OR and systems-some comments on Checkland's reply to Eden and Ackerman

Journal of the Operational Research Society

Volumn 59, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 139-142

  Ormerod, R J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 37149010553     PISSN: 01605682     EISSN: 14769360     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602483     Document Type: Note

References (11)

1. Checkland P (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Wiley: Chichester.
2. Checkland P (1983). OR and the systems movement: Mappings and conflicts. J Opl Res Soc 34: 661-676.
3. Checkland P (2006). Reply to Eden and Ackermann: Any future for problem structuring methods? J Opl Res Soc 57: 769-771.
4. Eden C and Ackermann F (2006). Where next for problem structuring methods. J Opl Res Soc 57: 766-768.
5. Eden C and Graham R (1983). Halfway to infinity: Systems theorizing for the practitioners? J Opl Res Soc 34: 723-728.
6. Keys P (1989). OR as technology: Some issues and implications. J Opl Res Soc 40: 753-759.
7. Ormerod RJ (1995).The role of methodologies in systems strategy development: Reflections on experience. In: Stowell FA (ed). Information Systems Provision: The Contribution of Soft System Methodology. McGraw-Hill: Maidenhead, pp 75-101.
8. Ormerod RJ (2006). The history and ideas of pragmatism. J Opl Res Soc 57: 892-909.
9. Probert SK (1998). A critical analysis of soft systems analysis and its (theoretical and practical) relationship with phenomenology. Systemist 20: 187-207.
10. Taket A and White L (1996). Pragmatic pluralism: An explication. Systemic Tract 9: 571-585.
11. Wallace RA and Wolf A (2006). Contemporary Sociological Theory, 6th edn. Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ.