language). Warner, R. (1988). Rhythm in social interaction. In: J. McGrath (Ed.), The social psychology of time. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications. Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization. New York: Oxford University Press. Weiner, N. (1950). The human use of human beings. New York: Houghton Mifflin. Weir, M. (1979). Participation in organization redesign: a five-company Scottish workshop and later review meeting. In: A. Alioth, J. Blake, M. Butteriss, M. Elden,O. Ortsman, & R. van der Vlist (Eds.), Working on the quality of working life: developments in Europe (pp. 339-353). Boston: Nijhoff. Weir, M. (1980). The analysis of changes in work organization, United Kingdom. In: The analysis of changes in work organization. Dublin: Loughlinstown House, Shankill. Weisbord, M.R. (1987). Productive workplaces: organizing and managing for dignity, meaning and community. Ardmore, Pennsylvania: Block-Petrella-Weisbord, unpublished manuscript. Weisbord, M.R. et al. (1990). McNeil Consumer Fort Washington Manufactuing: work redesign case study, January 1988 - June 1990. Ardmore, Pennsylvania: Block-Petrella-Weisbord. Westelaken, J.J.M. van de (1983). Ontwikkeling en evaluatie van de A WWB: een SITA-variant voor de proces-industrie (Development and evaluation of the A WWB: a SITA variant to be used in the processing industry). Nijmegen/Geleen: Katholieke Universiteit/DSM Limburg b.v. (Dutch language). Westerlund, G. (1952). Group leadership. A field experiment. Stockholm: Nordisk Rotogravyre. Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 50, 187. Williams, T.A. (1979). The search conference in active adaptive planning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 15 (4), 470-483. Williams, T.A. (1982). Learning to manage our futures. The participative design of societies in turbulent transition. New York: Wiley. Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 184 Wilson, A.T.M., & Trist, E.L. (1951). The Bolsover system of continuous mining, a report to the chairman, East Midlands Division, National Coal Board. London: Tavistock Document 290 (restricted). Wilson, A.T.M., Trist, E.L., & Curle, A. (1952). Transitional communities and social reconnection. In: G.E. Swanson, T.M. Newcomb, & E.L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 561-579). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Wisman, P.J.G. (1992). Beter voldoen aan flexibiliteit, beheersbaarheid en kwaliteit van de arbeid: een analyse van functie-eisen bij een metaalverwerkend bedrijf (Better satisfying flexibility, controllability and quality of work: an analysis of functional requirements in a metal-working enterprise. Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit, Faculteit Technische Bedrijfskunde, vakgroep Technologie en Arbeid (Dutch language). Witte, J. de (1980). The use of similarity coefficients in production flow analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 18 (4),503-514. Wobbe, W. (1991). Anthropocentric production system. A strategic issue for Europe. CECjFASTjAPS Research Series, 1. Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., & Roos, D. (1990). The machine that changed the world. New York: Rawson Associates. Wright, S., & Morley, D. (Eds.) (1989), Learning works: searching for organizational futures. A tribute to Eric Trist. Toronto, Ontario: York University, Faculty of Environmental Studies, ABL Group. Zwaan, A.H. van der (1970). Sociotechnisch systeemonderzoek (Sociotechnical systems research). Sociologische Gids, 17, 41-47 (Dutch language). Zwaan, A.H. van der (1971). Het axioma-stelsel in een sociotechnisch systeemonderzoek (The axiom system in sociotechnical systems research). Sociologische Gids, 18, 381-390 (Dutch language). Zwaan, A.H. van der (1973a). Leveren en laten leveren: een sociotechnische systeem analyse in de productiebesturing (To supply and let supply: a sociotechnical systems analysis in production control). Rotterdam: Universitaire Pers, proefschrift (Dutch language). Zwaan, A.H. van der (1973b). Een kritische evaluatie van het sociotechnisch systeemonderzoek (A critical evaluation of sociotechnical systems research). In: P.J.D. Drenth, P.J. Willems, & Ch.J. de Wolff (Eds.), Arbeids- en Organisatiepsychologie. Deventer: Kluwer (Dutch language). Zwaan, A.H. van der (1975). The socio-technical systems approach: a critical evaluation. International Journal of Production Research, 13, 149-163. Annals of STSD - FM. van Eijnatten - References - Draft - August 1992 185 Zwaan, A.H. van der, & Vermeulen, A.A.M. (1974). Sodotechniek 3: een sodotechnische systeembeschrijving van de produktiebeheersing op afdelingsnivo (Sodotechnique 3: a sodotechnical systems description of the production control function at departmental level). Mens & Onderneming, 28 (5),261-285 (Dutch language). Zwaan, A.H. van der, Vermeulen, A.A.M., Smets, P., & Elzinga, E. (1974). Sodotechniek 4: onderzoeksmethoden inzake de produktiebesturing (Sodotechnique 4: research methods for production control). Mens & Onderneming,28 (6),342-369 (Dutch language), Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 186 Subject Index Abduction, 74 technical, 88, 93 Absenteeism, 50, 82, 129 technical system, 32, 86 Action, TIED, 93 directed, 32, 34 variance, 14,86, 103, 104 Action, Analytical model A, group, 128 6 step method, 85 learning, 134 9 step method, 85 learning process, 64 Analytical model B, Action research, 8, 9, II, 19,84, 115 7 step method, 85 participatory, 63 Analytical thinking, 11 Tavistock's variant of, 20 Anthropocentric Production System Action research, 8, 9, 11, 19, 84, 115 (APS), context, 108 comparison with Nordic STSD, field experiment, 20 136 movement, 20 Finnish variant, 135 programmes in British army, 20 Approach, rules of thumb, 103 best-match, 125 studies with children, 20 contextualist, 122 studies with housewifes, 20 do-it-yourself, 39 Activity-Based Costing (ABC), 134 educational, 43 Adaptation, 11,22 empty cartridge, 114 active 26, 77 engineering, 50, 51 concept of, 78 holistic,2 Adaptive behaviour, 76 machine, 11 Adaptive purposeful system, 72 Macro (societal) systems, 67 Adaptive whole, 8 multi-level, 14, 93 Admirable Crichton principle, 35 Organizing for Learning, 79 Agenda theme, 134 partial, 7 Agricultural renewal program, 40 personnel, 50, 51 Aggregation,11 piece-meal, 7 Alienation, 6, 7, 50, 80 Sociotask, 85 All-in method, 18 systems, 11 Analysis, union-management, 50, 51 dynamic,75 vertical slice, 39 meta, 130-132 Approach, Pareto, 93 to Flexible Productive Systems static,75 (AFPS), 93, 94 Stream, 92 Ashby's law, 53 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 187 Aspects interconnections, 96 Causal texture, 32 Aspect-system, 55, 81, 118, 119, 126 Center-out model of change, 67 social,125 Change, technical, 125 degrees of freedom, 96 Asymmetrical dependence, 24 model,86 Attitudes, 129 method,85 Authority,35 process model, 96 Autocracy, 3, 6, 7, 12 recipies, 115 Autonomy, 50 skills, 115 responsible, 24, 126 9 step method, 85 Balance model, 51, 52, 53, 79, 81 Charter, 88 graphical representation, 53, 54 Classes of functional systems, 72, 73 Beauty,108 Classical STSD, 17, 26-37, 86, 96 Behaviour, basic concepts, 31-36 goal-directed,22 characteristics, 110 goal-seeking, 22 concept development, 23-26 escape, 131 design concepts, 83 Best match approach, 25 field experiments, 26-28 Blue-collar, 131 'handbook for the sixties', 23 Bolsover experiment, 76 Industrial Democracy Program, Bottle-neck, 26-28 identification of, 91, 92 Joint Committee, Norway, 27-30 Boundary, 24 methodological objections, 116, demarcation of, 91, 92 117 Boundary, 24 'New Factories' project, 29, 50 condition, 122, 123 new process model for, 81 control, 50 new theoretical foundation, 79 location, 35 objections concerning content, specification, 88 116,117 Brainstorming, 93 projects, 36-37 Branch projects, 65 Purfleet Power Station project, Broad front approach, 44 26 Bureaucracy,5,6, 12, 17,44, 1l1, 113 re-interpretation of analysis of Business, unit, 126 Shell Philosophy program, 29 Capacity for joy, 40 SSM-inspired analysis, 103, 104 Career, Swedish '500 firms' project, 28 development, 134 tentative classification, 112, 113 development system, 134 test of design principles, 32, 33 training III-C, 107 URAF programme, 28 Causality, Classical STSD method, 87 positivistic principle of, 72 master procedure, 87 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 188 schematic representation, 87 empty cartridge, 81 Class inclusion, 73 open-systems, 25, 72 Class membership, 73 socio-technical, 101 Closed system, 22 systems, 9 concept, 72 technology, 121 model, 120 twin, 119 Cluster, 110 Conceptual ambiguity, 123 of organizations, 66 Concreteness, Coalition, misplaced,101 discretionary, 126 Congruence, Coalition formation, 96 support, 35 Co-Determination Act, Sweden, 61 Conference, Coenetic variable, 22 company-wide, 64 Collective representation, 50 demonstration, 65 Combination, 74 network development, 66 Commitment, 6, 7, 109 planning, 60, 65 Communication, project development, 60, 63, 64, concept of, 107 65 conditions for, 63 recruit,68 Community development project, 70 regional promotion, 66 Company Development agreement, whole-company, 66 Sweden, 61 Conflict regulation, 50 Company Development (CD) contract, Constraints, 88 Norway, 59 Content of inquiry, 10, 102, 108 Company-wide Contextualism, 71, 78 conference, 64 framework, 26 learning process, 68 root metaphor of 76 Compatiblity, 34, 35, 125 Contextualist approach, 122 Competitive type III environment, 41 Contingency, Complexity, hypothesis, 130 reduction of, 126 thinking, 63 Composite work group, 17,24, 103 Control, Computer-controlled machines, 29 adaptive, 125 Concentration, demands for, 106 functional, 55 environmental demands for, 53 Concept, innovative, 125 basic,126 operational,53 communication, 107 organizational viabilities for, 53 Democratic Dialogue, 61 pollution, 127 directive correlation,22, 34, 72, variance, 14, 30,32,35,84, 126 76, 104 Control, Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 189 differentiation, 55 Cross-cultural differences, 1312 separation, 55 Cycle, specialization, 55 empirical model, 11 Control capacity, 51, 106, 126 interaction, 53 definition, 82 predictive model, 11 instruments for, 82 regulatory model, 11,20,84,93, Control functions, 115,126 division of, 55 Deconcentration, Control group, 130, functional, 55 unmatched, 130 Deduction, 11, 74 non-equivalent, 130 causal, 129 Controllability, 50, 51, 52, 53, 92, 106, 126 Deep slice, 44 balance, 106 Deliberation analysis, 67 Controllable organization, 93 5 step method, 85 Controlling variances, 67, 83 Delivery time, 127 Con trol need, 82 Demands for control, 106 definition, 82 Democracy, 3, 6, 7,12, 21,44,47 Control possibilities, 82 discourse aspect, 61 Control structure (C), 50, 55, 56, 93, 106, parochial, 3, Ill, 113 110, 125, 126 participative variant, 3 macro design, 91, 92 representative form, 3 meso design, 91, 92 Democratic Dialogue, 12, 13, 14, 59-66, micro design, 91, 92 107 practical model, 93 characteristics, 110 concept, 61 Cooperation, 50 method, 85 -local management-labour, 68 methodology, 61 Coordination, network strategy, 61 balanced, 125 process, 64 Co-producer, 22 SSM-inspired analysis, 107 Co-production, 134 tentative classification, 112 Costs, 129 trajectory, 63 Critical, 13 commandments, 62 mass, 40 Democratic system of value, 39 theory, 107 Democratic theory, 60 Criticism, Democratic work structure, 93 directive correlation, 117 Democratization of work, 8, 109 of initial conceptualizations, 121 Demonstration conference, 65 methodological, 129, 130 Demos project, 47 semi-autonomous work group, Dependence, 128, 129 symmetrical, 24, 108 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 190 Design, Design-orien ted research, integral, 51, 52, 106, 133 basic methodological scheme, partial, 125 115,116 machine, 129 Desirable future, 105 modular product, 29 scenarios, 41, 44, 104 provisional, 88 active and adaptive develop quasi-experimental, 130 ment of, 41, 104 research, 129 Development cycle, 64, 107 socio-ecological, 133 phases in, 64, 107 Design, Development of Human Resources application order, 121 (DHR) workshop, 44, 105 claims, 89 Development Organization (DO) content versus process, 96, 97 approach, 64, 107 criteria, 128 Dialogue, 62 cycle, 11 process, 63 ends, 87 Dialogue Conference (DC) method, 65, environmental entry, 87 107 interface, 87 Dichotomy, 71 intervention, 87 Differentiation, knowledgal entry, 87 performance, 55 means, 87 Diffusion, 30, 40, 47, 96 methodological entry, 87 Australian solution, 39, 49 model cycle, 11 model, 40, 47 objective, 91,92, 126 open-systems model, 42, 11 0 of information systems, 86 process, 40, 41, 42 principles, 126 Scandinavian solution, 59 principles lOR, 56 schedules, 28 principles Classical STSD, 88 study, 40 principles for knowledge work, theory, 27, 40 67 Direct participation, 7 procedures, 89 Directed action, 32, 34 process, 87 motivation theory of, 32, 34 rules, 89, 106 Directive correlation, 22, 34, 72, 76, 104 scope, 126 concept, 78 sequence rules, 56 criticism, 117 strategy, 89, 106, 126 extended social field, 41 Design of, long-term, 41 control structure, 92 methodology, 26, 31, 76, 77, 78, product, 91, 92 103 production structure, 92 system-theoretical alternative, 81 information structure, 92 Disaggregation, 11 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 191 Discretion, 50 placid, randomized variant, 32 Discretionary coalitions, 126 turbulent field variant, 32, 41 Dispersiveness, 76 vortical variant, 32 Dissatisfaction, 82 scheme, 32 Dissipative structure, 24 Environmental uncertainty, 32 Distribution of rewards, 50 Equifinality,22, 25, 34, 114, 121 Disturbance, Escape behaviour, 131 control, 24, 30, 35 ETHICS method, 86 sensitivity, 82 7 step method, 85 Division of labour, 6, 8,23,52, 109 Everyday rationalization, 97 Documents availability, 123 Experimental, Dogmatism, 134 control,74 Dominant world view, 9, 102 garden, 28 Do-it-yourself, group, 130 approach, 39 Evaluation study, 128-132 method,133 Everyday language, 61, 107 Double loop learning, 35, 41 Expert, Dynamic synchronization, 67, 83 analysis and design methodol definition, 83 ogy II, 104 Ecological process, 63 approach, 29, 39,96 Educational approach, 43 strategy, 97 Effectiveness, 50, 51 Explanatory diagram, 71, 72 Efficiency, 50 schematic representation, 75 Empirical model cycle, 11 Extended groups, 27 Employee turnover, 50, 129 Facilitator, 44 Empty cartridge, Feedback, 75, 88, 120, approach, 81 loop, 55, 81 concept, 81 performance, 128 Encapsulation, 97 Field experiment, 20, 130 Engineering approach, 50, 51 Ahmedabad, 19, 21 Entrepreneurial work teams, 70 natural occurring, 19,21, 121 Entropy, 22 semi-autonomous work group, Environmen t, 18,19 joint, 22, 31 Field theory, 21 Environment, Figure- ground reversal, 43 complexity, 41 Financial remuneration, 129 demands, 88, 92 Flexibility, 50, 55, 92, 106, 126, 127 functions (L22), 42 Fliessgleichgewicht,22 Environment typology, 26, 31, 103, 104 Flocking, 41 disturbed-reactive variant, 32, 41 Flocking session, 41 placid, clustered variant, 32 Flow group, 29 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 192 Flow-oriented production concept, 50 110 Formism, 71, 76 conceptual clarity, 121 Forth Bridge principle, 35 conceptual coherence, 121 Fourth-milestone, conceptual diversity, 3 classification, 12 constructive criticism, 99-102 contest, 134 content aspects, 5, 8 Function, contrasts, 109, 110 corporative, 134 democratic values, 2 design, 52 development, 5, 13 explanatory, 52 development trajectories, 11 feedback, 97 differences in terms of content, input, 97 126 input-output, 119 dual design orientation, 2 operational, 134 explanatory diagram, 71, 72 output, 97 goals, 5, 8, 111 managerial, 134 guiding philosophy, 8 pragmatic,l19 holistic approach, 2 regulative, 51 images, 11 semantic, 119 initial statements, 2, 3 social, 119 joint optimization, 6, 7, 24, 25, syntactical, 119 26,67, 104, 129 technical, 119 knowledge gaps, 99, 100 Function, longitudonal study, 129 demand,133 metaphor, 5,8 Functional, method,85 claim, 87, 89 methodological considerations, equivalent, 22, 110 9-11 production concept, 50 methodological diversity, 3 requirement, 118, 127 methodological renewal, 114-116 Functionally equivalent, 118 methodology, 5, 75 Generalization, method overview, 85 limited, 115 milestones, II, 12 General psychological requirements, minimum critical specification, 39,44,48,80,104,105 6, 7, 35, 126, 128 General STSD, 2-3 mission, 5, 8 aim, 6, 8 multiple broad skills, 6 bibliometric analysis, 12 normal research period, 127 central points of confusion, 101 normative world view, 9, 10 characterization, 6 open-systems model, 9 characteristics of content, 5-8 optimum task grouping, 6 compilation of characteristics, organization metaphor, 8 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 193 General STSD1 2-31 Group decision-making, 21 paradigm-based comparison, 6-8 Group dynamics, 21 paradigm shift, 2, 3, 5, 88 methodology, 20 personal paradigm change, 6-8 Group, personal reconstruction, 1-2 leaderless, 21 phases, 12-14 multi-disciplinary, 57, 83 pre-judgements, 99 multi-phased, 14 purposeful conceptual holon, 9, network, 41 10,102 operational, 106, 126, 134 purposeful human activity selection of peers, 128 holon,9, 10, 102 self-managing design, 39, 44 redundancy of functions, 6 self-managing production, 93 reference, 122 self-managing staff, 93 rough comparison, 108, 109, 110 self-managing work, 14, 17, 105 scientific-philosophical founda small military formations, 23 tion, 71 Technology, 93 self-managing social system, 6 vertical project, 39 self-regulation, 7, 8 whole task, 106, 126 'siamees twins' characteristic, 3 Group, socio-technical system, 8, 9 theory, 21 socio-technical systems design, 5 Gruppenfabrikation,23 SSM-inspired framework, 10, 13 Guide, tentative classification of for linear work, 67 approaches, 112-114 for non-linear work, 67 theoretical commodity, 8 Habermas-Luhmann debate, 52, 79 twofold holonic approach, 9 HABUT programme, Norway, 60, 61 typification, 5-7 Health risk, 82 unit of analysis, 122 Holistic system, 21, 22 variants Modern STSD, 13, 14 Holon, 9, 102, 108 General Systems Theory (GST), 120, 122 Holistic thinking, 57 Formist version of, 121, 122 Holonic participative redesign, 89, 90 Mechanistic version, 121 Holonic, Mechanist version of, 122 production system, 135 Gestalt, 21, 22 thinking, 9 Glacier project, 20 Homeostasis, 22 Goal-directed behaviour, 22 Homonomy, 108 Goal-seeking behaviour, 22 Human Integrated Manufacturing Greenfield, (HIM), 135 projects, 67 Humanity, 108 sites, 36 Human needs, 52 situation, 129 Human Relations school, 5, 71 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 194 Human Resource Mobilization, 110 transaction, 125 Human values, 35, 126 transformation, 125 Hyper-turbulence, 15, 134 Information, Hyper-turbulent vortex variant, 32 flow, 35 Ideal,108 sharing, 128 rejection of, 109 Information structure (C), STSD,113 design, 91, 92 Idealism, 71 Instrumentation, Implementation, 88, 91, 92 technical, 79, 80 strategy for, 85 Integral, Improvemen t, approach, 118 definition, 49 design, 51, 52, 106, 133 Incompletion, 35, 126 Integral Organizational Renewal, 12, Indian textile studies, 14 13, 14,49-58,87, 134 Induction, 11, 74 analytical model, 89 Industrial Democracy, 26, 39, 48,50, 118 candidate for fourth-milestone Act, Sweden, 47 contest, 134 project, 12,84 characteristics, 110 programme, Norway, 26-28, 29, definition, 79 32,33 design principles, 56 methodological approach, 29-31 design sequence rules, 56 Industrial relations, 127 graphic representation, 80 Inferential process, method, 87,89 deductive, 74 multi-level model, 87 inductive, 74 review studies, 57 Influence, 51 SSM-inspired analysis, 106 Informal European network group, 44 system-theoretical aspects, 114 Information, tentative classification, 112 aspect, 133 visibility in literature, 114 structure (1),55, 106, 126 17 step method, 85, 90, 91, 92 Inhibition, Integratedness, 76 paradoxical, 28 Integration, 50 Innovation, 93 thinking, 133 process, 134 Interactionalism,76 product, 134 In teraction, Innovative capacity, 127 conditions, 81 Input, strategy, 81 central,53 Interaction cycle, 53 function (LI2), 41, 42 network of, 53 Input function (LI2), 41, 42 Interdependence, 79, 101 Input-output, mutual, 118, 123 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 195 symmetrical, 51 Key variance, 31 Interest group, control table, 31 inside, 110 Knowledge, outside, 110 tacit, 63 Interface, Knowledge, customers, 128 cyc1e,116 Interference, 51, 81, 106, 126 faults, 115 definition, 81 work, 83 phenomenon, 81 Labour, probabilities, 52, 53 division of, 6, 8, 23, 52, 109 reduction of, 53, 82 Labour, Interlocking task, 33 conflicts, 17, 50 Internal environment, 25 relations, 134 Inter-organizational network, 14 Labour, Involvement, 6, 7, 62, 80 intensified,129 Ishikawa's fishbone, 93 Labour-management committee Jamestown community development (LMC),70 project, 68 Laissez-faire type of organization, 12 Job Characteristics Model (JCM), 34 Language, Job control, 82 everyday, 61, 107 Job fragmentation, 7, 20 ordinary, 107 Job optimization, 83 restructuring of, 61, 107 Job redesign principles, 32, 33 LatitUde, 82 Job rotation, 33 instruments for, 82 Job Satisfaction Research Program, UK, Law, 48 of Requisite Variety, 81, 121 Joint environment, 22, 31 rate-dependent, 120 Joint optimization, 6, 7, 24, 25, 26, 67, Second of thermodynamics, 122 104,129 time-dependent, 120 approach,104 Layout, 29 best-fit, 123 E-shaped, 29 best-match, 123, 126 J-shaped,29 design, 88 U-shaped,29 Dutch criticism, 118, 120, 125 Z-shaped, 29 goodness of fit, 124 Leaderless group, 21 graphical representation, 124 Leadership, ideal of, 126 facilitative, 128 optimal alignment, 123 Leading part, 41 structural propositions, 34 Lean Production (LP), 135 variety of definitions, 123 basic characteristics, 135 JOY project, Finland, 66 comparison with lOR, 137 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 196 comparison with Nordic STSD, Machine approach, 11 136 Macro (societal) systems approach, 67 Learning, 22,30,41,43, 101 Management By Objectives (MBO), 134 continuous process, 41 Market claims, 87, 89 double loop, 35, 41 Materialism, 71 experiential, 57 Maximum task breakdown, 6, 7 inter-organizational, 59, 60 Meaning, 80 intra-organizational, 59, 60 Meta-analysis, 130-132 iterative, 110 Metaphor, 108 removing barriers for, 67,83,84 organism, 108 organizational, 116 Meter, 73 self-generative, 42, 110 Method, Learning, analysis, 126, 127 evolutionary process, 44 Classical STSD, 87 function, 41 Democratic Dialogue, 85 in random networks, 121 general STSD, 85 to learn, 42 Integral Organizational strategy, 97 Renewal, 87, 89 Linear work, nine step, 86,90, 103, 104, 114, 126 guide for, 67 Participative Design, 85 'Little golden book', 40, 44 Participative redesign and Living Conditions Survey, 82 search, 86 Local management-labour cooperation, PD workshop, 85 68 search conference, 85 Local process, 63 technical variance analysis, 31 Local theory, 59, 60, 63, work, 24 of practice, lIS, 116 Methodological criticism, 129, 130 Logic, 74 Methodological orientation, grand, 74 dialogue oriented, 110 interactive, 110 diffusion oriented, 110 linear, 110 experimentally oriented, 110 local, 74 professionally oriented, 110 Logic of relations, 73 Middle-range theory, Logical test, 74 of practice, 116 L 11,42 Milestones STSD, 12, 13 L12,42 British mine studies, 12, 14 L21, 42 Democratic Dialoque, 12, 13,14 L22,42 Integral Organizational Renew LOM programme, Sweden, 60, 61, 66 al, 12, 13, 14 main features, 60 leadership experiments Lewin, Longwall-method, 17, 20 12 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 197 Norwegian Industrial Democ Narrow skills, 6, 7 racy project, 12, 14 Need, Participative Design methodol human, 52 ogy, 12 (Neo-)Kantianism, 71, 76 Minimum critical specification, 6, 7, 35, (Neo-)Positivism,71 126,128 Network, 110 Mixed content/ process model, 67, 96 branch-based, 61 graphic representation, 97 concept, 41 Model, development conference, 66 cybernetic, 120 group,41 integral metrical, 120 inter-organizational, 14, 59, 68, open-system, 41, 118 133 PCl, 106 local,61 Modern STSD, 38-69, 96 role, 88 Democratic Dialogue (DD), 59-66 'New factories' project, 29, 50 Evaluation studies, 132 Nine step method, 86, 90, 103, 104, 114, Integral Organizational Renewal 126 (lOR), 49-58 Nominalism, 71 North American Consultancy, Non-autonomous work group, 131 67-69 Non-linear process, 86 Participative Design (PD),39-48 Non-linear work, SSM-inspired analysis, 104-107 guide for, 67 tracks, 14, 125 Nordic sociotechnical model, 136 Modular product design, 29 Norm, Morphogenesis, 22 cognitive, 119 Motivation, pragmatic, 119 work, 50 semantic, 119 Motivation, technical, 119 theory of directed action, 32, 34 North American Consultancy, 13, 14, Multi-diSciplinary group, 57, 83 67-70 Multi-functional design principle, 34, projects, 69 35 SSM-inspired analysis, 104, 108 Multi-level approach, 14, 93 Nurturance, 108 Multi-level change strategy, 61 Object relations, 34 Multi-level strategy, 60,66 OD techniques, 93 Multi-phased group, 14 Off-site/ do-it-yourself workshop, 47 Multi-phasing, 83, 84 Ontology, 78 Multiple broad skills, 6, 7 Open-system, II, 22, 75, 76, 77, 125, 126, Multi-skilling, 30, 83, 84 133 table, 44, 45, 46, 48, lOS, 109 approach,74 Multi-stable system, 22 characteristic, 117 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 198 conception, 121 Paradigm, conceptual leap, 76 structural, 89 descriptive model I, 103 structural system, 90 descriptive model II, 104 participative process, 90 descriptive model III-A, 105 practical, 8 descriptive model III-B, 106 Paradigm, model, 41, 118 shift, 2, 3, 5, 88 pseudo-model of, 120 Paradoxical inhibition, 28 scan, 88 Parallelization, 93, 106, 126 Open-systems approach, 25 of order flows, 54, 55, 56 degree of elaboration, 116-120 technique for, 56 methodological foundation, 25 Pareto analysis, 93 Open-systems concept, 25, 72 Parochial democracy, 3, Ill, 113 Von Bertalanffy's, 26 Partial approach, 7 Open-systems model, Participant design, 34, 35, 126 descriptive variant, 103 deep slice method, 40 Open-systems thinking, 6, 8, 9, 21 Participation, 2, 26, 27, 50, 60, 62, 116 Operational group, 106, 126, 134 all-level, 62 Operators perform maintenance, 128 criteria for, 65, 107 Optimizing, 41 direct, 7 Optimum task grouping, 6 indicators Organicism, 76 operational definition, 51 Organization, user, 93 classification model, 111 Participation, 2, 26, 27, 50, 60, 62, 116 controllable, 93 in decision-making, 51 referent, 15 Participative, representative referent, 68 analysis and self-design method theory of, 110 ology III-A, 105 Organizational, approach, 96 change, 101 democracy, 8, 9, IS, 104-109, Ill, choice, 18, 24, 25, 128 113 effectiveness, 131 development methodology III-C, genotype, 44, 104,105 107 mapping technique, 63 integral organizational reno paradigm new, 111 vation methodology III-B, 106 paradigm old, 111 Participative Design (FD), 13, 14,39-49 performance, 50 Australian projects, 40, 48, 49 Review and Design (ORD) British projects, 48 framework, 67 Danish projects, 48 Organizing for Learning approach, 79 characteristics, 43, 110 Output function (L21), 41, 42 definition, 43 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 199 Participative Design(PD), 13, 14,39,49 approach, 50, 51 DHR workshop, 44, 45 management, 134 Indian projects, 48 policy, 134 'little golden book', 40, 44 Phases STSD, 13,14 method,85 Classical STSD, 13, 14 methodology, 12 Modern STSD, 13, 14 network of firms, 41 Pioneering Work, 12, 13, 14 Norwegian projects, 47 Physical proximity, 33 open-systems model, 42, 105 Piece-meal approach, 7 paradigm, 41 Pioneering work STSD, 16, 17-23, 121 process, 42 Ahmedabad field experiments, search conference, 12, 14,41,42, 19,21 43,44,86,93, lOS, 112, 126 Bolsover case, 19,20,76 SSM-inspired analysis, 104 criticism of initial conceptualiz Swedish projects, 47 ations, 121 tentative classification, 112 Elsecar case, 17-18,20 workshop, 12,14,41,43, 105,112 Haighmoor 'discovery', 17, 18,21 Participative Design workshop, 12, 14, SSM-inspired analysis, 102 41,43,86 Polarization, 134 definition, 43, 44 Pollution control, 127, 133 method,85 Planning, 41,47 variations, 68 active adaptive, 41, 104, lOS, 110 Participative process, 44 conference, 60, 65 paradigm, 90 democratic, 42 Participative redesign and search pro-active, 44 method,86 Platonism, 71 Participatory action research, 63 Political sub-system, 67 Participatory research, 67 Positivist principle of causality, 72 Pay, Postulate of Duality, 76 change in, 131 Postulate of Reciprocal Contexts, 76 for knowledge, 128 Power, 35 PCI-model, 106 Practical paradigm, 8 Peer review, 128 Predictive model cycle, 11 Performance, 129 Primary distinction, 71 differentiation, 55 Primary task, 24, 77 separation,55 Primary work system, 24 specialization, 55 Principle of minimal labour division, People, 73 81 Perceived problem situation, 102 Principles for task redesign, 39 Permutation, 74, 83 Pro-active search, 97 Personnel, Problem definition, 118 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 200 integral, 110, 118 Psychological requirements, 14 partial, 118 Purpose definition, 88 structured, 110 Purposeful, Problem solving, 41 conceptual holon, 9, 10, 102 Process, human activity holon, 9, 10, 102 ecological, 63 Purposefulness, 77 Process, Purposeful system, 34, 72, 73 consultancy, 115 Puzzling, 41 consultation, 93 Quality, 109, 129 of inquiry, 10, 102, 108 circle technique, 93 layout, 129 of Employment Survey, 82 theory of change, 79 of labour relations, 50, 51 Production flow, of organization, 50, 51 segmentation of, 93 of thinking life, 83, 84 Production Flow Analysis (PFA), 56,93 of work, 50, 51, 55, 82, 92, 103, Production structure (P), 50, 55, 56, 93, 104,106,117,118,126,127 106, 110, 125, 126 of working life, 50, 83, 84, 118, macro design, 91, 92 123 meso design, 91, 92 self-inspection, 128 micro design, 91, 92 Qualitative systems dynamics, 49 Productivity, 109, 129, 131 QWL, 118 Measurement and Enhancement criteria, 88 System (ProMES), 134 Rationalization of conflict, 42 Product, Reactive response, 97 quality, 127 Realism, 71 shop, 29 Recruit conference, 68 Program, Reductionism, 121 agricultural renewal, 40 Reductionist thinking, 6 Program automata, Redundancy, single, 73 of functions, 6, 35, 44, 83, 84, 101, multi, 73 lOS, 126 Project, of parts, 6,44 Demos, 47 of rhythms, 83, 84 development conference, 60, 63, of skills, lOS, 110 64,65 Referent organization, 15 management, 57 Regional promotion conference, 66 New factories', 29, 50 Regulation, 81 Sudbury, 70 definition, 81 Project, external, 51 phasing, 57 internal, 51 review, 128 levels, 51 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 201 Regulative functions, 51 change agent, 20 Regulatory model cycle, 11, 20, 84, 93, communicative, 110 115,126 consultant, 110 of diagnostic and consultative expert, 63 thinking, 116 process facilitator, 110 Relation, 74, 75 trainer, 110 cause-effect, 73 Resistance to change, 97 determined, 75 Resolution of conflict, 42 determining, 75 Responsible autonomy, 24, 126 deterministic, 72 Retroduction,74 dualistic,75 Rewarding system, 27, 28 familiarity, 73 Rewards, interactive, 127 distribution of, 50 invariant, 76 Robots, 29 nominal, 119 industrial, 73 object, 34 Result-responsible unit, 126 part-part within a whole, 73 Role, power, 108 work, 51 producer-product, 72, 73, 77 Role, proximity, 73 network, 88 siblings, 73 Safety, 129 social, 119 Satisfaction, symbiotic, 26 intrinsic, 129 tautological, 74 SBA programme, Norway, 61 technical, 119 Scholarship holder, 66 U-l, 73 Scientific Management, 5, 17,86 U-2,73 Scientific-philosophical foundation, 71 U-3,73 Search, U-4,73 future, 110 Removing barriers for learning, 67, 83, pro-active, 97 84 Search conference, 12, 14,41, 42, 43, 44, Renewal, 86,93,105,112,126 definition, 49 definition, 44 trajectory, 56 Gungahlin,45 Representation, 50 method,85 Representative referent organization, sort of, 68 68 Searching, Requisite variety, 22, 23, 126 ends instead of means, 42 cybernetic law, 25 Segmentation, 55, 56, 106, 126 Researcher's role, Selective labour process, 80 anti-expert, 47, 110 qualitative aspect, 80 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 202 quantitative aspect, 80 ecological approach, 66 Self-actualization, 40 engineering, 3, 101, 111, 113 Self-design, 134 Social interaction, 52, 109 educational programme, 57 system theoretical paradigm of, informal, 106, 126 49,114 Self-determination, 47 Social system, Self-expression, 40 grid, 88 Self-managing social system, 6 Social island conditions, 66 Self-managing design group, 39, 44 Social sub-system, 25, 104, 118, 125, 126, Self-managing production group, 93 129 Self-managing staff group, 93 Societal multi-level strategy method, Self-managing work group, 14, 17, 105 85 managing of, 133 Socia-ecological design, 133 Self-managing work place teams, 135 Socio-economic perspective, 50 Self-regulation, 7, 8, 22, 23, 126, 133, 134 Socia-psychological theory, 110 Self-supply, 128 Sociotask approach, Semi-autonomous work group, 12, 14, 17 propositions, 85 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 27, 39, 41, 45, 83, Socio-technical analysis, 30, 101 84,103,104,108,126,128,129 diversity of methods, 126, 127 criticism, 128, 129 Socio-technical concept, 101 field experiments, 18, 19, 121 as 'straw man', 101 natural occuring field experi Socio-technical criteria, 35 ments, 19,21 Socio-technical design principles, 32, 34 Semi-Parallel Streams (SPS) design Classical STSD, 35 technique, 93 Socio-technical interventions, 128-132, graphical representation, 94, 95 blue-collar, 131 Servo-controlled mechanism, 73, 80 duration of, 131 Shared vision, 97 evaluation study of, 130 Skill, meta-analysis, 130 analysis techniques, 46 white-collar, 131 faults, 115 Socio-Technical Process Analysis grouping, 46 (STPA),90 multiple broad, 6, 7 Socio-Technical Task Analysis (SITA), narrow, 6, 7 90 Skills and process training III-A, 105 Socio-technical system, 8,9,24,25,32 Skills training, Classical STSD definition, 34 programme, 105 tautology, 101 Small military group formations, 23 Socio-technical systems design (STSD), Social, 5,101 analysis, 88 diversity of methods, 126, 127 binding,50 goal, 111 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 203 meaning of 'misplaced concrete Strategy for industrial change, ness', 101 10 step method, 85 Socio-technical theory, 110 Strategy forum, 64, 65, 66 explanatory function, 52 definition, 65 design function, 52 Stream Analysis, 92 Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), 8,9, Stress, 50, 80 93 Structural conditions, 80 dominant world view, 9, 102 Structural parameters (lOR), perceived problem situation, 102 control differentiation, 55 purposeful conceptual holon, 9, control specialization, 55 102,108 division of control functions in purpuseful human activity feedback loop, 55 holon, 9, 102, 108 functional (de)concentration, 55 Specification, performance differentiation, 55 minimum critical, 6, 7 performance specialization, 55 total, 6, 7 separation of performance and SSM-inspired analysis, 102, 108 control functions, 55 of Classical STSD, 103,104 Structural paradigm, 89 of Democratic Dialogue, 107 Structural system paradigm, 90 of Integral Organizational Re Structure, newal, 106 architecture, 52, 127 of North American consultancy, definition, 49 104, 108 dissipative, 24 of Participative Design, 104, 105 external, 125 Specialization, implementation, 91, 92 performance, 55 renewed,127 SSM-inspired framework, 102 STSD practice, Stalemate, 134 critique, 127-132 Status equalization, 128 STSD projects, Steady state, 22,34, 114, 121, 123 in development countries, 70 Stepwise supervision, 7 Classical STSD, 37 Strategical analysis, 91, 92, 93 Meta-analysis of, 68 detailed, 91, 92 Modern STSD, 47, 48,49,58,69 global, 91, 92 Pioneering phase, 18, 19 Strategical exploration, 57 STSD theory formation, Strategic business unit, 92 further examination of, 120-127 Strategic correlative sub-system, 67 Subjective life space, 71 Strategy, Sub-optimization, 25 multi-level, 60, 66 Substitutability, 51 Strategy for implementation, Sub-system, 118 8 step method, 85 political, 67 Annals of STSD - EM. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 204 social, 25, 104, 118, 125, 126, 129 Ll1, 75,76, 77, 78 strategic correlative, 67 L12, 75, 76, 77, 78 technical,25, 104, 119, 125, 126, L21, 75, 76, 77, 78 127,129 L22,75,76, 77, 78 Sub-system, 118 output, 75 function, (Lll), 42 social dimension, 125 Sudbury project, 70 technical dimension, 125 Supervision, System structure, stepwise, 7 definition, 118 Support congruence, 35 System's analysis, Symbiotic relationship, 26 detailed, 91, 92 Symmetrical dependence, 24, 108 global, 91, 92 Symmetrical interdependence, 51 Systems, Symmetry, 76 Analysis (SA), 90, 92 Ll1sL22,76 approach,11 Synthetic thinking, 11 boundaries, 92 System, concept (technical term), 9 active functional, 73 non-routine, 83, 84 active multi-functional, 73 Systems concepts, active multi-functional and en definition of, 114 vironmentally independent, 73 development of, 78 career development, 134 redefined, 79 goal-seeking, 73 Systems thinking, 78 holistic, 21, 22 System values, 52 multi-goal-seeking,73 TacH knowledge, 63 multi-stable, 22 Table, passi ve functional, 73 multi-skilling, 44, 45, 46, 48, passive multi-functional, 73 lOS, 109 purposeful, 71, 72, 73 variance control, 88 reactive functional, 73 Task, reactive multi-functional, 73 interlocking, 33 reward,128 primary, 24, 77 rewarding, 27, 28 Task, reflex-bound, 123 analysis instrumentation, 92 System, complexity, 51 element, 118, 120 continuity,24 System function, redesign principles, 103, 104 input, 75 structure, 50 internal, 79,80, 125 Task and sentient system, 24 external, 79, 80, 118, 125 Tautology, 101 environment, 75 Tavistock splitting, 23, 100 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 205 Team, regulative, 81 non-rating, 128 socio-psychological, 110 self-managing, 134 value, 81 total design, 44 Theory, Technical analysis, 88, 93 of communication, 62 Technical instrumentation, 79, 80 of directed action, 34 defini tion, 79 of feedback mechanisms, 22 Technical skill development, 128 of organization, 110 Technical sub-system, 25, 104, 119, 125, of participative democracy, 110 126, 127, 129 of practice, 11, 103, 115,116 Technical system analysis, 32, 86 of qualitative system dynamics, methodology, 86 81 Technical system design principles, 35, Theory of concepts, 36 Classical STSD, 78 Technical variance analysis, 67 Pioneering Phase, 78 Technical variance analysis method, 31 Theory of science, Techniques, linguistic-pragmatic type, 61 OD,93 Technological imperative, 6 SPS, 93, 94, 95 Teleological thinking, 11 Technological, Thinking, change, 128 holistic, 57 determinism, 25 holonic,9 imperative, 6 open-systems, 6, 8, 9, 21 innovation, 129 reductionist, 6 Territory (boundary), 24 synthetic, 11 Theory, systems, 78 catastrophe, 83 teleological, 11 democratic, 60 Throughput time, 127 Field,21 TIED analysis, 93 Group, 21 Time span, 129, 134 industrial engineering systems, Time series data, 130 120 Total design team, 44 local, 74, 107 Total specification, 6, 7 middle range, 74 Total system intervention, 135 normative design I, 103 Tracks Babiiroglu, 13, IS, 109 normative design II, 104 Traditional STSD, 127 normative design III-A, 105 conceptual clarity, 121 normative design III-B, 106 conceptual coherence, 121 order through chaos, 83 scope, 121 partial, 118 technology concept, 121 power, 81 Traditional variance analysis, 67 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 206 technique, 30, 31, 84 key, 31 10 step method, 85, 86 Variance analysis, 14,86, 103, 104 Training, technical, 67 career III-C, 107 traditional, 67 cooperative skill, 70 Variance control, 14, 30, 32, 35, 84, 126, foremen, 30 127 on-the-job,57 matrix, 30, 127 T-group, 42 table, 88 Training, Variance matrix, 30, 31,88 courses III-B, 106 Variants Modern STSD, 13, 14 for self-design, 57, 90, 116 Democratic Dialogue, 13, 14 programme, 28, 108 Integral Organizational Renew Trans-actionalism, 76 al, 13, 14 Transitional organization, 35 North American consultancy, 13, Transport equations, 122 14 Trichotomy, 71 Participative Design, 13, 14 Turbulence, 15, 80, 81 Variety, Turbulent type IV environment, 41 requisite, 22, 23, 126 maladaptive response to, 134 Vertical project group, 39 Turnover, Vertical slice, 60, 64, 93, 110 employee, 50, 129 Vertical slice approach, 39 Uni-causal cause/effect relationships, Vertical slice group, 66 11 Vortical environment, 32, 134 Union-management approach, 50, 51 Waste emitter, 73 Unit operations, 31, 32 White-collar, 131 Unobtrusive measures, 130 Whole-company conference, 66 User participation, 93 Whole task, 7, 93 Validity, group, 106, 126 external, 129, 130 Willful bifurcation, 83 internal, 129, 130 Work, Value, democratization of, 8, 109 human, 35, 126 Work division, 79, 80 democratic system of, 39 definition, 79 rejection of, 109 Work group, system, 52 non-autonomous, 131 work, 105 semi-autonomous, 12, 14, 16, 17, Variable, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 27, 39, 41, 45, 83, dependent, 74, 82 84,103,104,108,126,128,129 independent, 74 Working conditions, 50 Variance, 74 Work method, 24 controlling, 67, 83 Work motivation, 50 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Subject Index - Draft - August 1992 207 intrinsic, 129 Work organization, form of, 126 Work pressure, 82 Work role, 51 Work shop, off-site I do-it-yourself, 47 Participative Design, 12, 14,41, 43,86 DHR, 44, 45 Work structure, democratic, 93 Work system, primary, 24 Work value, 105 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Company/Institute Index - Draft - August 1992 208 Company/Institute Index Ailsa Trucks Ltd., Scotland, United Kingdom, 48 Alcan Aluminium, Arvida, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 37 Alexander, Scott & Associates, USA, 68 American Productivity Center, USA, 68 Arco Chemicals, PO/TBA plant, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 58 Associated Biscuits, Bermondsey, United Kingdom, 48 AVEBE, farine production plant, Veendam, The Netherlands, 58 Avon Rubber, United Kingdom, 29 Bang & Olufsen, audio/video factory, Stuer, Denmark, 37 Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL), Tiruchirapalli, India, 48 Block-Petrella-Weisbord, Ardmore, Pennsylvania, USA, 68 Bolsover Colliery, North-West Durham, East Midlands, United Kingdom, 18, 19 British Oxygen, welding/heating factory, Bletchley, United Kingdom, 37 British Retail Trade, United Kingdom, 19 Calico weaving-mill, textile industry, Ahmedabad, India, 19 Centraal Beheer, insurance company, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands, 37 Christiania Spigerverk, wire draw plant, Oslo, Norway, 27 Clothing factory, Norway, 19 Coras Lompair Eireann, bus service, Dublin, Ireland, 37 Corning Glass Works, R&D department, Medfield, Massachusetts, USA, 37 Cotter & Associates, USA, 68 CSP Foods, edible oil production, Harrowby, Man., Canada, 69 Cummins Engines, Jamestown, USA, 68 DAF Trucks, truck cabines production, Westerloo, Belgium, 58 DAF Trucks, truck final assembly, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 58 DAF Trucks, truck shafts production, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 58 Danfoss, Denmark, 47 DEC/SME, USA, 68 DSM Chemicals, Sulfa/ZAV / ACN plants, Geleen, The Netherlands, 58 Dutch Government, Ministry of Internal Affairs, The Hague, The Netherlands, 58 Elsecar Colliery, Haighmoor seam, NE division, South Yorkshire, UK, 17, 18, 23 ESAB, welding equipment factory, Laxa, Sweden, 37 FHikt AB, ventilation equipment factory, Ljungarum, Sweden, 37 Fokker Aircraft, aircraft factory, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 37 Foundation for the Promotion of the Quality of Work and Organization (NKWO), Den Bosch, The Netherlands, 57 Frans Swarttouw, transhipment, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 58 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Company/Institute Index - Draft - August 1992 209 Gaines General Foods, pet food factory, Topeka, Kansas, USA, 37, 67 General Electric, aircraft engines, Bromont, Quebeck, Canada, 69 General Motors, assembly division, Tarrytown, New York, USA, 37 General Motors, automobile concern, Detroit, Michigan, USA, 37 GM-Fisher, automobile body plant, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, 37 Grasso Products, compressor production, Den Bosch, The Netherlands, 58 Harbour, London, United Kingdom, 19 Harwood, manufacturing company, 20 Haustrup, Denmark, 47 H0jbjerg, machine factory, Aarhus, Denmark, 47 Holec-HAT, parts manufacturing, Hengelo, The Netherlands, 58 Hunsfos, paper-mill, Vennesla, Kristiansand, Norway, 27, 3D, 31, 33, 37,39,84 IHC-Smith b.v., shipyard/parts manufacturer, Kinderdijk, The Netherlands, 58 Imperial Chemical Industries (lCD, Australia, 40 Institute for Industrial Social Research (IFIM), Trondheim, Norway, 26 International Revenue Service, USA, 68 Jamestown Area Labour-Management Committee, Jamestown, USA, 68 Jubilee weaving-mill, textile industry, Ahmedabad, India, 19 KNTU-Bamshoeve, spinning-mill, textile industry, Twente, The Netherlands, 37 Ladybird Ltd., Glascow, Scotland, UK, 48 Management & Behavioral Science Center (MBSC), Warton School, USA, 68 McCormack & Dodge, software house, Natick, Massachusetts, USA, 69 McNeil Consumer, consumer products, Fort Washington, Pennsylvania, USA, 69 MONA, desserts/sweets production, Zoetermeer, The Netherlands, 58 MS 'Balao', merchant ship/trading vessel, Norway, 47 National Bank, India, 48 National Capital Development Commission, Canberra, Australia, 45 National Center for Productivity and QWL, USA, 68 National Coal Board, UK, 18,21 National Labour Institute (NLI), New Delhi, India, 48 Van Nelle DE, tabacco factory, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 58 N. Foss' Electric, Hilleroed, Denmark, 47 NOB0, electrical panel heaters factory, Hommelvik, Trondheim, Norway, 27, 37 Non-Linear Systems Inc., California, USA, 19 Nordic Cable, Glostrup, Denmark, 48 Norsk Hydro, chemical industry, Heroya, Porsgrun, Norway, 28, 37 Northern Telecom, PBX assembly, Santa Clara, California, USA, 69 Norwegian Work Life Centre, Oslo, Norway, 61 Off-shore industry, Norway, 47 Olivetti, components factory, Ivrea, Italy, 37 Ontario Center for Working Life, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 68 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Company/Institute Index - Draft - August 1992 210 Organon International (AKZO), pharmaceutics production, Oss, The Netherlands, 58 Orrefos Glass Works, polishing department, Sweden, 37 Pasmore & Sherwood, USA, 68 PCGD, postal giro service, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands, 37 PCGD, postal giro service, The Hague, The Netherlands, 19,37 PCGD, postal giro service, Tilburg, The Netherlands, 37 PG+E, electrical power & utility, San Luis Obispo, California, USA, 69 Philips, audio/video factory, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 37 Philips Components, coal resistors factory, Roermond, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Components, cristals production, Doetinchem, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Components, C-SMD condensators production, Roermond, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Components, semi-conductors production, Stadskanaal, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Domestic Applications, shaver parts production, Drachten, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Domestic Applications, thermoplasts department, Drachten, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Lighting, armatures production, Winterswijk, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Lighting, half-fabricates production, Maarheeze, The Netherlands, 58 Phlips Lighting, TL tubes factory, Roosendaal, The Netherlands, 58 Philips Ltd., Hamilton, Scotland, UK, 48 Philips, machine factory, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 37 Philips Radio, Copenhagen, Denmark, 47 Philips, television factory, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 37 Postal services, India, 48 Pratt & Whitney, aircraft engines production, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 69 Purfleet Power station, Purfleet, United Kingdom, 26 Rolls Royce, engineering works, Derby, United Kingdom, 37 Royal Australian Airforce, Australia, 40 RTZ, United Kingdom, 29 Ruston, coal mine, Rushton, Pennsylvania, USA, 37 Saab-Scania, carrossery factory, Trollhattan, Sweden, 28, 37 Saab-Scania, gasoline-engine factory, Sodertalje, Sweden, 28, 37 Scandinavian Airlines System (SAS), Copenhagen, Denmark, 47 Scottish & New Castle Breweries, Ltd., Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 48 SEB-Pyrenees, computer department, Lourdes, France, 37 Secours lARD, insurance company, Paris, France, 37 SEMA, pension fund, Paris, France, 37 Shell, oil refinery, Stanlow, Cheshire, United Kingdom, 29, 31, 37, 84 Annals of STSD • F.M. van Eijnatten - Company/Institute Index· Draft· August 1992 211 Shell, oil refinery, Teesport, United Kingdom, 37 Shell, poly-propylene plant, Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, 37 Sherwin-Williams, paint factory, Richmont, Kentucky, USA, 37 Shipping industry, Norway, 27,47 Siemens, pneumatic control equipment factory, Karlsruhe, Germany, 37 Signetics, semi-conductor plant, Sunnyvale, California, USA, 69 Soabar (Avery Label), tag/label printing manufacturer, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 69 Sociotechnical Design Consultants, Inc., USA, 68 Sourth Australian Meat Corporation (SAMCOR), Yearling Hall, Australia, 40 Standard Motor Company, Coventry, United Kingdom, 19 Stork PMT, poultry processing systems, Boxmeer, The Netherlands, 58 STS Associates, USA, 68 STS International, USA, 68 Sulzer, turbine paddles factory, Winterthur, Switzerland, 37 Swedish Work Environment Fund, Stockholm, Sweden, 61 Tannoy, audio factory, accounting department, Coatbridge, Scotland, UK, 37 Tannoy Products, Ltd., Scotland, UK, 48 Tavistock Institute of Human Relations (TIHRt London, UK, 16, 19,21,26,31,33, 48,67,76,81,84, 100, 101, 103, 121, 129 Human Resources Centre (HRC group), 23, 33, 100 Centre for Applied Social Research (CASR group), 23, 100 Telephone exchange, Glascow, Scotland, UK, 19 Telephone switchboard, Stockholm, Sweden, 19 Thomas Drijver & Verblifa, colour jars production, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands,58 + Thomas Engineering b.v., car components production, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 58 Thread Manufacturers NKT, Glostrup, Denmark, 48 Trebor Sharps, loudspeaker factory, Woodford, United Kingdom, 37 UCLA Center for Quality of Working Life (CQWL), Los Angeles, California, USA, 68 Unichema International (Unilever), oleochemicals production, Gouda, The Netherlands, 58 United Hospital, Grand Forks, North Dakota, USA, 69 United States Army, USA, 68 University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California, USA, 31 US State Government, public sector center for data, Bismark, North Dakota, USA,69 US State QWL centers, USA, 68 Volvo, car assembly plant, Kalmar, Sweden, 28, 37 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Company/Institute Index - Draft - August 1992 212 Volvo, car assembly plant, Uddevalla, Sweden, 135 Westinghouse, electrc nic/ control devices production, Airdrie, Alberta, Canada, 69 Work in America Institute, USA, 68 Work Research Institute(s) (WRI), Oslo, Norway, 26, 47, 61 Work Research Unit (WRU), Ministry of Employment, London, UK, 48 X-TRBIE, software de\~elopment, San Luis Obispo, California, USA, 69 Zilog Inc. (Exxon), microprocessor chip plant, Nampa, Idaho, USA, 69 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Author Index - Draft - August 1992 213 Author's Index Abraham, R., 83 Bradshaw, P., 70 Ackoff, RL., 11, 72, 73, 114 Bregard, A., 27, 37 Agun?n, 5., 28, 29, 37, 93 Briggs, J., 83 Allegro, J.T., 37, 86 Brouwers, A.A.F., 57 Amelsvoort, P.J.L.M. van, 18, 56,58,93, Brown, D.R, 93 134, 135, 137 Brown, L., 128 Alink, J.B., 37 Brunswick, E., 31 Angyal, A., 21, 22, 41 Buchanan, D.A., 18 Archer, J., 37 Buitelaar, W.L., 58, 134 Argyris, C., 35, 41 Burbidge, J.L., 29, 37,56, 93 Arnopoulos, 5., 69 Burden, D.W.F., 7 Asadorian, RA., 67, 69, 86, 123, 124 Butera, F., 37 Ashby, W.R, 22, 23, 31,53,78,81, 121 Buyse, J.J., 58 Auer, P.,28 Campbell, D.T., 130 Babiiroglu, D.N., 13, 15,32, 109, 134 Canon, W.B., 22 Bamforth, K.W., 12, 17, 18, 20, 24 Canter, RR, 114 Barker, R, 20 Chadwick, M., 69 Barko, W., 86 Checkland, P.B., 8, 9, 93 Barten, A.W.H.M., 58 Chein, I, 32, 34 Bavelas, A., 20 Cherns, A.B., 32, 34, 35, 41, 121, 123 Beek, H.G. van 37 Chevalier, G.G., 37 Beekun, RA., 68, 130, 131, 132 Chisholm, RF., 20, 86, 124 Beer, M., 37 Clark, F., 69 Beinum, H.J.J. van, 3, 5, 6, 12, 13, 19,37, Clarke, L., 70 60, 61, 66, 78, 85, 86, 101, 102, 111, 130, Cobbenhagen, J.W.C.M., 58, 134, 133 Cook, T.D., 130 Bertalanffy, L. von, 22, 25, 26, 75, 76, 120, Crombie, A.D., 32, 43,44 122 Cummings, T.G., 18, 32, 34, 85, 86, 123, Betcherman, G., 69 129, 130 BeurIe, RL., 121 Cunningham, J.B., 68 Bion, W.R, 21, 24 Curle, A., 20 Birchall, D.W.,37 Dankbaar, B., 56, 57, 134 BIutot, E., 37 Davis, L.E., 25, 32, 33, 37, 41, 100, 114, Boekholdt, M.G., 86 123 Bolwijn, P.T.,55 De Greene, K.B., 67, 83 Boons, A.N.A.M., 58 Desmares, J.G.W., 58 Borrie, H.F., 58 Devany, RL., 83 Bostrom, RP., 86 Dewar, D.L., 93 Bostrup, L., 29 Dijck, J.J.J. van, 25, 121 Annals of STSD - P.M. van Eijnatten - Author Index - Draft - August 1992 214 Does de Willebois, J.L.J.M. van der, 37 Gunzburg, D., 47 Eberhardt, B.J., 69 Gustavsen, B., 12, 28, 59, 61, 62, 63, 64, Edgren, J., 28, 29, 37, 93 65, 85, 86, 110 Egmond, c., 82 Gustavson, P.W., 69 Eijnatten, F.M. van, 12, 55, 56, 58, 80, 82, Habermas, J., 52, 61, 79 85,87,89,90,91,92,99, 100, 113, 115, 116, Hackman, J.R, 11, 34, 121, 129 117,133 Haes, A.A. de, 58 Elden, J.M., 20, 27, 43, 47, 63, 67 Halpern, N., 37 Elias, N., 79 Hanssen-Bauer, J., 61 El Jack, A., 70 Hammarstn?Jm, N.K., 47 Elliott, 0., 67, 69, 123, 124 Harvey, D.F., 93 Emery, F.E. , 3, 12, 13, 18, 21, 23, 24, 25, Hedberg, B., 86 26,27, 28, 29,30, 31, 32, 33, 34,35,37, 39, Heij, P., 49 40,41,42,43,44,46,48, 71, 72, 73, 74, 76, Heinen, J.S., 86 77,78,80,84,85,86,90, 100, 108, 109, lID, Hellpach, W., 23 114,118,120,122,123,124,133,134 Hendriks, H.J., 58 Emery, M., 3, 12, 28, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, Henri, L., 69 46,48,49,85,86,93 Henshall, D., 37, 86 Engelstad, P.H., 27, 28, 3D, 31, 32, 35, 37, Herbst, P.G., 19, 23, 24, 3D, 32, 34, 35, 37, 47,59,60,61,64,65,66,85,127 40,41,43,47,63,71,72, 100, 121 Feibleman, J.K., 22, 24, 122 Hertog, J.F. den, 37, 56, 57, 116, 134 Felten, D.F., 67 Heuvel, RE.F. van den, 58 Finlay, M.L, 61 Higgin, G.W., 19 Fisher,78 Hill, A.V., 22 Flood, RL. 134 Hill, c.P., 18,30, 31, 32, 35, 37, 84, 85, 127 Foster, M., 20, 31, 84, 85, 90 Hoevenaars, A.M., 53, 54, 56, 58, 93, 94, Friedlander, F., 128 95,115 Friend, J.W., 22, 24 Hulten, W.J.M. van, 58 Fruytier, B.G.M., 57 Hunnius, G., 28, 63 Fry, D.E., 75 Huse, E.F., 37 Gabarro, J., 37 Ilk, 78 Gagnon, J.J., 37 Jackson, M.C., 134 Getz,L,47 Jaques, E., 20 Glas, G.A., 37 Jamestown Committee, 68 Glor, B., 86 Janse, F., 134 Golomb, N., 123 Jantsch, E., 83 Grebogi, c., 83 Jenkins, G.M., 28 Grenier, V., 37 Johansen, R, 47 Groder, M., 83 Jones, A., 86 Groot, A.D. de, 11 Joosse, D.J.B., 57, 82 Gulowsen, J., 28, 37 Jordan, N., 25 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Author Index - Draft - August 1992 215 Juran, J.M., 93 Laszlo, E., 82, 83 Jurkovich, R, 32 Lawler ill, E.E., 34 Kahn, RL., 18, 25, 100 Lederer, K.G., 37 Kalkman, W., 58 Lefebvre, c., 37 Kanawaty, G., 70 Legros, M" 37 Karasek, R, 82 Lehrer, F., 136 Karlsen, J.I., 109, 110 Lewin, K., 20, 21, 71 Karlsson, U., 88, 37 Lichtenberg, A., 58 Kasvio, A., 66 Lilienfeld, R, 121 Katz, D., 18,25, 100 Lindholm, R, 28, 29 Kauppinen, T., 66 Lippitt, R, 12, 20 Keidel, RW., 68, 70 Litterer, J.A., 121 Kelly, J.E., 100, 129 Little Inc., A.C., 32 Kerkhof, W.H.C., 37 Loeffen, J.M.J., 56, 58, 92, 133 Ketchum, L.D., 6, 37, 67, 70 Logue, G., 37 Kidwell, L 70 Lorenz, E.N., 83 Kiggundu, M.N., 70 Lorsch, J.W., 37 King, S.D.M., 19 Luhmann, N., 49, 52, 61, 79 Kirby, P., 69 Lytle, W.O., 67 Kiviniity, J., 136 Maassen, H., 58 Klein, L., 18 Macy, B.A., 86 Klein, M., 21, 34 Maier, N.RF., 20 Klisurich, D., 20 Marek, J., 26, 27, 28, 30, 32, 33,34,37 Koehler, W., 22 Markus, M.L., 37 Koen, M.M., 58 May,J.,83 Koestler, A., 9 May, RM., 83 Kohler, W., 21, 22 Mayo, E.,5 Kolodny, H.F., 67, 85, 86, 96, 97 McCann, J.E., 32, 134 Kommers, J.C.M.J., 57 McGill Association, 69 Kotler, P., 92 Melcher, A.J., 74, 75 Krishnan, R, 69 Melman, S., 19 Kuipers, H., 18, 121 Menzies, I.E.P., 23 Kumpe, T., 55 Merton,74 Kunst, P.E.J., 58, 134 Miller, E.C., 37 Kuriloff, A.H., 19 Miller, E.J., 19,23,24,82, 100 Kusterer, K.C., 63 Mills, T., 47 Landen, D.L., 37 Montuori, A., 84 Landre, C.J.W., 56, 58 Morgan, G., 108 Lang, R,23 Morley, D., 13, 134, 135 Lansbury, R, 66 Mumford, E., 37, 48, 85, 86 Larsen, H.H., 37 Murray, H., 19,24 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Author Index - Draft - August 1992 216 Nagel, E., 22 Rogne, K., 47 Naschold, F., 132 Rolloy, G., 37 NCDC,45 Roos, J.P., 42 Nicolis, G., 83 Roux, W., 22 Nieuwenhuizen, H.J., 58 Rundell, CR, 37 Nilakant, V., 40, 48 Rutte, C.G., 121 Nilsson, K., 58 Rysle,63 Nilsson, P., 58 Sandberg, A., 47 Norstedt, J.P., 28, 37 Scholes, J., 8, 9 0degaard, L.A., 47 Schon, D.A., 35, 41 Oldham, G.R, 34 Schlitzberger, H.H., 37 Otten, J.H.M., 58 Schrodinger, E., 22 Pasmore, W.A., 35, 36, 67, 79, 83, 84, 85, Schumacher, E.F., 29 86,123,127,128,129,130 Schumacher, P.C, 93 Pattee, 20 Schiitzenberger, M.P., 22 Pava, C, 67, 84, 85, 86, 114, 123, 125, 127, Selsky, W.J., 32, 134 128, 129 Sena, J.A., 69 Peat, F., 83 Shani, A.B., 67, 69, 123, 124 Peirce, CS., 73 Shaw, 76 Pepper, S.C., 76, 122 Shepherd, V.W., 18 Philips, G., 58 Sherwood, J.J., 123 Pionet, F., 37 Sievers, B., 49 Pleij, F.J., 58, 134 Simonse, L., 58 Pollock, A.B., 19 Singer Jr, E.A., 22 Porras, J.I., 92 Sin ten, L. van, 58 Pot, F.D.,82, 92 Sitter, L.U. de, 12, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, Poza, E.J., 37 56, 57, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 87, 92, 93, 110, Prigogine, I., 22, 78, 83 114,117,119,125,126,127,133 Pritchard, RD., 134 Sluijs, E. van, 134 Purser, RE., 67, 79,83,84 Smith, F., 19 Qvale, T.U., 40, 47, 61, 63 Smets, P., 49, 79 Radke, M., 20 Soderberg, G., 29 Rao, V.R, 40, 48 Sol, E.J., 135 Rapoport, RN., 20 Sommerhoff, G., 22, 23, 26, 31, 76, 78, Rashevsky, 120 120,121 Reeken,T. van, 134 Spencer-Brown, L., 71 Rice, A.K., 19,23,24,25,82, 100 Spiegelman,S., 22 Riegler, C, 28 Srivastva, 5., 18, 32, 34, 85, 86, 123, 128 Roberts, H.J.E., 58, 134 Stanley, J., 130 Robison, D., 37 Stengers, I., 83 Roggema, J., 27, 37, 47 Stjernberg, T., 67, 85, 86,96,97 Annals of STSD - F.M. van Eijnatten - Author Index - Draft - August 1992 217 Strien, P.J. van, 8, 11, 84, 90, 116 Wilson. A.T.M., 18, 20, 24 Sudbury 2001, 70 Wisman, P.J.G., 55 Sullivan, C.S., 37 Witte, J. de, 93 Susman, G.I., 2, 34, 35, 123 Wobbe, W., 136 Taylor, J.C., 25, 36, 67, 68, 69, 84, 86, 87, Womack, J.P., 135 88, 123, 124, 128 Wright,S., 13, 134, 135 Taylor, F.W., 5 Zelst, J.B. van, 58 Terra, N., 58 Ziegenfuss, J.T., 86 Terwisga, H.B. van, 134 Zwaan, A.H. van der, 49, 79, 117, 121, Thissen, P., 82 127 Thorsrud, E., 12, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37, 39,41,47,85,86, 100, 124 Tolman, E.C., 31 Tomkins, 5.5., 22 Trist, E.L., 5, 6, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 31, 32, 34, 35, 37, 39, 41, 67, 68, 70,85,86,90,117,121,123,134 Turvey, 76 Veld, J. in tt, 37,90, 114 Vermeulen, A.A.M., 49, 79 Verschuur, F., 58 Vogelzangs,58 Vossen, H.P, 58 Vries, E. de, 37, 86 Walfish, B., 37 Wall, T.D., 129 Walton, R.E., 37, 128 Warnecke, H.J.E., 37 Warner, R., 84 Weber, M., 5 Weiner, N., 22 Weir, M., 37, 48, 85, 86 Weisbord, M.R, 68, 69 Westelaken, J.J.M. van de, 58 Wester, Ph., 37 Westerlund, G., 19 White, RK., 12,20 White, T., 68 Wiener, N., 22 Williams, T.A., 43, 44 Wilpert, B., 23