(This article is part two of a three-part series on modern multidisciplinary fields that can be used as influences and sources of new effective, practical conflict strategies)
Boulding uses his hierarchy to point to gaps in our knowledge and to alert us to a potential danger – employing a level of theoretical analysis below the level of complexity of the empirical phenomenon of interest.
Michael C. Jackson
Introduction
The field of conflict resolution, in the widest sense of that imprecise term, has in recent years become a wonderfully multi-disciplinary field, influenced and informed by a myriad of related and often interlinked disciplines such as neuro-science, psychology, sociology and several others. This has brought about a refreshing revitalization of a field crucial to human endeavour and prosperity, and new questions and disruptions have brought about new skills and solutions to our human conflicts. Three of the lesser-known of these contributory fields that I have found to be inspirational to my own research and consulting work, have been the fields of storytelling, critical systems thinking (CST here below), and micro-sociology. Each of these seemingly unrelated fields have contributed to my own work in measures that have convinced me that they are necessary, indispensable components of any modern, high-level conflict work. This series, of which this is the second article of three, presents a brief framework of the contents and benefits of CST to the field of conflict resolution.
A working understanding of Critical Systems Thinking (CST)
The study of problems across a range of human endeavours and challenges, of which our conflicts are of course a foremost example, and across a range of interlinked disciplines, have in recent years helped us to understand these problems and conflicts in a fresh and revitalised way. Systems Thinking is a way of studying and addressing our most complex and seemingly intractable problems, and looking at methods and processes that can help us arrive at better solutions. Systems Thinking is widely accepted as a crucial modern leadership skill. In my view there are few people who have contributed clearer and more practical work in the field than emeritus professor Michael C. Jackson. I find his work invaluable in guiding my own work in applying systems thinking to conflict.
These studies of our problems and conflicts have brought us to several important conclusions insofar as our efforts, and our abilities to resolve them, are concerned. Problems and challenges, at certain levels of complexity, simply reject any attempt at general systems laws. Factors such as technology, artificial intelligence and the emergent properties of certain levels of complexity simply require different approaches and philosophies if we are going to have a workable system of problem solving tools available to us. Jackson, and the way that he understands and presents critical systems thinking (CST) brings a fresh and practical order to systems thinking, and it is here where I believe that great potential for collaboration and mutual benefit can lie between CST and conflict studies and practice.
The synergies between conflict and CST
The modern world and technological advances have always brought its fair share of new problems, challenges and conflicts. This is to be expected, and it has certainly kept humanity on its toes trying to keep up and get ahead of these challenges. But an increase in the complexity of a variety of potential conflict causes, from resource allocations, the balancing of claimed human rights, technological advances and a renewed pressure on existing systems and institutions have brought a steep increase in some of the complexity levels of some of these conflicts (see for example the discussion on this in my book Hamlet’s Mirror: Conflict and Artificial Design), requiring or demanding a renewed and improved ability to deal with these increasingly complex and interrelated problems and conflicts.
Conflict studies, and to an extent conflict praxis, have responded well to these challenges in designing and applying new solutions to these brand new challenges. Conflict studies have certainly kept an open door approach to learning from, and then applying, the knowledge made available by other disciplines, and it is here where I believe CST can play an invaluable role in contributing real world information and solutions to our complex conflicts. In studying CST I was surprised to see how little formal work has really been done between it and the wider conflict field. I have little doubt that this will change in the near future, and as this series hopefully indicates, I intend doing some meaningful work in this undeveloped field.
Possible areas of application of CST in conflict management
Here Jackson’s own work gives us a hint of the work that lies ahead: “Complexity makes it difficult to place boundaries around a study and to isolate the key variables impacting what happens.”)(Jackson 37). Tensions between the scientific method as only source of solutions and the so-called wicked problems, the dynamics between interconnected conflict dynamics and increased involvement of various stakeholders all lead to fertile ground for work in, and by, the field of human conflict.
Leaders and decision makers live and operate in a world exhibiting increased VUCA characteristics – volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. To illustrate the point beautifully it has become difficult to even define the concept of complexity. The certainty of past times and systems have all but collapsed, and one either grimly clings to those conflict solutions, such as they are, or try to potter along with a hit-and-miss approach, neither of which strategy is scientific or effective. These different levels of complexity in our conflicts require a systematic and informed assessment and utilization of best practices, developments and solutions from a wide range of seemingly unrelated disciplines.
It is here where CST plays an invaluable role in assisting decision makers to “better understand and address the complex issues they face”. (Jackson 97). CST has a wonderfully open approach to reality and all that shapes and forms part of that process, including a very realistic view of what is attainable with complex conflicts. From CST has developed what Jackson calls Critical Systems Practice (CSP), the working parts of CST, a realization that shows CST’s sincere intention of bringing practical results to its theories. The various stages and sub-stages of CSP deserve their own discussion on a separate occasion, but here serves to emphasize the observable fact that CST and CSP means business in practical terms, making it a perfect fit for conflict studies and practice. Inspiring practical work has been done in recent years on complex conflicts, establishing a rich and developing field of study and application.
Bringing the potential of CST to bear on complex conflicts and its moving parts can only enhance our ability to understand this most vital, most robust of human interactions, our conflicts. While Jackson’s work refers to our “problems”, our “situations” and our “challenges”, I would argue that these simply translate into our conflicts, properly understood. It is my sense at this stage, and I expect my future work on this to simply confirm the hunch, that CST and certain areas of complex conflicts will be a natural fit, hopefully in time leading to extended fruitful collaboration (even though I have to admit that I foresee the conflict field deriving the most benefit from such a collaboration).
Conclusion
Critical Systems Thinking provides, in my view, the perfect companion and guiding lens for further work in this most important of conflict arenas. Some of our complex conflicts literally holds the future of humanity as consequence, and the stakes are enormously, even existentially high. A sophisticated ally such as CST can only serve as a valuable aid and guide. Our conflicts demand a multi-disciplinary view and working method, and this is one area of collaboration where I expect meaningful conflict solutions to arise from.
Summary of main sources, references and suggested reading
1. For an excellent primer on Jackson’s most recent work, I recommend Critical Systems Thinking: a practitioner’s guide by Michael C. Jackson, John Wiley & Sons (2024).
2. Complexity Thinking for peacebuilding practice and evaluation, edited by Emery Brusset, Cedric de Coning and Bryn Hughes, Palgrave Macmillan UK (2016)
3. Relevant articles (including my future work on this subject) for your consideration and their source material can be found at www.conflict-conversations.co.za
(Andre Vlok can be contacted on andre@conflictresolutioncentre.co.za for any further information)
(c) Andre Vlok
September 2024