Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Boundary critique: an approach for framing meth...
View graph of relations

Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSNChapter

Published

Standard

Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design. / Reynolds, Martin; Wilding, Helen.
Applied systems thinking for health systems research: A methodological handbook. ed. / Don deSavigny; Blanchet Karl; Taghreed Adam. London, UK: McGraw-Hill / Open University Press, 2017. p. 38-56.

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSNChapter

Harvard

Reynolds, M & Wilding, H 2017, Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design. in D deSavigny, B Karl & T Adam (eds), Applied systems thinking for health systems research: A methodological handbook. McGraw-Hill / Open University Press, London, UK, pp. 38-56.

APA

Reynolds, M., & Wilding, H. (2017). Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design. In D. deSavigny, B. Karl, & T. Adam (Eds.), Applied systems thinking for health systems research: A methodological handbook (pp. 38-56). McGraw-Hill / Open University Press.

Vancouver

Reynolds M, Wilding H. Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design. In deSavigny D, Karl B, Adam T, editors, Applied systems thinking for health systems research: A methodological handbook. London, UK: McGraw-Hill / Open University Press. 2017. p. 38-56

Author

Reynolds, Martin ; Wilding, Helen. / Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design. Applied systems thinking for health systems research: A methodological handbook. editor / Don deSavigny ; Blanchet Karl ; Taghreed Adam. London, UK : McGraw-Hill / Open University Press, 2017. pp. 38-56

Bibtex

@inbook{a060e0482395491db80ba6f4c8047d43,
title = "Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design",
abstract = "The popularity of contemporary evidence-based practice (EBP) approaches in health care research have a long and well-documented history which tends to prioritise the factual world over the world of values. It comprises a conventional linear mechanistic understanding of {\textquoteleft}research{\textquoteright} informing {\textquoteleft}practice{\textquoteright}; an understanding described elsewhere in the arena of public administration as the Received View. In the arena of health care, the importance of values is paramount; particularly in setting priorities of health systems research in low-income countries. An alternative approach to the Received View is what we might call a praxis-oriented approach. Here, the continual integral dynamic between research and practice is acknowledged, recognising also that research is essentially value-driven. Praxis can be described as practice-informed-theory and/or theory-informed-practice; or alternatively, ideas-in-action or thinking-in-practice. In praxis, the activities of research and practice are not seen as an either/or dualism, but regarded rather as a continual both/and duality. One significant expression of a praxis-oriented approach in the systems thinking tradition is Werner Ulrich{\textquoteright}s notion of boundary critique; an {\textquoteleft}eternal triangle{\textquoteright} of interdependence between judgements of fact and value judgements, mediated through boundary judgements.In this chapter, Section 1 describes boundary critique and a particular manifestation of it - the systems thinking in practice (STiP) heuristic - developed amongst systems practitioners at the UK-based Open University. STiP provides a framework for using multiple methods or techniques – systems-based or otherwise – through a sequence of activities involving (i) understanding inter-relationships, (ii) engaging with multiple perspectives, and (iii) reflecting on boundary judgements. Two sets of systems tools have been found particularly helpful in these activities, as experienced by the authors – tools associated with soft systems methodology (SSM) and critical systems heuristics (CSH). These are briefly outlined. Section 2 describes an application of the STiP heuristic in developing systems for health partnerships. Whilst the case study is situated in a UK context – specifically Newcastle upon Tyne, in North East of England, the wider context of enabling partnerships through the application of boundary critique is one that has universal relevance.",
author = "Martin Reynolds and Helen Wilding",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
isbn = "9780335261321 ",
pages = "38--56",
editor = "Don deSavigny and Blanchet Karl and Taghreed Adam",
booktitle = "Applied systems thinking for health systems research",
publisher = "McGraw-Hill / Open University Press",

}

RIS

TY - CHAP

T1 - Boundary critique: an approach for framing methodological design

AU - Reynolds, Martin

AU - Wilding, Helen

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - The popularity of contemporary evidence-based practice (EBP) approaches in health care research have a long and well-documented history which tends to prioritise the factual world over the world of values. It comprises a conventional linear mechanistic understanding of ‘research’ informing ‘practice’; an understanding described elsewhere in the arena of public administration as the Received View. In the arena of health care, the importance of values is paramount; particularly in setting priorities of health systems research in low-income countries. An alternative approach to the Received View is what we might call a praxis-oriented approach. Here, the continual integral dynamic between research and practice is acknowledged, recognising also that research is essentially value-driven. Praxis can be described as practice-informed-theory and/or theory-informed-practice; or alternatively, ideas-in-action or thinking-in-practice. In praxis, the activities of research and practice are not seen as an either/or dualism, but regarded rather as a continual both/and duality. One significant expression of a praxis-oriented approach in the systems thinking tradition is Werner Ulrich’s notion of boundary critique; an ‘eternal triangle’ of interdependence between judgements of fact and value judgements, mediated through boundary judgements.In this chapter, Section 1 describes boundary critique and a particular manifestation of it - the systems thinking in practice (STiP) heuristic - developed amongst systems practitioners at the UK-based Open University. STiP provides a framework for using multiple methods or techniques – systems-based or otherwise – through a sequence of activities involving (i) understanding inter-relationships, (ii) engaging with multiple perspectives, and (iii) reflecting on boundary judgements. Two sets of systems tools have been found particularly helpful in these activities, as experienced by the authors – tools associated with soft systems methodology (SSM) and critical systems heuristics (CSH). These are briefly outlined. Section 2 describes an application of the STiP heuristic in developing systems for health partnerships. Whilst the case study is situated in a UK context – specifically Newcastle upon Tyne, in North East of England, the wider context of enabling partnerships through the application of boundary critique is one that has universal relevance.

AB - The popularity of contemporary evidence-based practice (EBP) approaches in health care research have a long and well-documented history which tends to prioritise the factual world over the world of values. It comprises a conventional linear mechanistic understanding of ‘research’ informing ‘practice’; an understanding described elsewhere in the arena of public administration as the Received View. In the arena of health care, the importance of values is paramount; particularly in setting priorities of health systems research in low-income countries. An alternative approach to the Received View is what we might call a praxis-oriented approach. Here, the continual integral dynamic between research and practice is acknowledged, recognising also that research is essentially value-driven. Praxis can be described as practice-informed-theory and/or theory-informed-practice; or alternatively, ideas-in-action or thinking-in-practice. In praxis, the activities of research and practice are not seen as an either/or dualism, but regarded rather as a continual both/and duality. One significant expression of a praxis-oriented approach in the systems thinking tradition is Werner Ulrich’s notion of boundary critique; an ‘eternal triangle’ of interdependence between judgements of fact and value judgements, mediated through boundary judgements.In this chapter, Section 1 describes boundary critique and a particular manifestation of it - the systems thinking in practice (STiP) heuristic - developed amongst systems practitioners at the UK-based Open University. STiP provides a framework for using multiple methods or techniques – systems-based or otherwise – through a sequence of activities involving (i) understanding inter-relationships, (ii) engaging with multiple perspectives, and (iii) reflecting on boundary judgements. Two sets of systems tools have been found particularly helpful in these activities, as experienced by the authors – tools associated with soft systems methodology (SSM) and critical systems heuristics (CSH). These are briefly outlined. Section 2 describes an application of the STiP heuristic in developing systems for health partnerships. Whilst the case study is situated in a UK context – specifically Newcastle upon Tyne, in North East of England, the wider context of enabling partnerships through the application of boundary critique is one that has universal relevance.

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9780335261321

SP - 38

EP - 56

BT - Applied systems thinking for health systems research

A2 - deSavigny, Don

A2 - Karl, Blanchet

A2 - Adam, Taghreed

PB - McGraw-Hill / Open University Press

CY - London, UK

ER -