| 1. |
- Bednar, Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Move along please - there is nothing new here!
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of ECRM 2009. The 8th European Conference on Research Methods in Business and Management. - 9781906638313 ; , s. 48-54
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper considers how researchers can best establish a forward trajectory in their work, individually and collectively. The suggestion is sometimes made in academic circles that it is inappropriate to present work that revisits an area previously discussed within the field. While we accept that any published paper should make an original contribution to what is collectively known about a particular area of inquiry, we nevertheless believe that it is both necessary and desirable to revisit and discuss again topics of significance. Only through reflection upon our own past work and that of others can we build productive learning spirals. Only in this way can we establish and extend a reflexive relationship to future practice. Whilst research needs to maintain an agenda of innovative inquiry, we should also remind ourselves of a need to ‘stand upon the shoulders of giants’ - good research should include reflection upon the accumulated wisdom of our predecessors. In pursuit of inquiry, we should also be open-minded and therefore prepared to revisit ideas and issues previously discarded or forgotten, in the light of fresh evidence or contexts. We believe, therefore, that research methodology should explicitly incorporate opportunities for such reflection. We draw upon examples from our own field of Information Systems research to illustrate these views.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bednar, Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Systemic combinatory use of Brainstorming, Mind-Maps and Rich Pictures for analysis of complex problem spaces
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of ECRM 2009. - 9781906638313 ; , s. 38-47
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- For years tools and techniques such as Brainstorming, Mind-Maps and Rich Pictures have been used in both academic and professional practices to assist people with making sense of complex problem spaces. These tools have their supporters and in many cases their uses can be argued to be interchangeable. Seldom however have they been systematically applied in combination in theory or practice. Even though that these techniques have different analytical focal points their combined usage has not been distinctively elaborated upon. They have different strengths and weaknesses which supports their users in meaning shaping and practical reflective thinking in contextual analysis. Not only do these tools draw upon different historical backgrounds but they are also usually employed in a basis of different philosophical groundings. In this paper we will show how a philosophically common grounding can be achieved to combine the strengths of these three techniques. The discussion will include the outline of the complementarities of the different focal points of the techniques in application and describe their individual unique strengths. We will outline how the inherent weaknesses of each of the techniques can be overcome with the support of the other two. We will also demonstrate, with practical examples, a particular systemic approach to transfer and develop further the analysis from one technique to another in a systematic fashion. The approach described in this paper allows the combined techniques to be used in an organised and structured way to expand the sense-making and reflective ability of the analyst when dealing with uncertain and complex problem spaces.
|
|
