Paradigmatic Metamorphosis and Organisational Development

Maurice Yolles, Kaijun Guo

Liverpool John Moores University
98 Mount Pleasant, Liverpool L3 5UZ
Email: m.yolles@livjm.ac.uk
Systems Research and Behavioural Science, 2003, Vol. 20, 177-199.

Abstract
Paradigms metamorphose when they develop a new frame of reference. Two examples of paradigmatic
metamorphosis are examined that together can be argued to formulate an evolutionary approach to
managerial cybernetics. Organisation Development (OD) is a well-established soft methodology used
extensively to engineer cultural change in organisations. OD can be set within Viable Systems Theory
(VST), itself a conceptual development of the managerial cybernetic theory that underlies the Viable
Systems Model (VSM). To illustrate this, a frame of reference is created that looks at systemic
transformational processes. VST can operate as a general framework for this within which OD, VSM,
and indeed the principles of Habermas’s theory of communicative action can be embedded. A result of
this exploration is to show how a managerial cybernetic form of OD can be developed to improve the
way organisations can be diagnosed in complex change situations that must be managed.

Key words: paradigmatic metamorphosis, evolving Organisational Development, managerial cybernetics

Paradigmatic Metamorphosis

It has only been within the last 30 years or so, largely since the work of Kuhn (1970), that we have
considered how paradigms change their form. Incremental change involves the development of concepts
and their structural relationships, creating new knowledge. Paradigms also change dramatically as new
fundamental concepts arise that alter their frames of reference, i.e., as new conceptual extensions enter
their frames of reference (Yolles, 1998). In so doing, paradigm holders expand their capacity to explain
and therefore diagnose the phenomena that they perceive. Such dramatic change has also been referred
to as paradigmatic revolutioni or metamorphosis. It occurs because of a perceived need by paradigm
holders to respond to inherent inadequacies, anomalies or paradoxes (e.g., Zeno’s paradoxii). Such
metamorphosis can be part of an evolutionary process within which a new species of paradigm arises
that has its basis in an existing paradigmiii. Metamorphosis is not spontaneous, and paradigms first pass
though a “virtual” stage (Yolles, 1996; Midgley, 2000). Viable Systems Theory (VST) is an example of
this; its original development occurring because of a perceived need to respond to the problem of
paradigm incommensurability (Burrell and Morgan, 1979; Yolles, 1996), and at that time other
approaches seemed unable to adequately respond to itiv. VST can be historically related to both
Organisational Development (OD) and managerial cybernetics as encapsulated by the Viable Systems
Model (VSM) (Beer, 1979) .

In socially complex situations it is useful to have a theory of the organisation that can help structure
problems and manage change. Positivist perspectives have been found to be inadequate in dealing with
this complexity, and alternative perspectives like critical theory and constructivism have developed
(Guba and Lincoln, 1994). Effectively, the distinction between the two perspectives centres on a
dichotomy between objective and subjective epistemology that arose at the turn of the 19th Century,
engaged because of a perceived inadequacy of classical physics to explain the phenomena it saw. It did
not start to take hold in the management sciences until the mid 20th Century. In the area of management
systems, Lewin (1947) proposed his more constructivist approach, and others like Churchman (1970)
and Checkland (19811) embraced related perspectives. Lewin’s constructions became manifested into
the Organisational Development (OD) methodology (Yolles, 1999). It operates through an open system
model, where inputs occur from its environment, and are then transformed as outputs to that
environment. Requirements for change in the open system results in candidate interventions. However,
there are three traditional barriers to systemic change: (a) resistance to change by members of the
organisation, (b) control for change, and (c) power.

1
The managerial cybernetics paradigm that underpins VSM can be argued to be a metamorphosis of that
underpinning OD. It maintained the OD paradigmatic extensions of the open system, but then included
the concept of a metasystem. Decisions that arose in the metasystem were transformed in some way to
become manifested in the system. VST makes explicit this implicit transformation, and indeed
introduced its own metamorphosis by identifying it as a domain in its own right. Linking and developing
VST with the ideas of Habermas (1987) and Schwarz (1997) has enhanced its paradigm significantly,
and provided a broad potential for inquiry into complex situations. Unlike OD and VSM, VST does not
attempt to offer a particular intervention, but rather provides a conceptual framework of analysis, for
considering appropriate existing models, and for creating new ones. Hence, both OD and VSM can sit
comfortably within VST. One problem is that OD is not part of the managerial cybernetic paradigm, and
so to better relate it to VST it requires a linguistic shift. This can occur without altering its underlying
paradigm, and can result in an enhanced and more effective way of dealing with complex change
situations. How this can occur will be illustrated in this paper.

Organisational Development

OD developed from the work of Lewin (1947), and integrates Nadler’s idea that an open system is a
transformer of inputs to outputs. Such systems need to have “favourable transactions of input and output
with the environment in order to survive over time” (Nadler, 1996, p86). OD offers an approach to
organisational inquiry that seeks to find a balance of forces with its environment (Pugh, 1993) by
instituting appropriate change in an organisation’s system. It was originally conceived as a strategy for
large-scale cultural and/or systemic change that depends on many people accepting the need for change,
and until recently was based on diagnosing gaps between what is and what ought to be (Weisbord and
Janoff, 1996).

OD maintains a paradigm that is consultant orientated and people-centred. It is a soft system methodology
(Yolles, 1999), engaging elementary systems concepts, and developed prior to the work of Checkland
(1981). It is concerned with intervention into problem situations to achieve change management through
individuals and their relationships. OD’s intended use was “to articulate a mode of organisational
consultancy that paralleled the client-centred approach in counselling and contrasted with consultancy
models that were centred on expertise” (Coghlan, 1993, p117). However, at its broadest, OD is concerned
with “boundaries and relationships at a number of different levels between enterprises, their stakeholders
and society, and the way in which these relationships could change over time” (Pritchard, 1993, p132).

Harrison explains that consultants who use traditional OD tend to assume that organisations are most
effective when they “reduce power differences, foster open communication, encourage cooperation and
solidarity, and adopt policies that enhance the potential of employees” (Harrison, 1994, p8). To help assist
organisational forms and cultures towards this ideal, consultants use small group training, feedback on
interpersonal processes, participative decision-making, and build strong cohesive organisational cultures.

Traditional OD has been described as being based on a narrow view of organisational effectiveness. It
“does not seem to work well in organisations that emphasise status and authority differences or in nations
that do not share the values underlying development. Even where they are appropriate, traditional
organisational development interventions usually yield minor, incremental improvements in organisational
functioning, as opposed to the radical transformations needed for recovery from crises and decline”
(Harrison, 1994, p8-9). The needs of fast change in complex situations should be added in here.

To make OD more flexible and broaden its ability to deal with complex organisational situations, it must be
able to deal with changes in organisational form, strategy, and culture, power alignments, political
bargaining, cultural diversity (at different levels of the organisation), stability and instability. Harrison
therefore proposed some changes to diagnosis in OD. However, it still has a limited capacity to guide
inquiry through a variety of political and cybernetic attributes of organisations that are pertinent to change.
It would be ideal if a map could be found that enhances the propositional capacity of OD to do this. To

2
satisfy this, more theory needs to be embedded into the propositional base of OD. In due course we will
show that this theory can be derived from VST.

The Organisation as a Transforming System

Nadler’s model that underpins OD is referred to as the Congruence Model of Organisational Behaviour
(Nadler and Tushman, 1977; 1979) because it supports the notion that organisations need to have
congruency between four subsystems: tasks, individuals, formal organisation and informal organisation.
Thus, for instance, there needs to be congruency between tasks and individuals, or between the formal
organisation, its control structures and processes, and the informal power structures and processes that
exist within the organisation. The basic hypothesis of the model is that an organisation will be most
effective when all the four components of the system are congruent with each another. Nadler’s four
subsystems have been subsumed into a system definition, part of the Systems as a Transformer, in table
1, which also incorporates Harrison’s (1994) explanations of organisational focus.

System Focus Inputs System as a Transformer Outputs

Organisational Resources facilitate the
establishment and
maintenance of structures,
and activities of the
organisation.
Strategy: a set of key
decisions about the match of
the organisation’s resources
to environmental imperative.
Group Resources facilitate the
maintenance of structures
and activities of the group.
Individual Human resources
Table 1: A focussed view of the organisation through Organisational Development
System Focus Environment
Goals, culture, Provides constraints, Products and services.
technology, process, demands and Performance indicates
behaviour, formal and opportunities for the the ability of the
informal organisation. organisation. organisation to achieve
History provides a its desires.
background that validates
the organisation, its
structures, and activities.
Group composition, Organisation provides Products, services.
structure, technology; task definition and Performance indicates
group behaviour process, redefinition, control of the ability of the group
culture. Effectiveness in a change, resistance to to satisfy its intended
group’s performance is change, power to function.
determined by strategic shape organisational
goals. dynamics
Individual jobs/tasks; Group/organisation Products, services,
individual behaviour, provides quality of ideas. Performance
attitudes, orientations. work life, well-being. indicates the ability of
individuals to operate.

Generic Problems, Needs and Actions for Organisational Change

In the underlying theory of OD coherent organisations have political systems composed of individuals,
groups, and coalitions, all of which may be competing for power (Tushman, 1977). New ideologies can
also influence power positions. Balances of power exist within organisations, and changes can upset
these, generating new political activity that forges stable power relationships. In order to facilitate
change, it is necessary to shape the political dynamics of an organisation, enabling change to be accepted
rather than rejected.

Nadler argues that change situations have three generic problems. Change might upset existing power
relationships, and a political dynamic for change is needed. Change may also make people feel that their
existing power positions are threatened. Nadler has also identified resistance to change as a generic
problem. This may occur when individuals are faced with change situations that they feel may affect
their security or stability (Watson, 1969; Zaltman and Duncan, 1977). Not only can it generate anxiety
and affect an existing sense of autonomy, but it can also make individuals alter the patterns of behaviour
that have enabled them to cope with the management structures and processes. Finally, Nadler identifies
control as a factor necessary to manage change processes. Table 2 is indicative of Nadler’s view that
each of these three factors are generic problems that have associated with them organisational needs, and
prescribed actions for intervention that can be used to improve problem situations.

3
We have said that it will be of use to take OD through a linguistic shift, thereby explaining Nadler’s
generic problems in terms of VST for use later. Resistance to change is expressed in terms of four
actions that are intended to motivate the organisation to adopt a re-orientation that can deal with the
change. Thus, actions (1) and (2) develop the fundamental support that is able to motivate a new
orientation for the organisation, and in (3) the use of social symbols can be used to share meanings
through which explicit and implicit patterns of behaviour are acquired and transmitted. In (4) the
creation of stability can concretise the orientation that has been created. Hence, Nadler’s idea of the
problem of resistance to change can also be expressed in terms of providing a re-orientation in the
change for the organisation as a whole. The idea of an organisational re-orientation will subsume within
it the need to reduce resistance to change.

Generic Problem Need Action

Nadler Yolles Nadler Yolles
Support the change 1. Assure support of key power groups
2. Use leader behaviour to generate
Resistance Changing Motivate change energy in support of change
orientation Underpin the change 3. Use symbols and language
4. Build in stability
Manifest perturbing unrest 5. Surface dissatisfaction with present
state
Manifesting Manage the Manifest support and 6. Participation in change
Control possibilities transition variety generation 7. Rewards for behaviour in support of
change
Introduce new variety 8. Time and opportunity to disengage
dynamically from the present state
Cybernetics 9. Develop and communicate a clear
image of the future
Energising Shape political 10. Build in feedback mechanisms
Power kinematic dynamics Polity 11. Develop organisational arrangements
processes for the transition
Semantic communication 12. Facilitate support

Table 2: Actions Relating to Problems and Needs for Change

Control is normally cybernetic, but this is not consistent with the notion of managing the transition.
Rather managing the transition might be better expressed in terms of the actions that relate to an
organisation’s possibilities of development. The action (5) of surfacing dissatisfaction is a pre-requisite
that will in part involve seeking the views of the membership of the organisation, thereby identifying the
unrest that perturbs the organisation and enables the possibility of creating variety. Action (6) is directed
at the manifestation of variety, as is action (7). Action (8) provides for the possibilities thrown up with
the variety generation to be selected and instituted, and is therefore part of the dynamics of the change
process.

In Nadler’s problem area designated by power, actions (9) and (12) are cybernetic processes that may be
considered to be independent of power. Further, (11) relates to an organising process rather than to
power, and thus is a function of polity that enables the creation of order. All three points therefore are an
energising process as opposed to an empowering one, and can perhaps be better described as kinematic -
an energetic movement that can be considered abstractly without reference to the source of that motion.
Action (10) identifies leverage points to pressure the change. While leverage is consistent with the
creation of force and the use of power, other approaches are possible.

While these proposed modifications may seem trivial, they will in due course assist in facilitating entry
into the VST frame of reference.

The Viable System Model

4
Beer (1959), in his development of managerial cybernetics, explored the nature of viable systems when
he created his Viable Systems Model (VSM). Viable systems participate in the autonomous development
of their own futures. A viable organisation participates in automorphosisv, when it is responsible for and
participates in changing its own form, and thus enabling it to maintain appropriate operational behaviour
within a changing environment and survive. The form is determined by its structure (Yolles, 1999) that
both facilitates and constrains that behaviour. Its refinement over OD is that strategic decisions are not
simply seen as an input to the system. Rather, they derive from its metasystem (the metaphorical
“cognitive consciousness” of the system) that is responsible for manifesting and maintaining its
structure. While OD sees the system itself as the transformation, the management cybernetics that
underpins VSM invents a metasystem, and it implicitly supposes a transformation between the system
and the metasystem. Thus, for instance, in OD strategy decisions are seen as inputs to the system, while
in VSM they derive from the metasystem. In this way the metasystem formally becomes one aspect of a
structured inquiry.

When decision-making is part of a formalised determinable process in an organisation, so the

metasystem is also formalised, and decisions are made within it with respect to the perceived needs of
the organisation at the level of focus concerned. This does not mean, however, that there may not be
another informal metasystem from which informal decisions derive. The metasystem ultimately operates
through and is defined by the worldviews that determine the nature of the organisation. When a
worldview exists formally it may be called its paradigm (Yolles, 1996; Yolles, 1999), and when it is
information it may be called its weltanschauung.

VSM is a generic model of the organisation that promotes principles of communication and control that
help it to maintain its viability (see Schwaninger, 2001). It is axiomatic in VSM that any organisation
that can be modelled as a viable system can also be modelled as a set of 5 subsystems. They each
represent an interactive cybernetic function that act together as a filter between the environment and the
organisation's management hierarchy, and connect management processes and their communication
channels. The filter is sophisticated because it attenuates (reduces the importance of) some data while it
simultaneously amplifies other data. The filtered data is converted into information that is relevant to
different levels of management within the organisation. A final control element addressed in the model
offers auditing tools to make sure that the correct data is being collated. The audit channel mops up
variety by sporadic or periodic checks. However, making sure that the appropriate data is assembled is
only one of its functions.

The five subsystems of VSM are referred to as systems 1-5 referred to here as S1-S5, and the control
element that operates as an auditor is represented as S3*. These subsystem relationships are shown in
figure 1. Some of the subsystems are assigned to the metasystem (S3, S4, S5). The system of operations
with its immediate management is S1. However, S2 and S3* do not have assignment since they are not
part of the system as such, or the metasystem. Interestingly, the system of operations is defined more
usefully in an OD way, in terms of its technology, structures (including jobs/tasks), process,
activities/behaviour (including jobs and operational activities). Unlike VSM, OD also includes culture
and its associated belief system, and it makes conceptual and analytical sense to distinguish this from the
system.

The recursive nature of both the metasystem/system conceptualisation, and thus the VSM as well, can be
appreciated by realising that each of the S2-S5 can individually also be seen as systems with their own
operations and metasystems. Thus for instance, the operations of S5 are policy formation, and its
metasystem is responsible for the creation of decisions that form policy. This recursive feature is both
powerful and important for the development of analytic frameworks.

5
 link to operations only to
collect deficit of S2

integration/ operations
audit S3* control S3

management
System S1

future/
development
S4

policy coordination
S5 S2

M etasystem

Environment

Figure 1: Relationship diagram showing the outline concept of the Viable System Model. The subsystem
entities in S1 (management and operations) are implicitly interconnected

The Basis for Viable Systems Theory

Viable Systems Theory was stimulated through some of the managerial cybernetic theory that grounds
VSM. Like Soft Systems Methodology (Checkland, 1980) and Critical Systems Thinking (Midgley,
2000), it adopts a subjectivist epistemology (as embedded in critical theory). In VSM decisions that
derive from the metasystem are transformed such that they can become manifested in the system. This
has been expressed explicitly in figure 1 (based on Yolles, 1999) using a dotted line to define a new
version of the metasystem (S4 and S5), and leaving S2, S3 and S3* as part of the transforming domain
between the metasystem with the system (S1). This modification does not affect the working of the VSM
in any substantive way.

The relationship between the system and the metasystem couple has been developed into a relationship
between a phenomenal and cognitive domain couple, and this has been made explicit in figure 2
(deriving from Yolles, 1996). Though the space between the phenomenal and cognitive domains is one
of transformation, it is also susceptible to being defined as a domain in its own right, resulting in a three
domains model. This model has evolved into figure 3 through considering the VST in terms of the
phenomenal process of transformational change in China as it joins the World Trade Organisation and
simultaneously embraces Internet and related technologies (Yolles and Iles, 2003). Here, the phenomenal
domain embeds a plurality of conscious purposeful complex adaptive systems seen as actors with
behaviour driven by worldviews and patterns of knowledge that reside in the cognitive domain. Thus, the
phenomenal domain constitutes a local environment that may be conceptually constrained in its scope
and context by defining within it a suprasystem of interacting actors. The phenomenal domain represents
the manifest experienced phenomena of the perceiving actors. The virtual domain maintains a virtual
image from which polity (order) develops. The knowledge attributes represented in each domain are
explained, for instance, in Yolles (2000), Iles and Yolles (2002) and Iles et al (2002). They derive from
Marshall’s (1995) classification of three different forms of knowledge that replace the traditional idea of
procedural and declarative knowledge. The dotted lines that connect across the domains are indicators of
the ontological relationship between them, and we shall discuss this in a moment.

Figures 2 and 3 represent different attributes of the overall model. We should note that each domain has
its own meaningful boundaryvi that distinguishes possible validity claims about reality. Such validity
claims about reality should be explored, at least briefly, because they provide a coherent basis for further
examination about the three domains and their relationships. In doing this, we are led to parallel validity
claims about reality to that explored by Habermas (1987) for his three worlds model. These are
summarised in table 3, and compared to summaries of those of Habermas.

6
 Transformational, Organising
or Virtual domain
Phenomenal or Formal/informal
Behavioural domain representation group worldviews

Cognitive
organisation of development/ group learning/ domain
Structurally facilitated intervention personal consolidation/
and constrained learning explication (formal)
behavioural world interpretation
Informal
personal
reflection/creation worldviews

Figure 2: Relationship between the behavioural and cognitive domains in the three domains model

Phenomenal/
Behavioural domain Cognitive
Organising/virtual domain
Knowledge migrating/ domain
Other actors & social interacting Culture
their behaviours (values, attitudes, Knowledge
beliefs, language) coalescing
Actor Virtual
attenuating Structure/ images
infrastructure impacting
altering organising influencing Paradigm(s)/
Impact of worldviews(s)
phenomena disturbing decision
e.g., regulation, facilitating & forming
technology constraining Polity/order Identification
from decisions using knowledge for creating
elaboration contextual (thematic)
attritioning knowledge decision processes
attenuating Behaviour
using executor implementing
knowledge

Figure 3: Influence diagram exploring the relationship between the phenomenological, virtual and
cognitive domains

Three Worlds Three Domains

Type of World Nature of World Types of Domain Nature of Reality
The external natural Material objects have Phenomenal or Material objects or events in interaction, the
(object) relations between them and behavioural perception of which is conditioned by a cognitive
between individual actors knowledge-based frame of reference. It is cognitively
(and their strategies), in a demiurgic (meaning formative or creative),
cognitive knowledge-based deriving from the notion of one who fashions the
frame of reference. material world from chaos, and consistent with
Husserl (1950) and Frieden (1999, p.108).
The social Actions associated with Virtual or Symbolic or logical relational images that relate to
actors in a social group organising phenomenal reality and involve purposeful
derive from common values organising. It is local to the experiences of the
expressed as a set of norms. perceiver. Images of value and belief are maintained,
The norms take on special partly represented through ethics and ideology. The
status that includes moral domain is conditioned by a cognitive knowledge-
validity and facts. based frame of reference.
The internal The local sphere of internal Cognitive The local belief based creation of concepts and their
(subjective) personal experiences and patterns held in worldviews that establish a frame of
meanings associated with the reference, and determine what is known and their
individual worldviews. related meanings.
Table 3: Validity Claims about Reality in terms of Three Domains and Habermas’s Three Worlds

7
Habermas considered validity claims about reality in his “three worlds” model upon which sits his theory
of communicative action that refers to participants who pursue mutual understanding. Each world
(external, social and internal) is absolute and has a fixed boundary, and the validity claims operate
through basic functions of language. Language allows us to make truth claims (about the external world),
rightness claims (about our social world) and claims about subjective experiences and sincerity (internal
world). The theory of communicative action relates to information processes that enable problems to be
structured in an action situation within the horizon of a lifeworldvii. It involves a group of participants
who interpret an action situation and together arrive at some agreement about it. The participants pursue
their plans cooperatively on the basis of a shared definition of the situation within the framework of the
lifeworld.

Habermas’s theory provides an entry into the cybernetic world of autonomous behaviour, for which
communication and information processes are central. Cybernetic needs go beyond those of
communicative action, however, and so our three domains model would be expected to have different
validity claims about reality than the three worlds.

To explore this further, we note that validity claims about reality are ontological expressions. Maturana
(1996) explores the nature of reality, regarded as:

“a proposition that we use as an explanatory notion to explain our experiences…. [beyond this] it is
that which in our living as human beings we live as the fundament of our living. Under these
circumstances, reality is not energy, not information, however powerful these notions may appear to
us in the explanation of our experiences. We explain our experiences with our experiences and with
the coherence of our experiences. That is we explain our living with our living, and in this sense we
explain human beings as constitutively the fundament for all that exists, or may exist in our domains
of cognition”.

Explaining our experiences with our experiences is a recursive phenomenon, enabling whatever images
of reality that we perceive to be embedded within other images, like two mirrors at an angle reflecting an
image of an object to infinity. This is effectively a recursive frame of reference, and each image
represents a new validity claim about reality that is contextualised by the validity claim in which it is
embedded. This idea allows us to talk about ontological recursion, by which we mean that each of the three
domains can, through the local context of its own validity claim about reality, recursively host the set of
three domains. When this happens, the host domain has a validity claim that is ontologically distinguished.
When the domain hosts other relative domains within it, they are capable of formulating finer, more local
validity claims about reality.

Let us illustrate this. Phenomenal reality can be apprehended by a unitary consciousness from which a single
person responds to his or her phenomenal experiences. Alternatively a socially plural consciousness with
distinguishable complexities may be defined, for which coherent social behaviour occurs phenomenally.
This is enabled through phenomenal structures that anticipateviii a plurality of commonalities and norms, and
an expectation for behavioural adherence to them. It is within the virtual domain that images of these arise
that enables the phenomenal structures and behaviours to be manifested in the first place. They are defined
in the conceptual domain through the knowledge that constitutes such commonalities and norms. This is
only possible because of the recursive nature of the domains within the conceptual domain, through which
the commonalities and norms are manifested through the interaction of a plurality of consciousnesses. It may
be noted that the commonalities and norms that have arisen to create a paradigm for the group arose
originally through the creation of a virtual paradigm in the virtual domain at another level of recursion. In
this case the paradigm itself with its shared concepts and their structured interconnections that constitutes a
pattern of normative knowledge would have been associated with the phenomenal domain.

Consistent with the notions of phenomenology, the three domains have boundaries that condition their
validity claims about reality. That of one domain is differentiated from that of the others through its
ontological horizonix. This horizon maintains a content that varies depending on the cognitive perceiver that

8
provides an entry into what may be meaningfully reflected on, spoken about, or acted over. The three
domains are ontologically related, and their horizons meldx when the domains are seen as an emergent
whole. However this can only occur if the boundaries that create the horizons also harbour ontological
connections that condition that melding. Thus, ontological horizons both distinguish and connect
differentiable validity claims about reality. This notion provides entry into the understanding that the
boundaries have themselves transformation attributes.

Since the domain boundaries entail ontological relationships, it is not problematic to note that the
relationship between the virtual and phenomenal domains is ultimately autopoietic (Maturana and Varela,
1979; Schwarz, 1997; Yolles and Dubois, 2001). It leads to the simple notion that the autopoietic capacity
for a system can be directly related to its ability to manifest phenomenally its own virtual images through the
self-production of usually structured intentional behaviour. We say usually because organisations operate
through normative behaviour that is consistent with their expectations, and normative behaviour is normally
regulated through structure. This does not mean of course that structure is a necessary condition for
regularised behaviour to occur. Having said this, it is probably possible to express any mechanisms through
which regularised behaviour occurs in terms of either implicit or explicit structure associated with the
organisation in focus.

Domain Properties

Each of the three domains of VST can be associated with a set of cognitive properties. They are
cognitive because they relate to human orientations that are manifested from worldview. We identify
three classes of such orientation: interests, properties, and influences. Taken together, it is possible to
formulate a picture of the cognitive properties of any purposeful activity system, as illustrated in table 4.
This develops on the cognitive properties table of Yolles (2000a), including some of Vicker’s (1965)
ideas on the notion of the appreciative system, and a development of the organisational surfing table of
Yolles (2000b) that we shall further discuss in due course.

Earlier we introduced the three worlds model of Habermas, which is underpinned by his theory of human
Knowledge Constitutive Interests (KCI) (Haberamas, 1970). The notion of 'knowledge constitutive' is
used because it determines the mode of discovering knowledge and whether knowledge claims may be
warranted. The three generic cognitive areas concern work, interaction and power. Empirical-analytic
sciences incorporate a "technical cognitive interest" that connects with knowledge about work, and is
associated with the instrumental control of the environment that identifies what is appropriate action.
The historical-hermeneutic sciences provide access to facts through the understanding of meaning rather
than by observation, which involves the interpretation of texts. Their validity is dependent on a mutual
understanding derived from traditions, which actors in a situation aim to attain. It is this level of inquiry
that Habermas claims is driven by the practical knowledge interest. Finally, emancipatory knowledge
enables us to become self-aware of both the internal and external forces that distort our communications.

It should be said that Habermas’s KCI was directed at the individual within a social environment. By
adopting his concepts as properties of the organisation, KCI plays a slightly different role. This is
illustrated by the distinctive use of emancipation. Habermas uses it in a way that is directed towards the
self-development, self-knowledge or self-reflection of the individual, and beyond the limitations of one's
roles and social expectations. Self-emancipation gains knowledge through reflection leading to a
transformed consciousness. However, our reference to “degrees of emancipation” in table 4 is intended
to describe the condition of an organisation in respect of the emancipation that it provides for the
individuals within it, which represents a reflection of the ideology, ethics and politics of the organisation.
This of course notes that the emancipatory condition will vary between different classes of individuals in
an organisation (e.g., director, manager and subordinate). Most organisations involve structural violence
(Yolles, 1999) that is directed differently towards different classes, and it limits the potential for
“improvement” of both the individual and ultimately the organisation, at least in respect of variety
generation and thus viability. This does not limit the capacity for any individual to seek his or her own
emancipation.

9

Cognitive Kinematics
Properties (through energetic motion)
Cognitive interests Technical
Work. This enables people
to achieve goals and
Phenomonal or generate material well-
behavioural being. It involves technical
domain ability to undertake action
in the environment, and the
ability to make prediction
and establish control.
Cognitive purposes Cybernetical
Intention. This is through
the creation and strategic
pursuit of goals and aims
Virtual or that may change over time,
organising domain enables people through
control and
communications processes
to redirect their futures.
Cognitive Social
influences
Formation. Enables
individuals/groups to be
influenced by knowledge
Cognitive domain that relate to our social
environment. This has a
consequence for our social
structures and processes
that define our social forms
that are related to our
intentions and behaviours.
Table 4: The Three Domains, their cognitive properties, and Organisational Patterning
Organisational Pattern
Orientation
(determining trajectory)
Practical
Interaction. This requires that people
as individuals and groups in a social
system gain and develop the
possibilities of an understanding of
each others subjective views. It is
consistent with a practical interest in
mutual understanding that can address
disagreements, which can be a threat to
the social form of life.
Rational/Appreciative
Formative organising. Enables
missions, goals, and aims to be defined
and approached through planning. It
may involve logical, and/or relational
abilities to organise thought and action
and thus to define sets of possible
systematic, systemic and behaviour
possibilities. It can also involve the use
of tacit standards by which experience
can be ordered and valued, and may
involve reflection.
Cultural
Belief. Influences occur from
knowledge that derives from the
cognitive organisation (the set of
beliefs, attitudes, values) of other
worldviews. It ultimately determines
how we interact and influences our
understanding of formative organising.
Possibilities
(through potential development)
Critical Deconstraining
Degree of emancipation. For
organisational viability, the realising
of individual potential is most
effective when people: (i) liberate
themselves from the constraints
imposed by power structures (ii) learn
through precipitation in social and
political processes to control their
own destinies.
Ideological/Moral
Manner of thinking. An intellectual
framework through which policy
makers observe and interpret reality.
This has an aesthetical or politically
correct ethical orientation. It provides
an image of the future that enables
action through politically correct
strategic policy. It gives a politically
correct view of stages of historical
development, in respect of interaction
with the external environment.
Political
Freedom. Influences occur from
knowledge that affect our polity
determined, in part, by how we think
about the constraints on group and
individual freedoms, and in
connection with this to organise and
behave. It ultimately has impact on
our ideology and morality, and our
degree of organisational
emancipation.

KCI theory creates primary generic properties in which human interest generates knowledge. Yolles
(1999, 2001) has applied it to the phenomenal domain, and extended its conceptualisations to the virtual
and cognitive domains. We shall explore this here.

Organisations adopt the purposeful behaviour associated with the individuals that compose them (Espejo et
al, 1996). The concept of purposefulness comes from the idea that human beings attribute meaning to their
experienced world, and take responsive action that has purpose. Bertalanffy (1968) attributed the idea of
purposefulness to Aristotle, and its consequence intention as conscious planning to Allport (1961, p224).
Purposefulness (Ackoff, 1981, p34) enables the selection of goals and aims and the means for pursuing
them. Checkland and Scholes (1990, p2) tell us that human beings, whether as individuals or as groups,
cannot help but attribute meaning to their experienced world, from which purposeful action follows. They,
like Flood and Jackson (1991), also note that purposeful action is knowledge based. One would therefore
expect that different knowledge is responsible for the creation of different purposeful behaviours. Consider
now that purposeful behaviour is a property of an organisation that can be associated with its paradigms
(and thus knowledge) and their associated cognitive models, processes and intentions. It is thinking as part
of this (Levine et al, 1986) that enables the creation of the goals and the taking of actions to achieve them.
Goals provide a target towards which purposeful behaviour can occur.

Cognitive purpose is a property of the organising or virtual domain. In table 4, three cognitive purposes
are assigned to the organising domain: cybernetic, rational/appreciative and ideological/moral.

10
Cybernetic cognitive purpose is connected with intention. This occurs through the creation and strategic
pursuit of goals and aims that may change over time. It enables people through control and
communication processes to redirect their futures. The rational cognitive purpose is connected to
formative organising that has logical and/or relational connections. It enables missions, goals, and aims
to be defined and approached through planning, all of which derive from a worldview. It may involve
rational aspects that refer to logical and relational abilities to organise thought and action and thus to
define sets of possible systemic and behaviour possibilities. We have in addition included Vickers’s
(1965) concept of the “appreciative system”, where appreciation provides a reflective view of a situation
that entertains both cognitive and evaluative aspects, and it may involve tacit standards by which one can
order and value experience. Appreciation might also be related to attitudes with reflection.

Ideological/moral cognitive purpose is concerned with the manner of thinking. It provides an intellectual
framework through which policy makers observe and interpret reality. It may be defined as a collection
of rationalised and systemised beliefs that coalesce into an image that establishes a phenomenal potential
or experience. Political ideology can be instrumental in defining (Holsti, 1967, p163):

(a) an intellectual framework through which policy makers observe and interpret reality,
(b) a politically correct ethical orientation,
(c) an image of the future that enables action through strategic policy,
(d) stages of historical development in respect of interaction with the external environment.

Ideological properties can be associated with “political correctness”xi, when stakeholders in a social
situation will have a worldview that creates some ethical expectation about the nature of the
manifestation of the social structures and their associated behaviours. Politics provides for the social
engineering of these expectations; politics is “correct” when it is associated with purposes that satisfy
those expectations.

Ideology/morality has an ethical orientation. Ethics is a term that Midgley (2000) refers to as “values in
purposeful action”. However, for us it is the harnessing of ethical and aesthetic values to form a virtual
image that an autonomous system will try to manifest phenomonologically. It can provide an image of
the future that enables politically correct action through appropriate strategic policy. It also gives a
politically correct view of stages of historical development, in respect of interaction with the external
environment, and occurs through values that distinguish between right and wrong. While aesthetics is
related to ethics (Mackie, 1977), it does not have associated with it social objectification that is normally
associated with ethics, that is it is not supposed to be taken as socially normative or common.

We have been referring to cognitive purposes, but cognitive influences are also said to exist. This occurs
because every coherent organisation can be defined in terms of differentiable cultural, political and social
belief systems. The three cognitive influences then, are (i) social relating to the formation of groups, (ii)
political relating to individual and group freedom, and (iii) cultural relating to knowledge and meaning
about self and others. Further explorations of cognitive influence can be found, for instance, in Yolles
(2000b; 2000c).

Organisational Patterning

The origin of the idea of organisational patterning derives from a tongue-in-cheek paper by Yolles
(2000b) on “surfing the organisation”. It is represented in table 4 as columns headers that indicate
horizontal interactivity between the row attributes. The proposition is that just as the rows each have
empirical and analytical independence so do the columns. Thus, both horizontal and vertical interactivity
can occur between cells through their ontological interconnections.

The first column involves: (a) technical cognitive interests connected to work that may be associated
with some form of creation; (b) cybernetical cognitive purpose connected to intention and implicitly
involving time through feedback if nothing else; and (c) social properties connected to the formation of

11
something, suggesting an idea of something in motion, for which we adopt the term kinematic. We recall
that the motion being considered is abstract, without reference to a source.

Since the kinematic classification relates to work, intention, and formation, it may be seen as being
representative of “viability in action”. Work knowledge conditions knowledgeable action, and may be
explored by examining how work processes change with the introduction of new knowledge.
Measurements for this control process are qualitative, requiring an inquirer to search the local
environment for ways in which knowledge has been applied (directly or indirectly) to varieties of
situation. Social influences represent knowledge about the way in which social processes operate. This
dimension can perhaps be measured not in terms of social meaning, but in terms of the reticence that
actors have to the introduction of new social meaning.

Consider the second column now. The first cell relates to the practical cognitive interest that is a
function of interaction, and enables people in the organisation to work together in a particular way. This
can be taken with logical and relational aspects of the rational cognitive purposes that orient the
organisation through its rational base and nature of the interactions that can occur. Also the orientating
cultural belief system of cognitive influence can be added in, all contributing to an organisational
orientation that determines its present and future trajectories. One metaphor for organisational
orientation leads us to the notion of the study of an organisation’s formative orientation within the
complex that it creates for itself, and that determines its present and future trajectory.

It has been said in this paper that orientation is a classification concerned with interaction, logical and
relational attributes, and beliefs. These are all connected with what we may call relevant others, that is
those other actors that are relevant to a situation from the perspective of an inquirer. Interaction
knowledge conditions knowledgeable action (action that results from knowledge), and might possibly be
explored by examining how interaction processes change with the introduction of new knowledge.
Cultural cognitive influences can be evaluated by examining beliefs, values and attitudes (cognitive
organisation). One way of doing this may be to examine individual and group resistance to new
classifiable patterns of cognitive organisation within a compound actor. The classifications should be
indicative of beliefs that limit the possibility of variation and variety in the organisation.

Finally, in the third column, we have emancipation, manner of thinking, and freedom, suggesting that by
releasing greater potential to individuals or groups the possibility of greater organisational viability is
ultimately enabled. This can liberate more possibilities for the organisation. Let us consider these three
classifications a little more fully.

The possibilities classification relates to emancipation, manner of thinking and freedom, and is
concerned with the liberty that is essential for the creation of variety. As such, variety generation may be
one way of evaluating the possibilities dimension of an organisation. We can now attempt to propose
specific approaches to measurements of an organisation’s possibilities, which function as attributes of
variety generation. Knowledge about emancipation may be determinable through in depth questioning of
relevant others. It may relate to the structural violence that may be believed to exist within an
organisation. This is reflected, for example, through the rules that staff within an organisation may need
to follow. It may be possible to measure this qualitatively by obtaining perceptions of the equity among
different sets of rules that relate to distinguished groups. Manner of thinking relates to the ideological
and ethical attributes of actors, and can be explored through in depth questioning. It filters and restricts
the way that information is considered (Midgley et al, 1998).

These ideas have meaning that is able to describe aspects of the viability of organisations in a holistic
rather than piecemeal way. Further, it seems that there are measurable qualities and quantities that may
be able to produce a complete profile of an organisation and its capabilities within a given environment.
This could tell us more about an organisation than a set of different individual explorations intended to
address a particular problem through the application of a particular methodology.

12
It is now possible to link tables 2 and 4, and generate a new table appropriate to Organisation
Development that results in organisation patterning. It provides the possibility of extending the
conceptual brief of OD by taking into account the properties associated with VST, like for instance
ideology, ethics and the development of potential. This provides a new and powerful option for OD that
is more appropriate to complex situations than the previous more simplistic approach. A practical
orientation to this is initially suggested in table 5.

Noting that cognitive influence is linked to the creation of knowledge enables us to explain table 5.
Social kinematics is related to providing people with an image of the future that will act as a basis for
change motivation. Cognitive purposes are linked to information, are local, and involve politics that
enable polity. In kinematic cybernetics, communication must be logically enabled through social design;
that is formal accessible channels of communication should be created through which common meanings
can be accessed. As part of this, feedback must also be seen as an essential component of the logical
design. Transition processes must also be rationally or appreciatively designed so that new structures can
materialise within which people can work. This is the same for organisational arrangements for the
transition. Facilitating support is also a political process that links to control and logical communication.
Cognitive interest is linked to data and data collection. OD ties into technical cognitive interest
kinematics as far as it requires that people actually use communication as a part of their designated work
profile. The potential for communication may not be adequate. Motivating routines must be established
in which people take communication to be an important part of their work processes. The interests row
has been enhanced with the knowledge constitutive counterparts of Habermas’s cognitive interests that
refer to the use of causal and empirical-analytical methods, descriptions and practical understanding, and
the use of critical approaches (Habermas, 1987; MacIsaacs, 1996; Fleming, 1997). Knowledge
management processes might well further develop on these (e.g., Iles et al, 2000; Yolles, 2000c).

Orientation is affected by cultural purposes in that the nature of the language used will provide
something of an image and meaning to participants in the change. For cognitive purposes, the rational
and appreciative aspects of orientation formulate key power group support by the political creation of
that support (with the help of the appropriate language). Stabilising this support is an important feature
of change management. The practical interest aspect of orientation involves the adoption of symbols that
people can apply in the technological communications that they establish. Practical interests are
facilitated by the provision of say the use of technology in creating networks of communication, or more
simply just manifest schedules for regular meetings. These clearly link to technical interests, so that for
instance people may be stimulated to attend a scheduled meeting. Leaders should have energy that can
be put at the disposal of the change. Their political behaviour should also be coincident with the
perceived needs of the change process.

No cognitive influences in the area of possibility for change are indicated within OD. They could have
involved, say, awareness that an existing despotic political culture does not provide sufficient
empowerment for participants in a change to help carry it through, and that a new more open political
structure is required. The ideological attributes of organisational potential for change occur by ensuring
that people become dissatisfied with the logical or political basis of the organisation, and their beliefs
can be developed or harnessed to encourage them to want to participate in change. Ethical considerations
that are part of ideology do not form part of the traditional OD paradigm. Within critical deconstraining,
people are provided with rewards for their behaviour in participating in change. These rewards may or
may not take the form of exchange media like money or power (Habermas, 1987); but they should
contribute to an increase in their liberation, thus enabling them to see that they should disengage from
the present state of the organisation. Part of this process could also be the ability for people to decide
their own constraints on their behaviour. However, at best this must be a lifeworld process that enables
semantic communication.

This context enables us to adopt the theoretical base provided by Viable Systems Theory, and to construct
a transformation of Nadler’s theory of organisational change that more satisfies the needs expressed in
table 2. It results in a tableau that guides an inquirer in an inquiry into organisational change management

13
through a set of characteristics that effectively assemble a number of conventional arguments together). A
consequence is that certain remedies can be implemented within the context of an OD inquiry that can
improve the organisation in terms of its kinematic energetic processes, the direction that it is taking, and
its future possibilities.

Cognitive Kinematics
Properties (through energetic motion)
Technical
Interest Routines for communication.
Causal explanations. Use
empirical-analytic methods.
Cybernetical
Logical processes of
Purposes communication and feedback;
Design of transition processes;
organisational arrangements for
transition; facilitate support
Social
Images of the future in the
management of social processes
are important. An understanding
Influence of the cybernetic purposes is also
important to enable technical
aspects of the organisation to
materialise. Is important.
Objectives play an important part
here, and must be understood.
Table 5: Extending Organisational Patterning of OD
Organisational Pattern
Orientation
(determining trajectory)
Practical
Symbols; energy of leader;
encourage appropriate behaviour.
Seek descriptions of perceived
situation and practical understanding.
Rational/Appreciative
Key power group support
Build in stability processes
Encourage reflection.
Cultural
Use of language and related concepts
that can give meaning to knowledge
(metaknowledge). It supports myths
that can misdirect the organisation.
The propositions of the organisation
are defined here, those that give
meaning to its existence.
Organisational mission and
objectives derive from this.
Possibilities
(through potential development)
Critical Deconstraining
Rewards for behaviour; disengage
from present state. Use critical
approaches.
Ideological
See dissatisfaction in ideological
terms. Mobilise change through
participation. Evaluate ethical or
aesthetic political attributes.
Political
Creates a culture’s normative
boundaries through its beliefs, values,
symbols, stories, and public rituals that
bind people together and direct them
in common action. These determine
the creation of ideological/ethical and
power constraints. They connect to the
structure of an organisation and the
way that power is distributed and used.

Paradigmatic Metamorphosis and Organisational Development in table 2 provides the basis for an
exploration of distinct aspects of the organisation at the cultural, polity and activity levels of the
organisation. It may be that additional attributes must also be introduced that are reflected in the work of
other compatible theories. The attributes of table 2 enables the different aspects of the organisation to be
explored in connection with its current capabilities and capacities, and its possible futures. It thus acts as
an energy and change map of the organisation that can assist the inquirer to develop appropriate
intervention strategies that can be hailed as remedies for improvement. This map is quite broad, and it is
possible to incorporate a number of models into it that are prevalent in the literature, for instance by Child
(1973), who drew attention to more intangible elements of organisational life such as the political
behaviour of organisational members, and by Huczynski and Buchanan (1991), where organisations are
social arrangements for the controlled performance of collective goals. A consequence of this map is to
provide a topology of problems that direct the inquirer to a portfolio of remedies for improvement,
consistent with the “actions” as illustrated in table 6, but more extensive and with cybernetic qualities that
pattern the organisation.

Conclusion

In this paper we have developed a cybernetic theory of organisational patterning that can enrich and
complexify OD, enabling it to be more effective in creating intervention strategies for organisations in
need of change.

This development has arisen because we have argued that OD, the theory that underpins VSM, and VST
each are supported by paradigms that represent distinct species of managerial cybernetics as it has passed
through paradigmatic metamorphoses, with all lying on the same evolutionary pathway. This is
illustrated by the creation of a frame of reference in which transformation is seen as a conceptual device.
In each case the number of fundamental dimensions of the frame of reference has increased as a new
way of defining transformation has been adopted. The notion that the boundary of each of the domains
of VST is also a transformational device has been mentioned but not explored here, and provides entry

14
into another new and potentially exciting paradigmatic metamorphosis open to a new process of
research.

Cognitive domain/ Kinematics
Properties (through energetic motion)
Cognitive domain/ Technical
Interest This enables people to achieve
goals and generate material well-
being. It involves technical ability
to undertake intrinsic and
extrinsic action, and the ability to
make prediction and establish
control.
Virtual domain/ Cybernetical
Purposes Through intentionality for the
future, to provide logical
processes of communication and
feedback; design of transition
processes; organisational
arrangements for transition;
facilitate support. This occurs
through the creation and strategic
pursuit of goals and aims that
may change over time, enables
people through control and
communications processes to
redirect their futures.
Phenomonal Social
domain/ Images of the future the
Influence management of social processes
are important. An
understanding of the cybernetic
purposes to enable technical
aspects of the organisation to
materialise is important.
Objectives also play an
important part here, and must
be understood.
Table 6: Tableau for Organisational Patterning in OD
Organisational Characteristics
Orientation
(determining trajectory)
Practical
Symbols and rituals should be
harnessed; energy of leaders should be
directed; appropriate behaviour should
be encouraged.
Interactions that maintain the direction
of the change are essential.
Rational/Appreciative
Key power group support
Build in stability processes
Develop and formulate objectives/goals
for the change.
Enables missions, goals, and aims to be
defined and approached through
planning. It may involve logical, and/or
relational abilities to organise thought
and action and thus to define sets of
possible systematic, systemic and
behaviour possibilities. It can also
involve the use of tacit standards by
which experience can be ordered and
valued, and may involve reflection.
Cultural
Knowledge about the current state and
its future is important, and removal of
myths is also essential. Use of language,
and a redefinition of identity should be
harnesses to direct the organisation. Use
of language and related concepts that
can give meaning to knowledge
(metaknowledge). It supports myths
that can misdirect the organisation.
The propositions of the organisation
are defined here, those that give
meaning to its existence.
Organisational mission and objectives
derive from this.
Possibilities
(through potential development)
Critical Deconstraining
Rewards for behaviour; disengage from
present state.
Emancipation from the current state and
empowerment enabling people to
contribute to a new future. For
organisational viability, the realising of
individual potential is most effective when
people: (i) liberate themselves from the
constraints imposed by power structures
(ii) learn through precipitation in social
and political processes to control their own
destinies.
Ideological/Moral
See dissatisfaction in ideological terms;
mobilising change through participation
and the facilitation of image. Clarification
of what constitutes a politically correct
approach for dealing with the change
process.
Political
Values that create groups, hierarchies,
leaders, power positions, and power
relationships. It establishes the basis for
freedoms that provide a new future for the
organization in a very different
environment, and will ultimately
determine through normative constraints
on structure what behaviors will be
possible. Creates a culture’s normative
boundaries through its beliefs, values,
symbols, stories, and public rituals that
bind people together and direct them in
common action. These determine the
creation of ideological/ethical and power
constraints. They connect to the structure
of an organisation and the way that power
is distriubuted and used.

OD sees the open system as a space that transforms inputs into outputs. To enable the organisation to
become more operationally effective, and thus to create improvement in its outputs (for given inputs)
that it perceives to be more appropriate to its environment, the system and the cultural base that defines it
must be modified. To enhance its capacity to map aspects of the organisation, we have modified OD to
adopt a terminology that is consistent with that of Viable Systems. Doing this it becomes clear that
traditional OD does not explore many of the facets of an organisation that can be pertinent to change.

VSM operates through a system and a metasystem, with an implicit transformation that couples the two.
In this sense it can be seen as an evolutionary development of OD. It can also be thought of as a model
that sits within VST, where the implicit transformational processes of VSM are attributed to an
independent domain. Here, transformational processes become assigned to the boundaries of the
domains. The validity claims about reality of its three domains was discussed. It resulted in two
conceptualisations for VST: (a) boundaries are ontological entities in themselves that embed both

15
distinction and connectedness, and (b) validity claims about reality can imply recursive frames of
reference. This lies at the basis of the three domains model and is quite distinct from that of the three worlds
of Habermas (1987). While the thinking for Habermas’s theory centres on communicative action, that of
VST derives from a cybernetic frame of reference that is influenced by Habermas but draws significantly on
the work of Eric Schwarz (1997). The three domains offer conditioned validity claims about reality that also
admit elements of communicative action.

Since VST admits more fundamental conceptual extensions than does VSM or traditional OD, it would
be expected to encompass more capacity to model complex situations. This has occurred because of the
relationship that has been developed between VST, Schwarz’s cybernetic theory of viable systems, and
Habermas’s theory of communicative action. Schwarz’s theory provides a grounded theory of the
complex cybernetic mechanics of autonomy. The cognitive properties of VST domains were inspired by
Habermas’s KCI theory. This provides a conceptual map through which cultural, virtual, and
behavioural attributes of an organisation can be considered. The cognitive properties of the conceptual
map are row attributes (of table 4). However, column attributes also exist, and these can be used to
pattern an organisation in such a way that its viability could be more clearly assessed. These column
attributes are capable of patterning an organisation. They do this by identifying its overall kinematic
processes that energise its movements in its environment, its orientations that determine an intended
trajectory for action, and its possibilities for potential development.

This conceptual OD development can enable inquiry into a coherent organisation, its groups, or its
individual participants, thereby exploring its viability within more complex situations than normally
occurs within traditional OD. This is because it extends the brief of OD through its organisational
patterning map significantly beyond that proposed by Nadler or Harrison. Having claimed this, the
suitability of this platform for OD development will need to be evaluated through practical results, and
this work is currently in process (Yolles and Guo, 2002).

References

Ackoff, R.L., 1981, Creating the Corporate Future, Wiley, New York
Allport, G.W., 1961, Pattern and Growth in Personality. Holt, Rinehart & Winston
Beer, S., 1959, Cybernetics and Management. English Universities Press
Beer, S., 1979, The Heart of the Enterprise. Wiley, New York.
Bertalanffy, L. von, 1968, General Systems Theory. Penguin, Middlesex, UK
Burrell, G., Morgan, G., 1979, Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. Heinemann,
London
Casti,J.L., 1989, Paradigms Lost, Abacus, London.
Checkland, P.B., 1981, Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley, Chichester
Checkland, P., Scholes, 1990, Soft Systems Methodology in Action. Wiley, New York.
Child, J., 1973. Strategies of Control and Organizational Behaviour. Administrative Science Quarterly
18: 1-17.
Churchman, C.W. 1970, Operations Research as a Profession. Mngmt Sci. 17:B37-B53.
Coghlan, D., 1993, In Defence of Process Consultation. Contained in Mabey & Mayin-White (Eds)
Managing Change. Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd., London.
Espejo, R., Schuhmann, W., Schaniger, M., Bielello, U., 1996, Organisatonal Transformation and
Learning. Wiley, Chelmsford
Fleming, M., 1997, Emancipation and Illusion: Rationality and Gender in Habermas’s Theory of
Modernity, Penn State University Press,
Flood, R.L., Jackson, M.C., 1991, Creative Problem Solving: Total Systems Intervention. Wiley,
Chichester
Frieden, R., 1999, Physics from Fisher Information: A Unification, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Guba, E.G., Lincoln, Y.S, 1994, Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin, N.K,
Lincoln, Y.S., (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp.105-117

16
Habermas, J., 1970, Knowledge and interest in: Sociological Theory and Philosophical Analysis,
pp36-54, (Emmet, D., MacIntyre, A., eds), MacMillan, London
Habermas, J., 1987, The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2, Polity Press, Cambridge, UK
Harrison, I.H., 1994, Diagnosing Organizations: Methods, Models and Processes,. Sage, Thousand
Oaks, Cal, USA.
Holsti, K.J., 1967, International Politics, a Framework for Analysis. Prentice Hall, London.
Huczynski, A., and Buchanan, D, 1991, Organisational Behaviour, Hemel Hempstead, Prentice-Hall.
Institute for Employment Research, 1995, University of Warwick, Coventry.
Iles, P.A. and Yolles, M., 2002, International joint ventures, HRM, and viable knowledge
migration, International Journal of HRM,13:14, 624-641.
Iles, P.A., Yolles, M. and Altman, Y., 2000, HRM and Knowledge Management: responding to the
challenge. Journal of Research and Practice in HRM, 8(2)1-31, pp 3-33
Kuhn, S.T., 1970, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Ladriëre, J., 2002, Technical universe in an ontological perspective, Society for Phylosophy &
Technology, vol. 4, n0.1, http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v4n1/LADRIERE.htlm.
Levine, R.I., Drang,D.E., Edelson, B., A Comprehensive Guide to AI and Expert Systems. McGraw-Hill.
1986
Lewin, K., 1947,Frontiers of Group Dynamics. Human Relations, 1,5-41.
MacIsaac, D., 1996, The Critical Theory of Jurgan Habermas, http://www.physics.nau.edu/~danmac
Mackie, J., L., 1977, Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. Penguin Books, London, UK.
Marshall, S.P., 1995, Schemes in Problem Solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Maturana, H., 1996, Metadesign, Instituto de erapia ognitiva, Publicaciones,
http://www.inteco.cl/articulos/006/doc_ing4.htm
Maturana, H., Varela, F.J., 1979, Autopoiesis and Cognition, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of
Science, Boston
Midgley, G., 2000, Systemic Intervention: Philosophy, Methodology, and Practice, Kluwer
Academic/Plenum Publishers, NY
Midgley, G., Munlo, I., Brown, M., 1998, The Theory and Practice of Boundary Critique: developing
housing services for older people. J. Op. Res. Soc. 49,5,467-478
Nadler, D.A., 1993, Concepts for the Management of Organisational Change. Contained in Mayon-
White, B., (Ed.), Planning and Managing Change. Harper & Row, London , pp85-98.
Nadler, D.A., Tushman, 1977, Feedback and Organisations Development: Using Data Based on
Methods. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.
Nadler, D.A., Tushman, 1979, A Congruence Model for Diagnosing Organisational Behaviour. In
Kolb, D.,, Rubin, I., McIntyre, J.,. Organisational Psychology: A Book of Readings. (3rd
edn.) Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Nicholson, M., 1993, Organisational Change. In Maybey,.C., Mayon-White, B., Managing Change,
pp.207-11. Paul Chapman Publishing Co., London
Pritchard, W., 1993, What’s New in Organisational Development. Contained in Mayon-White, B., (Ed.),
Planning and Managing Change. Harper & Row, London. Pp. 132-140.
Pugh, D., 1993. In Mabey, C., Mayon-White, B., (eds.), Managing Change, pp109-112, Paul Chapman
Publishing Co., London. Originally in London Business School Journal, 1978, 3(2)29-34.
Schwaninger, M., 2001, Intelligent Organisations: An Integrative Framework, Sys. Res. 18, pp.137-
158.
Schwarz, E., 1997, Towards a Holistic Cybernetics: From Science through Epistemology to Being.
Cybernetics and Human Knowing, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp17-50.
Tushman, M.L.,1977, A Political Approach to Organisations; a review and rationale. Academy of
Management Review, 2,206-216.
Vickers., G, 1965, The Art of Judgement. Chapman and Hall, London (Reprinted 1983, Harper and
Row, London).
Watson, G., 1969, Resistance to Change. In Bennis, W.G.,, Benne, K.F., Chin, R., (eds). The Planning
of Change. Holt, Reinhart, Winston, New York.
Weisbord, M.R., Janoff, S., 1996, Future Search: Finding Common Ground in Organisations and
Communities. Systems Practice, 9(1)71-84.

17
Williams, A., Dobson, P., Walters, M., 1993, Organisational Culture: new organisational
approaches. IPM, London
Yolles, M.I., 1996 (Oct), Critical systems theory, Paradigms, and the Modelling Space. Systems
Practice, 9(6)549-570
Yolles, M.I., 1998, Changing Paradigms in Operational Research. Cybernetics and Systems,
29(2)pp.91-112
Yolles, M.I., 1999, Managment Systems: A Viable Approach. Financial Times Pitman, London
Yolles, M.I. 2000, Organisations, Complexity, and Viable Knowledge Management,
Kybernetes. Kybernetes Millennium Volume, Vol. 29 No. 9/10
Yolles, M.I., 2000a, The Theory of Viable Joint Ventures, Cybernetics and Systems. 31(4)371-396
Yolles, M.I., 2000b, From Viable Systems to Surfing the Organisation, Journal of Applied Systems,
vol. 1, no.1, 127-142
Yolles, M.I. 2000c, Organisations, Complexity, and Viable Knowledge Management, Kybernetes,
Vol. 29 No. 9/10
Yolles, M.I., 2001, Viable Boundary Critique, Journal of Operational Research Society. January,
51,0-12
Yolles, M.I., Dubois, D., 2001, Anticipatory Viable Systems. International Journal of Computing
Anticipatory Systems. Vol. 9, pp.3-20.
Yolles, M.I., Guo, K., 2002, Organization Development in Chinese state-owned commercial banks: A
developing Organizational development perspective, Conference of International Society for
Systems Science, Shanghai, China, August 2-5.
Yolles, M.I., Iles, P., 2003, Transformational Change in China, Organisational Transformation and
Social Change, pending. Based on a Keynote speech presented by Yolles, M.I., 2002,
Change, Informatization and the World Trade Organisation, Fourth International
Conference on Chinese Management Innovation. September 28-30, 2002, Qingdao,
China.
Zaltman, G., Duncan, R., 1977, Strategies for Planned Change. Wiley, New York

Notes
i
“...scientists, just like the rest of humanity, carry out their day-to-day affairs within a framework of
presuppositions about what constitutes a problem, a solution, and a method. Such a background of shared
assumptions makes up a paradigm, and at any given time a particular scientific community will have a
prevailing paradigm that shapes and directs work in the field. Since people become so attached to their
paradigms, Kuhn claims that scientific revolutions involve bloodshed on the same order of magnitude as that
commonly seen in political revolutions, only the difference being that the blood is now intellectual rather than
liquid...the issues are not rational but emotional, and are settled not by logic, syllogism, and appeals to reason,
but by irrational factors like group affiliation and majority or ‘mob’ rule” (Casti, 1989, p40)
ii
Zeno’s paradox is concerned with the impossibility of moving between two points A and B in space. To reach
B from A one must travel half the distance to it to a point say a1, and to get from a1 to B you must reach a point
half way to it at a2. This argument is recursive as you move to a3, a4, a5,.... To count the full distance that you
have travelled you must add all of the half distances that forms an infinite series, suggesting mathematically that
you can never reach B. The solution to the paradox is to introduce time as a new analytically and empirically
independent conceptual extension that operates as a limiting factor on the summation. The introduction of this
new conceptualisation has meant that a new paradigm has been created with new propositions and beliefs, and it
is thus incommensurable with the previous paradigm since it creates a new conceptual extension through which
new ways of seeing can be created (Yolles, 1998).
iii
This happens all paradigmatic environments, whether they relate to the cultural basis of an organisation - for
instance in the privatisation of public companies (Yolles, 1999), or of a discipline of science as that being
considered here.
iv
For example, see Yolles (1999), referring to the work of Flood and Jackson (1994)
v
The term self-organising is normally used here, but within the context of this paper it can be misleading in that it
can be supposed to be part of an “organising” domain, rather than what it is, associated with system structure and
its manifest behaviour. It is for this reason that we refer to it as automorphosis, or self-change-of-form, relating to
the concept of morphogenesis (Yolles, 1999).

18
vi
The nature of the boundaries of each domain in of particular interest, because they can be seen as a transformer
in their own right. We have no space here to explain how or why this occurs, but it can be argued to be true by
relating Schwaninger (2001) to Yolles and Dubois (2001).
vii
Lifeworld is a teleogical and communicative social environment for action situations that are to be managed. It
appears as a reservoir of taken-for-granteds, or unspoken convictions that participants in communication draw
upon in cooperative processes of interpretation. Single elements are mobilised as consensual (problemisable)
knowledge when they are relevant to an action situation. Lifeworld is a culturally transmitted linguistically
organised stock of interpretative patterns. Its horizon represents the limits of what can be mastered and
problematised in an action situation, and understanding about this may change. Lifeworld defines patterns of the
social system as a whole. It is a transcendental site where speakers and hearers meet for intersubjective affairs like
dealing with validity claims, settling disagreements, and achieving agreements. It appears as a reservoir of taken-
for-granteds, or unspoken convictions that participants in communication draw upon in cooperative processes of
interpretation.
viii
When we say anticipation, we are actually referring to “strong anticipation” (Yolles and Dubois, 2001), relating
to the nature and relationship of the boundaries of the three domains and their validity claims about reality.
ix
The idea of ontological horizon may be developed by referring to Ladriëre, (2002)
x
According to the American Heritage Dictionary 4th edition 2000 on line, meld means to merge or blend (e.g., a
meld of diverse ethnic stocks). In our context it relates to a process of de-differentiating that is a consequence of
emergence.
xi
This notion of political correctness is weaker than that often used in politics to indicate an excessive attitude
towards a political particular situation.

19