mdh.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Midgley, Gerald
Publications (8 of 8) Show all publications
Nicholas, G., Foote, J., Kainz, K., Midgley, G., Prager, K. & Zurbriggen, C. (2019). Towards a heart and soul for co-creative research practice: a systemic approach. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 15(3), 353-370
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Towards a heart and soul for co-creative research practice: a systemic approach
Show others...
2019 (English)In: Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, ISSN 1744-2648, E-ISSN 1744-2656, Vol. 15, no 3, p. 353-370Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The language of co-creation has become popular with policy makers, researchers and consultants wanting to support evidence-based change. However, there is little agreement about what features a research or consultancy project must have for peers to recognise the project as co-creative, and therefore for it to contribute to the growing body of practice and theory under that heading. This means that scholars and practitioners do not have a shared basis for critical reflection, improving practice and debating ethics, legitimacy and quality. White seeking to avoid any premature defining of orthodoxy, this article offers a framework to support researchers and practitioners in discussing the boundaries and the features that are beginning to characterise a particular discourse, such as the one that is unfolding around the concept of co-creation. The paper is the outcome of an online and face-to-face dialogue among an international group of scholars. The dialogue draws on Critical Systems Heuristics' (Ulrich, 1994) questions concerning motivation (revealing assumptions about its purpose and value), power (interrogating assumptions about who has control and is therefore able to define success), knowledge (surfacing assumptions about experience and expertise) and legitimacy (disclosing moral assumptions). The paper ends by suggesting important areas for further exploration to contribute to the emerging discourse of co-creation in ways that support critical reflection, improved practice, and provide a basis for debating ethics and quality.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
POLICY PRESS, 2019
Keywords
Co-creation, participatory research, boundary critique, Critical Systems Heuristics
National Category
Information Systems, Social aspects
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-45311 (URN)10.1332/174426419X15578220630571 (DOI)000484784700003 ()2-s2.0-85073418395 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2019-09-26 Created: 2019-09-26 Last updated: 2019-10-31Bibliographically approved
Johnson, M. P., Midgley, G., Wright, J. & Chichirau, G. (2018). Community Operational Research: Innovations, internationalization and agenda-setting applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 761-770
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Community Operational Research: Innovations, internationalization and agenda-setting applications
2018 (English)In: European Journal of Operational Research, ISSN 0377-2217, E-ISSN 1872-6860, Vol. 268, no 3, p. 761-770Article in journal, Editorial material (Refereed) Published
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier B.V., 2018
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-39077 (URN)10.1016/j.ejor.2018.03.004 (DOI)000431164000001 ()2-s2.0-85045255838 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-04-26 Created: 2018-04-26 Last updated: 2018-05-11Bibliographically approved
Torres-Cuello, M. A., Pinzón-Salcedo, L. & Midgley, G. (2018). Developing a Systemic Program Evaluation Methodology: A Critical Systems Perspective. Systems research and behavioral science, 35(5), 538-547
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Developing a Systemic Program Evaluation Methodology: A Critical Systems Perspective
2018 (English)In: Systems research and behavioral science, ISSN 1092-7026, E-ISSN 1099-1743, Vol. 35, no 5, p. 538-547Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In recent years, there has been an increased interest within the program evaluation field in the introduction of systems thinking concepts. However, most of these introductions have been primarily directed towards supporting the practice of evaluation and not towards making theoretical advancements. This article is focused on introducing systems thinking, and specifically perspectives and concepts from the work in critical systems thinking (CST), at a theoretical level in the program evaluation field, towards a reframing of Fourth Generation Evaluation methodology. The process for carrying out such a reframing is introduced, as well as a description of the major changes produced in the evaluation methodology from incorporating the CST perspective. A new model is proposed, and how this model may be beneficial for conducting an evaluation is discussed. Finally, recommendations are made for future developments. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2018
National Category
Computer and Information Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-42101 (URN)10.1002/sres.2561 (DOI)000451830700003 ()2-s2.0-85055282489 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-12-28 Created: 2018-12-28 Last updated: 2019-01-16Bibliographically approved
Johnson, M. P., Midgley, G. & Chichirau, G. (2018). Emerging trends and new frontiers in community operational research. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 1178-1191
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Emerging trends and new frontiers in community operational research
2018 (English)In: European Journal of Operational Research, ISSN 0377-2217, E-ISSN 1872-6860, Vol. 268, no 3, p. 1178-1191Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Community Operational Research (Community OR), and its disciplinary relation, Community-Based Operations Research, has an increasingly high profile within multiple domains that benefit from empirical and analytical approaches to problem solving. These domains are primarily concentrated within nonprofit services and local development. However, there are many other disciplines and application areas for which novel applications and extensions of Community OR could generate valuable insights. This paper identifies a number of these, distinguishing between 'emerging trends' (mostly in well-studied areas of operational research, management science and analytics) and 'new frontiers', which can be found in traditions not commonly oriented towards empirical and analytical methods for problem solving, where community-engaged decision modeling represents new ways of generating knowledge, policies and prescriptions. This paper will show how the exploration of emerging trends and new frontiers in Community OR can provide a basis for the development of innovative research agendas that can broaden the scope and impact of the decision sciences. D .

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, 2018
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-39201 (URN)10.1016/j.ejor.2017.11.032 (DOI)000431164000032 ()2-s2.0-85038857804 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-05-11 Created: 2018-05-11 Last updated: 2019-01-04Bibliographically approved
Ufua, D. E., Papadopoulos, T. & Midgley, G. (2018). Systemic Lean Intervention: Enhancing Lean with Community Operational Research. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 1134-1148
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Systemic Lean Intervention: Enhancing Lean with Community Operational Research
2018 (English)In: European Journal of Operational Research, ISSN 0377-2217, E-ISSN 1872-6860, Vol. 268, no 3, p. 1134-1148Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper explores how theory and methodology from Community Operational Research (Community OR) can enhance Lean initiatives. We are driven by the paucity of the literature discussing the involvement of non-obvious stakeholders, particularly local communities, in the adoption of Lean. We present a project undertaken with a food production company in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria, where we employed a Systemic Intervention methodology to integrate theory and methods from Community OR with those from Lean. Based on this example, we argue that the inclusion of community representatives is necessary if Lean waste-reduction initiatives are to benefit both organizations and their local communities. Our only proviso is that, in the spirit of Community OR, the involvement of community representatives must be meaningful, so change is agreed through stakeholder engagements that respect their inputs and framings, and do not result in organizations imposing unwanted 'solutions' on communities. The paper ends with some reflections on the added value that Community OR can offer Lean practitioners. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV, 2018
Keywords
Community operational research, Lean, Operational research in developing countries, Problem structuring methods, Systems thinking
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-39200 (URN)10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.004 (DOI)000431164000029 ()2-s2.0-85028365339 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-05-11 Created: 2018-05-11 Last updated: 2018-09-14Bibliographically approved
Midgley, G., Johnson, M. P. & Chichirau, G. (2018). What is Community Operational Research?. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 771-783
Open this publication in new window or tab >>What is Community Operational Research?
2018 (English)In: European Journal of Operational Research, ISSN 0377-2217, E-ISSN 1872-6860, Vol. 268, no 3, p. 771-783Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Community Operational Research (Community OR) has been an explicit sub-domain of OR for more than 30 years. In this paper, we tackle the controversial issue of how it can be differentiated from other forms of OR. While it has been persuasively argued that Community OR cannot be defined by its clients, practitioners or methods, we argue that the common concern of all Community OR practice is the meaningful engagement of communities, whatever form that may take - and the legitimacy of different forms of engagement may be open to debate. We then move on to discuss four other controversies that have implications for the future development of Community OR and its relationship with its parent discipline: the desire for Community OR to be more explicitly political; claims that it should be grounded in the theory, methodology and practice of systems thinking; the similarities and differences between the UK and US traditions; and the extent to which Community OR offers an enhanced understanding of practice that could be useful to OR more generally. Our positions on these controversies all follow from our identification of 'meaningful engagement' as a central feature of Community OR. 

Keywords
Community operational research, Community-based operations research, Engaged OR, Problem structuring methods, Process of OR
National Category
Other Social Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-39199 (URN)10.1016/j.ejor.2017.08.014 (DOI)000431164000002 ()2-s2.0-85029633740 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-05-11 Created: 2018-05-11 Last updated: 2019-01-24Bibliographically approved
Midgley, G., Nicholson, J. D. & Brennan, R. (2017). Dealing with challenges to methodological pluralism: The paradigm problem, psychological resistance and cultural barriers. Industrial Marketing Management, 62, 150-159
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Dealing with challenges to methodological pluralism: The paradigm problem, psychological resistance and cultural barriers
2017 (English)In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 62, p. 150-159Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper calls for methodological pluralism in industrial marketing research. We discuss three challenges that proponents of methodological pluralism have to address if their practice is to be seen as credible: the paradigm problem; psychological resistance; and lack of cultural readiness to accept pluralism. We review the works of a variety of authors from other disciplines who have tackled these problems, and identify useful ideas to take forward into a model of learning. This addresses the paradigm problem by making it clear that no pluralist methodology can exist without making its own paradigmatic assumptions. It deals with psychological resistance by talking in terms of learning, starting from wherever the researcher is currently situated (a large knowledge base is not needed to begin practicing methodological pluralism). However, this model does not deal with the question of whether the time is right, culturally, for methodological pluralism. We argue that the time will be right when it is widely appreciated that methodological pluralism adds value to industrial marketing research practice. The next step for our research community must be the accumulation of a body of empirical evidence to demonstrate that this added value does or does not exist. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 2017
National Category
Economics and Business
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-35352 (URN)10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.08.008 (DOI)000400228000013 ()2-s2.0-84991253466 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2017-05-23 Created: 2017-05-23 Last updated: 2018-01-29Bibliographically approved
Lowe, D., Oliver, P., Midgley, G. & Yearworth, M. (2017). Evaluating how system health assessment can trigger anticipatory action for resilience. In: Disciplinary Convergence in Systems Engineering Research: (pp. 765-776). Springer International Publishing
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Evaluating how system health assessment can trigger anticipatory action for resilience
2017 (English)In: Disciplinary Convergence in Systems Engineering Research, Springer International Publishing , 2017, p. 765-776Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In 2014, the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory developed and implemented a novel approach to assess the system by which the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence delivers infrastructure projects and services. This approach brought together existing methods to constitute a hybrid problem structuring method that offered the potential to trigger anticipatory intervention by focusing on the health as opposed to the performance of this system. This paper revisits the initial assessment to examine whether use of the method has led to increased system resilience, and in particular to understand what it was about the method that helped to deliver benefits. Insights with regard to the structures and processes necessary to enable anticipatory action for resilience are presented. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer International Publishing, 2017
National Category
Other Computer and Information Science
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-41265 (URN)10.1007/978-3-319-62217-0_53 (DOI)2-s2.0-85055188845 (Scopus ID)9783319622170 (ISBN)9783319622163 (ISBN)
Available from: 2018-11-01 Created: 2018-11-01 Last updated: 2018-11-01Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications