liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
On systems thinking in logistics management - A critical perspective
Linköping University, Department of Science and Technology, Communications and Transport Systems. Linköping University, The Institute of Technology. (Bygglogistik)
2012 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Systems thinking. Systems theory. The systems approach. All these concepts have in various guises been claimed as central to logistics management, since its dawning in the mid twentieth century. Such claims are the starting point of this dissertation, the purpose of which is to contribute to an increased understanding of systems thinking in logistics management research, both present and for future advances. The primary unit of analysis in this dissertation is thus logistics management research.

The purpose is pursued through a strategy of triangulation of research approaches, via two research objectives:

  • To describe the nature of systems thinking in logistics management research.
  • To explore the merits for logistics management research of an interpretive approach to actors’ systems thinking.

The term systems thinking in this dissertation denotes any somewhat ‘organised’ bodies of thought with aspirations to be ‘holistic’ in the sense of aiming for comprehensiveness. This part relates mostly to the systems part of the term. With regard to the other part, systems thinking is also regarded as a term that encompasses thinking about, and in terms of, systems; either that of researchers or that of actors in logistics practices.

Systems thinking can sometimes be theorised on in such a way that it seems fair to label it as systems theory. Another term that is also frequently employed is systems approach. This denotes any approach to intervene in and/or conduct research on enterprises, with a holistic ambition. Such approaches can or cannot be informed by systems theory. By approach is meant the fundamental assumptions of the effort, such as ontological and epistemological positions, views on human nature, and methodologies.

This dissertation employs an approach informed by a strand of systems theory labelled Critical Systems Thinking (CST). This builds on a pluralist strategy, which entails an awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of all types of systems approaches, and thus strives towards putting them to work under such circumstances in which they are best suited.

The first objective is pursued by means of a combined inductive-deductive approach presented mainly through two peer-reviewed, published journal articles. The first is an extensive literature review of academic publications in logistics management; the second is a survey of logistics management academics. Results show that the systems thinking within the discipline most often is not informed by systems theory, and is oriented towards a narrow section of the available systems approaches. This is an approach that builds on an objective world-view (realist ontology), and which seeks knowledge in terms of different kinds of law-like regularities. There are variations to the kinds of knowledge that are sought, in the sense that some search for deeper, underlying generative mechanisms (structuralist epistemology), some seek causal relationships among observable phenomena (positivist epistemology). The common view on human nature is determinist, and methodologies are often quantitative. It is concluded that logistics management employs a functionalist systems approach, which implicitly assumes homogeneity in actors’ systems thinking in mutual contexts (i.e. shared logistics practices).

The second objective is pursued by adopting an interpretive systems approach, thus embracing a nominalist ontology and interpretivist epistemology, in order to explore what benefits such a perspective can lend to logistics management. Informed by the pluralist commitment of CST, theoretical constructs and methods grounded in cognitive psychology are employed to study logistics management practitioners’ systems thinking through cognitive mapping. If this reveals heterogeneities in systems thinking among actors of a mutual context, in which a high degree of homogeneity can be expected, the rationale is that the dominant homogeneity assumption is insufficient. The study, presented through an unpublished working paper, concludes that actors’ systems thinking can differ in ways that render the assumptions of the functionalist systems approach inadequate. More thought, debate, and research on an interpretive systems approach within logistics management is called for.

With constant expansions in the scope of ambition for logistics management in mind – towards larger enterprise systems in the spirit of supply chain management, towards more goals for enterprises than the traditional financial ones, and towards new application areas (e.g. healthcare) – it is recognised that more and more actors become stakeholders in the practices that logistics management research seeks to incorporate within its domain of normative ambitions. This leads to an expanding scope of voices that ought to be heard in order to legitimise efforts to improve logistics management practices. This in turn motivates that we should seek to accommodate not only interpretive systems approaches, but also emancipatory, in order to ensure normative prescriptions that are legitimate from the perspectives of as many stakeholders as possible, not only from the common a priori efficiency perspectives of functionalist logistics management research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2012. , 144 (including appendix 1-2) p.
Series
Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations, ISSN 0345-7524 ; 1456
Keyword [en]
Logistics management, Systems thinking, Systems theory, Systems approach, Critical, Interpretive, Actors
National Category
Transport Systems and Logistics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-77119ISBN: 978-91-7519-878-1 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-77119DiVA: diva2:525007
Public defence
2012-06-01, Kåkenhus, K3, Campus Norrköping, Linköpings universitet, Norrköping, 10:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2012-05-08 Created: 2012-05-04 Last updated: 2012-06-19Bibliographically approved
List of papers
1. Systems theory - myth or mainstream?
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Systems theory - myth or mainstream?
2012 (English)In: Logistics Research, ISSN 1865-035X, Vol. 4, no 1-2, 63-81 p.Article in journal (Other academic) Published
Abstract [en]

Systems thinking has by some been proposed as the ‘hard core’ of our discipline. Others have claimed that logistics rests on systems theory. However, glancing at how these notions are used outside of the discipline, there is reason to believe that there is more to systems theory than has been noted within our discipline. This paper therefore investigates the adoption of systems theory within the logistics discipline. The paper is entirely theoretical. It begins with a review of what is judged to be the main strands of the systems theoretical field. Thereafter, the adoption of these within the logistics discipline is studied, by means of a literature review that spans a total of 2,537 peer-reviewed journal articles as well as a sample of widespread basic textbooks. The findings indicate that a holistic or systems approach seems to have a somewhat central role in the logistics discipline. However, systems theory or systems thinking in its various forms—as it appears to be treated by those various scholars who deal with these notions explicitly—seem not to. Also, it seems that systems theory was more explicitly treated in the early days of our discipline, having become less visible explicitly in more recent publications.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2012
Keyword
Systems theory – Systems thinking – Systems approach – Logistics discipline – Literature review
National Category
Transport Systems and Logistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-76176 (URN)10.1007/s12159-011-0062-9 (DOI)
Available from: 2012-03-29 Created: 2012-03-29 Last updated: 2017-12-07
2. Mythbusting in the logistics domain: a second look at systems theory usage
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Mythbusting in the logistics domain: a second look at systems theory usage
2012 (English)In: Logistics Research, ISSN 1865-035X, Vol. 5, no 1-2, 3-20 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Logistics has been said to rest on a foundation of systems theory. Recent research has however indicated that such claims merely are myths that have been passed on. These myths are in this paper put to the test. An international survey of logistics/SCM academics rendered 178 usable responses. Two main research questions are examined. One concerns the views on and valuation of the terms systems approach, systems thinking, and systems theory, in relation both to each other and to the logistics discipline. The other concerns the extent to which logistics researchers are familiar with and have explicitly cited scholars that are central to a number of different schools of systems theory. Results point clearly in one direction: myth busted. That is, there is little support for claiming that logistics is rooted in systems theory. Also, more evidence is found that the scope of systems theory that actually has influenced the discipline is rather narrow. There are hints of myopic tendencies. The paper is wrapped up with a glimpse of one possible remedy for this, a rather recent strand of systems theory labelled critical systems thinking.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2012
Keyword
Systems theory, Logistics discipline, Survey, Myopia, Critical systems thinking
National Category
Transport Systems and Logistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-77115 (URN)10.1007/s12159-012-0078-9 (DOI)
Available from: 2012-05-04 Created: 2012-05-04 Last updated: 2017-12-07Bibliographically approved
3. Actors’ systems thinking in a logistics context: An application of cognitive mapping
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Actors’ systems thinking in a logistics context: An application of cognitive mapping
2012 (English)Report (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Research has indicated that the level of logistics development in many companies still is not as sophisticated as can be expected from visionary outlooks in literature, especially those relating to the promises of Supply Chain Management (SCM). Although there hardly exists any universally accepted definition of what SCM is, certain related themes such as coordination, integration, and cooperation are often repeated in different guises. Although sometimes expressed implicitly, these are often seen as imperative for SCM success. Coordination of logistics along an entire supply chain is put forth as having a potential to lend great benefits, but it requires the chain to be “… managed as one single entity where end customer satisfaction is the superior goal for all involved actors. This demands collaboration on a strategic level and that all involved actors have a true supply chain orientation.”

The majority of contemporary logistics practices are however far from this vision. There are sporadic reports on the odd case in which logistics collaboration have rendered exceptional results, but the majority of companies have not yet reached the full potential. As put by Spekman et al: “… business has yet to crack the code … talk is cheap and supply chain management is still only part of today’s jargon.” Companies are reported to, at best, focus internal optimisations and have neither managed to implement SCM in reality, nor adopt the underlying philosophy.

One possible explanation for this might be that the vast majority of logistics research neglects a very important factor: actors. It is the actors1 who carry out all the tasks and activities, from strategic to operative, of the logistics practices. Therefore the actors are of utmost importance for which logistics solutions that are implemented. As put so aptly by Skjoett-Larsen (2000): “In the end, it is the employees and not the systems and processes that will ensure solutions to the logistics tasks and provide the company with the necessary competitiveness.  Therefore, it is crucial not to underestimate the human and cultural aspects in the implementati on of projects of change in the company.” (p. 386).

Anything that happens in the logistics practices of enterprises, apart from ‘catastrophic’ events such as accidents, are the effect of human decisions and actions. Decisions in a logistics system span a range from strategic, e.g. localization of facilities or outsourcing of entire service bundles, to operative, e.g. batch sizing, picking routes in a warehouse, or issuing dispatch orders. Actions are the effectuation of such decisions as well as any physical and administrative tasks that are necessary for the logistics to function. We can see an immense spectrum of actions and decisions dispersed over time and space, made by different actors in the logistics practices.

In a recent publication, actors are in fact the very basis for defining logistics: “Logistics and supply chain systems are networks of interacting human decision makers.” This contrasts the finding of Gammelgaard (2004), who, based on the framework of three methodological approaches presented by Arbnor & Bjerke (1997), concludes that it is the analytical and systems approaches that so far have dominated logistics. Regarding the third, the actors approach, it is stated: “The implication is that this approach may not be relevant in logistics, or maybe logistics researchers have not yet seen its potential for investigating new aspects of their field.” This paper intends to show that the latter alternative is most likely, by demonstrating the relevance of an actors approach (an interpretive approach).

To be more specific, the purpose of this paper is to apply an interpretive approach to actors’ systems thinking. The aim is to explore whether the systems thinking of actors within a mutual context (i.e. a certain shared logistics practice) differs, even in a context where a high degree of homogeneity in systems thinking can be assumed a priori. If differences can be demonstrated, it calls for the logistics research community to alter its systems thinking.

The purpose is pursued by first discussing the systems perspective that thus far seems to have dominated the discipline. Thereafter an alternative, ‘soft’, viewpoint regarding systems is presented, and from this perspective it is argued that an approach that can accommodate for differences in individual systems thinking is necessary. In order to handle this, a construct from cognitive psychology (mental models) as well as techniques for studying these (cognitive mapping) are adopted. These are then applied on a group of actors who are all related to one shared  logistics practice, a retail chain store based in Sweden. Causal maps are created for all actors, and these are then compared in order to identify any similarities or discrepancies. The paper is wrapped up with a discussion of which implications the finding from this actors perspective can have for both research and practice.

Publisher
58 p.
Series
LIU-IEI-WP, 2012:1
National Category
Transport Systems and Logistics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-77116 (URN)LIU‐IEI‐WP‐12/0001 (ISRN)
Available from: 2012-05-04 Created: 2012-05-04 Last updated: 2012-05-08Bibliographically approved
4. Visualisation for System Learning in Supply Chains
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Visualisation for System Learning in Supply Chains
2007 (English)In: International Journal of Learning and Change, ISSN 1740-2875, E-ISSN 1740-2883, Vol. 2, no 2, 170-191 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Contemporary supply chains are vastly complex, and decisions made by actors have system-wide consequences that these might not be able to foresee. There are gaps between 'best practice'-founded theory and actual practice in supply chains. To remedy this, we argue, the supply chain actors need to enhance systems knowledge. There is a need to support development of mental models about systemic structures in the supply chain. This is difficult, if not outright impossible, to achieve in real-life settings. A supply chain visualisation microworld engine has therefore been developed, which forms the basis of a learning arena that supports system learning for the supply chain actors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
InderScience Publishers, 2007
Keyword
Logistics; mental models; microworld engines; simulation; supply chain management; SCM; systemic structures; visualisation; learning; knowledge management.
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-40658 (URN)10.1504/IJLC.2007.015508 (DOI)53754 (Local ID)53754 (Archive number)53754 (OAI)
Available from: 2009-10-10 Created: 2009-10-10 Last updated: 2017-12-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

On systems thinking in logistics management - A critical persepctive(1338 kB)2589 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1338 kBChecksum SHA-512
43e1e614a05bbafce11ebf55abb239b4866b56ac96523cf9e44e52c3c0f72701bc125fc4abc2a962abf5eadb9e9543b6f1ecf35499e8ad2ceee86c310cad72c8
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf
omslag(452 kB)66 downloads
File information
File name COVER01.pdfFile size 452 kBChecksum SHA-512
87619a00cda1ca7f6aefd107b640ec6dc2c2e6179c4018fb0988163da57eae52e0e2f7ff5d9992846da11f7ff8a62ac4b14cc43ff5cf03d74663f248b182bc2a
Type coverMimetype application/pdf

Authority records BETA

Lindskog, Magnus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindskog, Magnus
By organisation
Communications and Transport SystemsThe Institute of Technology
Transport Systems and Logistics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 2589 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 2263 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf