WELCOME!

1. WELCOME!

2. Existing and Emerging Methods for Integrating Theories Within and Between Disciplines Steven E. Wallis, PhDswallis@ProjectFAST.org Director, Foundation for the Advancement of Social Theory Fellow, Institute for Social Innovation, Fielding Graduate University Adjunct Faculty, Capella University Editorial Board, Integral Review ISSS 56th annual meeting 2012 July 15-22 – San Jose, CA

3. Research in Natural Systems / Service Systems Acceptable for NORMAL Science • Inductive (begin with data and move toward theory) • Deductive (begin with theory and conduct experiments to test theory and gain more data) • Abductive (have a great insight / idea / Ah-Ha!)

4. Research in Natural Systems / Service Systems • Over-reliance on empirical assumptions may lead to dead-end thinking. • Where do revolutions come from?

5. Some Sources of REVOLUTIONARY Science • Galileo sparked a revolution began by comparing two contradictory theories • Einstein sparked a scientific revolution by integrating multiple theories

6. Were they unique? How might WE integrate theories to advance the field more rapidly?

7. A few methods for integration • Existing Methods • Ad-hoc • Cherry-picking • Emerging Methods • Propositional Analysis • Formal Grounded Theory • Reflexive Dimensional Analysis

8. Cherry-Picking New Theory #3 Concepts: A D Existing Theory #1 Concepts: A B C Existing Theory #2 Concepts: D E F Good Speculation Not Good Science

9. Ad-hoc New Theory #3 Concepts: A D G Existing Theory #1 Concepts: A B C Existing Theory #2 Concepts: D E F Good Speculation Not Good Science

10. Why do existing methods fail to generate good, revolutionary theory? Because we systems thinkers have been looking at each theory as a non-systemic collection of concepts

11. Emerging CRITICAL Metatheory Reflects The Need For Rigor • Use whole theories • Understand theory as system of interrelated propositions • Seek systemic relationships

12. Systems of Logic “A” is true / real / important ATOMISTIC LINEAR More A More B More C More A More B More C CIRCULAR More A CONCATENATED More C More B

13. EXAMPLE: Propositional Analysis • Identify the logical propositions. • Diagram the causal relationships. • Integrate diagrams. • Identify and count the “Concatenated” aspects (two or more causal influences). • Count the total number of aspects (Complexity of the theory). • Calculate the Robustness (divide Concatenated aspects by total aspects).

14. NOTE: Concatenated aspect is privileged (emergent, Bateson’s dual description) Abstract Example Propositions within a Theory Carefully Integrated B A B A A C C C D E E D C C = 5 R = 0.20 Four linear logics poorly connected

15. By quantifying the structures of logic, we can measure the level of systemicity THUS – we have an empirical/quantitative way to see qualitative relationships … so, we can…

16. Scientific Revolution See Evolution of Theory & Changes in Complexity Complex theories – some usefulness

17. Scientific Revolution See Relationship between Structure & Usefulness Robust theories – Very Useful

18. Concepts in each theory Relatedness on Scale of Zero to One Trend Line for Complexity Intuitive Approaches = Poor Results(Theories of Motivation) Complexity declining – not peaking: No revolutionary change is indicated Robustness remains low: Theory not very useful in practical application

19. Existing Methods (ad-hoc, intuitive) Do not support revolutionary thinking Emerging Systemic Methods (Critical Metatheory) Identify Complexity & Systemicity So follow norms of complexity & systems thinking

20. We can better integrate theories within and between disciplines to create theories that are more systemic, more complex, and more likely to be effective. As did Galileo & Einstein

21. Questions? ~ OR ~ Proceed with LIVE Example?

22. INTERACTION TIME!Together, we will now: LIVE EXAMPLE • Choose topic (Service? Natural?) • Brainstorm propositions (brainstorm rules) • Identify co-casual linkages • Build a better theory • Talk about paths for revolution

23. Concepts in each theory Relatedness on Scale of Zero to One Trend Line for Complexity Without Rigorous Standards We Become Biased and Our Theories Become Simple and Weak 150 years until it disappears 900 years until it becomes fully effective

24. Some scholarsgo to the ad-hocWe should NOT follow them SYSTEMS thinkers: Let’s look differently at theories!

25. To Improve, We Must Push Theories to Higher Levels of Complexity, Systemic Interrelatedness, and Robustness

26. To Conclude… • All data is “theory laden” – empirical approaches alone will not support revolution. • We SHOULD apply rigorous methods to analyze and integrate theories within and between disciplines. • If we are to have effective theory, that theory must be addressed in a rigorous scientific way (Critical Integrative Metatheory) • Those methods should be applied to review submissions to journals

27. Many Thanks! Steven E. Wallis, Ph.D. Director, Foundation for the Advancement of Social Theory http://projectfast.org Fellow, Institute for Social Innovation, Fielding Graduate University Adjunct Faculty, Capella University Editorial Board, Integral Review SWallis@ProjectFAST.org Fielding Graduate University is a 501 c (3) non-profit university of higher learning.