The Relevance of Rigour for Design Practise

Design is an inverted discipline. The concept of rigour, as understood within the natural sciences, cannot be applied to Design Practice. Rigour for the natural sciences is a quality assurance mechanism ensuring that the knowledge bases of the disciplines are developed to an accepted set of standards. Design’s ontology is not like the natural sciences and as such an understanding of rigour for Design must proceed from an appropriate standpoint about the nature of Design Practice. This paper builds upon Harfield’s [1] ontological assessment of Design, Schön’s [2] [3] work on Reflective Practice and Spencer’s [4] investigation into the experience and practise of designing to develop a standpoint about Design Practice and make a proposition about the relevance of rigour for Design Practise. This paper considers how individual Reflective Practice practitioners, within the context of Design Practice, manage and ensure quality control through the application of care and thoroughness. This paper argues that rigour for Design Practise is the personal and phenomenological quality control of a design inquiry: a process of managing expanding mental chaos and restricting order

Ontological Representations of Software Patterns

This paper is based on and advocates the trend in software engineering of extending the use of software patterns as means of structuring solutions to software development problems (be they motivated by best practice or by company interests and policies). The paper argues that, on the one hand, this development requires tools for automatic organisation, retrieval and explanation of software patterns. On the other hand, that the existence of such tools itself will facilitate the further development and employment of patterns in the software development process. The paper analyses existing pattern representations and concludes that they are inadequate for the kind of automation intended here. Adopting a standpoint similar to that taken in the semantic web, the paper proposes that feasible solutions can be built on the basis of ontological representations.Comment: 7 page

Language, logic and ontology: uncovering the structure of commonsense knowledge

The purpose of this paper is twofold: (i) we argue that the structure of commonsense knowledge must be discovered, rather than invented; and (ii) we argue that natural language, which is the best known theory of our (shared) commonsense knowledge, should itself be used as a guide to discovering the structure of commonsense knowledge. In addition to suggesting a systematic method to the discovery of the structure of commonsense knowledge, the method we propose seems to also provide an explanation for a number of phenomena in natural language, such as metaphor, intensionality, and the semantics of nominal compounds. Admittedly, our ultimate goal is quite ambitious, and it is no less than the systematic ‘discovery’ of a well-typed ontology of commonsense knowledge, and the subsequent formulation of the longawaited goal of a meaning algebra

Combining Luhmann and Actor-Network Theory to see Farm Enterprises as Self-organizing Systems

From a rural, sociological point of view no social theories have so far been able to grasp the ontological complexity and special character of a farm enterprise as an entity in a really satisfying way. The contention of this paper is that a combination of Luhmann’s theory of social systems and actor-network theory (ANT) of Latour, Callon, and Law offers a new and radical framework for understanding a farm as a self-organizing, heterogeneous system. Luhmann’s theory offers an approach to understand a farm as a self-organizing system (operating in meaning) that must produce and reproduce itself through demarcation from the surrounding world by selection of meaning. The meaning of the system is expressed through the goals, values, and the logic of the farming processes. His theory, however, is less useful when studying the heterogeneous character of a farm as a mixture of biology, sociology, technology, and economy. ANT offers an approach to focus on the heterogeneous network of interactions of human and non-human actors such as knowledge, technology, money, farmland, animals, plants, etc., and as to how these interactions depend on both the quality of the actors and the network context of interaction, but the theory is weak when it comes to explaining the self-organizing character of a farm enterprise

Combining Luhmann and Actor-Network Theory to see Farm Enterprises as Self-organizing Systems

From a rural, sociological point of view no social theories have so far been able to grasp the ontological complexity and special character of a farm enterprise as an entity in a really satisfying way. The contention of this paper is that a combination of Luhmann’s theory of social systems and the actor-network theory (ANT) of Latour, Callon, and Law offers a new and radical framework for understanding a farm as a self-organizing, heterogeneous system. Luhmann’s theory offers an approach to understand a farm as a self-organizing system (operating in meaning) that must produce and reproduce itself through demarcation from the surrounding world by selection of meaning. The meaning of the system is expressed through the goals, values, and logic of the farming processes. This theory is, however, less useful when studying the heterogeneous character of a farm as a mixture of biology, sociology, technology, and economy. ANT offers an approach to focus on the heterogeneous network of interactions of human and non-human actors, such as knowledge, technology, money, farmland, animals, plants, etc., and how these interactions depend on both the quality of the actors and the network context of interaction. But the theory is weak when it comes to explaining the self-organizing character of a farm enterprise. Using Peirce’s general semiotics as a platform, the two theories in combination open a new and radical framework for multidisciplinary studies of farm enterprises that may serve as a platform for communication between the different disciplines and approaches

Where constructionism and critical realism converge: interrogating the domain of epistemological relativism

The paper interrogates the status, nature and significance of epistemological relativism as a key element of constructionism and critical realism. It finds that epistemological relativism is espoused by authorities in critical realism and marginalized or displaced in the field of management and organization studies, resulting in forms of analysis that are empirically, but not fully critically, realist. This evaluation prompts reflection on the question of whether, how and with what implications epistemological relativism might be recast at the heart of critical realist studies of management and organization

Contextualizing phenomenology in event management research: Deciphering the meaning of event experiences

Purpose - Although the core phenomenon of events is the experiences and the meanings attached to them, there is limited management research on the experiential, existential and ontological dimensions of events. Phenomenology provides a sound philosophical framework for studying the multifaceted dimensions of experiences and associated meanings of events. However, quite surprisingly, phenomenology has not yet been systematically applied on the event management field. This conceptual paper aims to introduce phenomenology to the study of events, demonstrate its value for the field and encourage as well as guide its application on event management research. Design/methodology/approach - A review and synthesis of the main phenomenological streams of thought was undertaken in order to develop a research paradigm for the application of phenomenology on the event management field. Findings - The paper explains why phenomenology is needed in the study of events and their management, its conceptual underpinnings and streams of thought and finally suggests a research framework for conducting phenomenological studies in event management. Research limitations/implications - The consequences of the phenomenological perspective are delineated for explaining how the study of event meanings and experiences can be undertaken from this perspective. The limitations of phenomenology are noted such as the emphasis on ‘lifeworld’ subjectivity and subsequent difficulty to claim the generalizability of research findings. Practical implications - The suggested research framework can guide future event management research on how to apply phenomenology to the study of event experiences and meanings. On this basis, practitioners can get insight regarding how to develop and design events that optimize the perceived experiences of attendees. Originality/value - While the experiential paradigm and the phenomenological turn have been spread across many disciplines emphasizing the essence of lived experiences in a variety of human interactions and exchanges, the event management field lags behind. This is unfortunate and has to be addressed as the experiences and meanings shape the essence of events. Therefore, this conceptual paper hopes to inspire, encourage and guide event management researchers to embrace and apply the phenomenological perspective on their future research endeavors, which can profitably complement and expand the predominant research paradigms in the field

An Analysis of the Notion of Need for the Representation of Public Services

Many Public Administrations structure their services around the notion of users’ need. However, there is a gap between private, subjectively perceived needs (self-attributed) and needs that are attributed by PA to citizens (heteroattributed). Because of the gap, citizens’ needs are often only partially satisfied by PAs services. This gap is in part due to the fact that the meaning of the word “need” is ambiguous and full of antinomic nuances. The purpose of this paper is to formulate a definition of “need” suitable for citizens’ needs management with respect to PA’s services offering, and to provide an accurate ontological analysis of the notion of “need” and the network of concepts that relate to it

Critical thinking and systems thinking: towards a critical literacy for systems thinking in practice

About the book: In reflective problem solving and thoughtful decision making using critical thinking one considers evidence, the context of judgment, the relevant criteria for making the judgment well, the applicable methods or techniques for forming the judgment, and the applicable theoretical constructs for understanding the problem and the question at hand. In this book, the authors present topical research in the study of critical thinking. Topics discussed include developing critical thinking through probability models; the promotion of critical thinking skills through argument mapping; an instructional model for teacher training in critical thinking; advanced academic literacy and critical thinking and critical thinking and higher education