1,025 research outputs found
A theoretical framework for measuring value creation based on Viable Systems Approach (VSA)
No full textAim of this work is to propose a new approach to the analysis and to the subsequent measurement of the concept of value, reinterpreted in a systemic perspective. Starting from a review of its definitions and of the tools that the literature has developed to determine it, the contribution wants to provide a different method and, consequently, a possible analytic perspective of the main variables that affect firms going concern. The perspective derives from adopting the Viable Systems Approach (VSA) as a methodological paradigm (Golinelli, 2005; Barile, 2008), according to which the company, intended and observed as a system, in pursuing its goals of permanence in its specific context of reference, must build consonant relations on which to base resonant interactions with all the supra-systems involved in its operative and decision-making dynamics
L'innovazione tra creatività e sostenibilità
No full textIl contributo intende tracciare un percorso interpretativo del processo di innovazione nelle organizzazioni inquadrandolo tra attività creative del pensiero e scelte valoriali ispirate ad una visione di sostenibilità.
Il processo creativo così ispirato si può realizzare a livello di individui e di organizzazioni nonchè di network di organizzazioni secondo una logica di combinazione creativa della varietà
Il giudizio etico sui comportamenti imprenditoriali: verso una modellizzazione secondo l’Approccio Sistemico Vitale (ASV)
No full textATTENZIONE: edizione riveduta ed aggiornata
BARILE S., GATTI M., PROIETTI L., Il giudizio etico sui comportamenti imprenditoriali: verso una modellizzazione secondo l’Approccio Sistemico Vitale (ASV), in Sergio Barile (a cura di), L’impresa come sistema. Contributi sull'Approccio Sistemico Vitale (ASV), Giappichelli, Torino, 2006
Capitolo CON attribuzioni ai singoli AutoriWARNING: revised and updated edition BARREL S., CATS M., L. Proietti, Ethical judgment on entrepreneurial behavior: towards a modeling according to the Systemic Approach Vitale (ASV), in Sergio Barile (ed.), The enterprise as a system. Contributions on the approach Systemic Vitale (ASV), Giappichelli, Turin, 2006 Chapter WITH allocations to individual Author
Il giudizio etico sui comportamenti imprenditoriali: verso una modellizzazione secondo l’Approccio Sistemico Vitale (ASV)
No full textBARILE S., GATTI M., PROIETTI L., Il giudizio etico sui comportamenti imprenditoriali: verso una modellizzazione secondo l’Approccio Sistemico Vitale (ASV), in Sergio Barile (a cura di), L’impresa come sistema. Contributi sull'Approccio Sistemico Vitale (ASV), Giappichelli, Torino, 2006
Capitolo senza attribuzioni ai singoli AutoriBARREL S., CATS M., L. Proietti, Ethical judgment on entrepreneurial behavior: towards a modeling according to the Systemic Approach Vitale (ASV), in Sergio Barile (ed.), The firm as a system. Contributions on the approach Systemic Vitale (ASV), Giappichelli, Turin, 2006 Chapter without attribution to individual author
Is a smarter planet also more sustainable? Co-creating knowledge for sustainability
No full textSustainability and Sustainable Development are becoming increasingly relevant in the global agenda of governments as well as businesses and civil society. They should be among the top priorities of what we would consider a really smarter planet.
The concept of smartness is widely used essentially to refer to digitalized processes and telematic interactions in several fields of social, environmental, and economic human activities. The concept of sustainability is used to define successful human activities, processes and interactions from an integrated social-environmental-economic viewpoint. Although both the concepts imply multi- and inter-disciplinary views that involve economic, social and environmental sciences, the ‘smartness’ and ‘sustainability’ perspectives have different focus: the former is more focused on socio-technical systems (Trist, 1981), hence on human-technology interactions; the latter is more focused on social-ecological systems (Berkes et al., 2003; Ostrom, 2009), hence on human-nature interactions.
By reflecting upon human-nature and human-technology interactions i.e. relationships between socio-technical and social-ecological systems, in terms of contribution to sustainability, we wonder:
What is the relationship between smartness and sustainability?
Is a smarter planet also more sustainable?
With the aim of addressing these questions, by adopting a systems-thinking view and co-creation logic, our essay outlines a possible boundary-crossing co-creation framework for Sustainable Development. Our interpretative methodology is built upon the roots of systems thinking (Barnard, 1938; Buckley, 1968; von Bertalanffy 1968; Emery, 1969; Espejo, 1994; Jackson, 2000; Basile and Caputo, 2017; Calabrese et al., 2017; Tronvoll et al., 2017). Systems thinking and, specifically, the Viable Systems Approach (vSa) (Golinelli, 2010; Barile, 2013; Barile et al., 2012) can be adopted as meta-level frameworks that provide general interpretation schemes to support understanding of complex phenomena like sustainability. Accordingly, our aim is to identify research domains that are engaged in knowledge co-creation efforts whose integration could accelerate progress toward sustainability (Di Nauta et al., 2015; Formisano et al., 2015; Caputo, 2017)
From 'EGO' to 'ECO' in B2B relationships
No full textThis paper addresses sustainable development through the lens of the Viable Systems Approach (VSA), a theoretical approach developed by, among others, Golinelli (2000, 2005, 2010) and Barile (2000, 2008, 2009) to extend the relative reflections of the governing processes of a firm by focusing on the research of consonance within the specific context in which the firm operates. In fact, the aim to ensure a sustainable value proposition, and therefore be more competitive, can only be achieved if one understands and anticipates the evolution of the emerging contingencies while still attempting to exploit one's own distinctive features over time. These issues have particular relevance in business to business (B2B) socio-economic relationships where all of the elements are homeostatically balanced and must constantly change to adapt to the external contingencies, and the lack of ability to adapt and maintain balance could harm or end the relationship
Experimental and Numerical Analysis of Beverage’s Cans Thermal Shocked
No full textSince May 2007, many manufactories of beverage’s cans have replaced the “standard can” with a new one, named “sleek can”. The traditional can now changes its shape, becoming taller and slimmer, but containing the same volume of beverage (33 cl). The total volume of a sleek can results smaller than the total volume of a standard can. A study on mechanical behavior of cans subjected to controlled thermal loads was carried out. The aim of the present work is to experimentally study the strains field on both types of can and different types of commercial beverages, and to identify the most dangerous condition. Experimental tests were executed realizing either a thermal shock or a gradual increase of temperature. A finite elements model was implemented. Strains obtained from experimental tests were compared with the numerical ones and the stress field of the can was evaluated. The soft drinks considered were sprite and coke. They are very common soft drinks, widely appreciated by young consumers. So it becomes fundamental that the cans are not only functional but also safe. In fact, drinks containing a considerable quantity of carbon dioxide (5.4 g/l of CO2 for coke and 7.2 g/l CO2 for sprite), can be considered a sort of pressure tanks because shaking the beverage or increasing the temperature, produces a growth of the gas pressure
on the can walls. An experiment was simulated: it was supposed to leave a can in a car during a sunny day. The temperature reached was higher than 70 °C (in south of Italy in September). A preliminary test was executed and it was observed that heating with hot domestic water, the can end was violently removed from the can body, hitting the operator. For this reason an-in-depth study was conducted
An integrated model of governance for sustainability
No full textThe term “Anthropocene” qualifies a human epoch characterized by the apparent influence of humans on the Earth dynamics dramatically changing the conditions of equilibrium at biophysical and social level. Current governance systems do not seem to fit the needs of the new epoch. Scientists and professionals from all over the world are debating about the appropriate governance in the Anthropocene, adopting different disciplinary perspectives. With the purpose of highlighting the contribution of a systems perspective, this essay aims to promote discussion about the need of integrating the multiple dimensions that should be considered in the framework of governance for sustainability. We embrace a systems view of sustainability and sustainable development (Pearce, Atkinson and Dubourg, 1994; Clayton and Radcliff, 1996; Barile et al., 2014), also contributing to highlight cybersistemic possibilities (Espejo, 2014, 2015; Espinosa, 2015; Schwaninger, 2001, 2015; Ison and Schlindwein, 2015).
Among the various models that interpret socio-economic phenomena by integrating multiple dimensions, the Triple-helix model seems to offer an important contribution (Etzkowitz, 1998; Etzkowitz and Leyesdorff, 2000). Although developed to sustain the thesis of the so-called “third mission” of Universities in the governance of socio-economic innovation, the model has been used in several disciplinary domains to different aims. In the field of sustainability, it has been elaborated in several domains (Leydesdorff and Etzkowitz, 2003; Lombardi, 2012) also including further elements in a fashion of quadruple and even quintuple helix models (Carayannis, Barth and Campbell, 2012).
The use of the model in the field of enquiry of sustainability, however, does not seem to offer evidences or examples useful to understand its real contribution. Hence, our aim is to propose an elaborated version of the model providing an example that highlights its interpretative potential. More specifically, our purpose is to offer a possible evidence of the general reasoning related to the use of the model as a possible reference in the development of a governance model for sustainable development
People, technology, and governance for sustainability: the contribution of systems and cyber-systemic thinking
No full textWe live in an ever-increasing unsustainable world in which sustainability shows to be a complex multidimensional and multi-stakeholder problem. The complexity to address is increasingly beyond our traditional response capabilities. Hence the challenge is “how we account for this complexity in the quest for a sustainable world underpinned by inclusion and fairness” (Espejo 2018). What is required is to account for the “individual and cumulative social, environmental and economic implications of decision or process based on an understanding of the systemic nature of the world, the interconnectedness of natural and human systems”, and for the “direct and indirect consequences for people and ecosystems based on an understanding of the global nature of the world and how local and regional issues are part of the whole” (Crofton 2000: 400).
People and technology are key resources for addressing the above challenge. Dominant interpretative and governance approaches, however, tend to reduce complex problems to the application of techno-centric knowledge and pseudo-solutions focusing on single aspects of the problems instead of trying to capture and read their complexity as a whole. Governance in such complex contexts requires challenging our dominant thinking, practices, institutions and development narratives (Ison 2017, http://wosc2017rome.asvsa.org/).
Any phenomenon of reality relevant to the goals of sustainability and sustainable development is indeed characterized by highly interconnected dynamics that involve a variety of ecological, social and economic dimensions that cannot be effectively analysed in isolation (Holling 2001).
When dealing with such complex, interrelated, real-world, riddled with uncertainties and contested problems disciplinary knowledge requires being effectively integrated and linked to action (Best and Holmes 2010). Inter- and trans-disciplinary approaches are needed in order a body of knowledge can be co-produced which is capable of overcoming the limits of still fragmented and specialized disciplines and capable to include all perspectives, interests, values of all actors involved or affected (Barile et al. 2018a). Active collaboration with various stakeholders throughout society—transdisciplinarity—must form a critical component of sustainability science” (Yarime et al. 2012: 101).
Since its origins, Sustainability Science has been engaged in such missions, providing a platform for building a corpus of knowledge which can “point the way to a sustainable global society by facing challenges that existing disciplines have not addressed” (https://link.springer.com/journal/11625): although the academic landscape has constantly evolved over the years, shifting from discussions focused on specialized fields to an interdisciplinary debate that pursues a comprehensive understanding of social, economic and ecological systems, there is still much work to do (Komiyama and Takeuchi 2006; Orecchini et al. 2012; Wiek et al. 2012).
Many scholars highlight these still-unfulfilled needs, as follows:
“The problems needing to be addressed are complex and interconnected; they cannot be understood through the lens of a single specialization and they cannot be solved when isolated into compartments. Sustainability leaders will need the ability to be flexible and innovative, to think and communicate with others outside narrow disciplines” (Robertson 2014: 309);
“While furnished with a diverse range of perspectives and approaches, development practice is in need of ways to better conceptualize the interactions between the social, environmental, and economic dimensions of sustainability so that opportunities for simultaneous improvement in human and ecological well-being can be identified more readily” (Smith 2011: 1);
“People with a broad interdisciplinary outlook [...] are being sought out to offer systemic approaches that are capable of dealing with the complexity of the problems and the tasks we face’’ (Crofton 2000: 400).
Principles and rules underlying the complexity of the problems and the tasks we face, then, are to be identified and operationalized, as well as well-grounded theoretical frameworks that can offer general-level interpretation schemes and models that are capable of supporting the understanding of complex phenomena, and suffer less from the passing of time.
Therefore, comprehensive frameworks capable of supporting the shift from a simple combination of knowledge to the required integration seem to be still missing. If we agree that “What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning” (Heisenberg, 1958: 57), then the method of questioning adopted is determinant to the understanding of any experienced phenomenon and always affects the cognitive interpretation process and its outcomes (Barile 2009).
On the basis of these premises, this Special Feature has been launched to collect contributions from various disciplinary domains that propose frameworks of reference that can be easily shared among scholars and professionals to contribute to the building of a comprehensive body of knowledge for sustainability science.
This Special Feature is one of the outcomes of the WOSC 2017, the 17th edition of the Congress of the World Organization of Systems and Cybernetics, a world organization that invites scientists, policy-makers, professionals, and students across the globe to contribute to the debate of the dynamics underpinning contemporary societal problems from cybersystemic perspectives. WOSC offers a space for conversations about social dynamics from multiple points of view. A call for multidisciplinary approaches launched to collaborate to the creation of inter- and trans-disciplinary knowledge within the shared theme of problem-solving and decision-making in the twenty-first century. Multiple conversations have helped to integrate the variety of themes in the construction of the WOSC 2017s’ agenda that has been highly participative valorising diversity within the overarching theme of “Science with and for Society—Contributions of Cybernetics and Systems”.
To be effectively addressed, the challenge of sustainability requires research and education to move from a merely descriptive–analytic mode towards a transformational one. These fundamental requirements imply a strong collaborative commitment of Science, Policy and Society towards the envisioning and realization of a Sustainable Future. Hence, this Special Feature aims to offer a contribution to the development of general reference frameworks that can support the understanding of issues related to “people, technology, and governance for sustainability” by adopting systems and cyber-systemic perspectives.
In what follows, we first briefly discuss the main contribution of systems thinking as a paradigm useful to interpret and address the complexity of sustainability issues at methodological and practical level. Subsequently, we illustrate the contents of the papers included in this Special Feature. Finally, we outline some concluding remarks
Lettura in chiave sistemica della dinamica evolutiva del concetto di sostenibilità
No full textObiettivo del presente contributo è fornire una analisi dell’evoluzione del concetto di sostenibilità nell’ambito degli studi manageriali di matrice sistemica con particolare riferimento al filone di studi che può ricondursi all’approccio sistemico vitale (asv).. Il concetto di sostenibilità, introdotto nel 1987 dal Rapporto “Our Common Future”, ha assunto, nel tempo, un ruolo centrale nella definizione delle scelte di governo, non solo delle istituzioni ma anche delle organizzazioni imprenditoriali e sociali. Adottare un’ottica di sostenibilità, infatti, significa, per il decisore, valutare le possibili alternative che emergono dalle rappresentazioni di vincoli e regole dei contesti di natura economico, sociale e ambientale in cui ciascuna organizzazione vive ed opera.
Tanto premesso, i tradizionali approcci alla sostenibilità si sono spesso concentrati sull’affrontare ed esaminare tematiche riconducibili ad uno o più dei tre citati contesti in maniera separata , senza considerare le interdipendenze che, invece, tra tali contesti esistono. Ciò ha portato, in molti casi, alla definizione di linee strategiche e prassi operative che hanno tralasciato i possibili effetti che una mancanza di visione sistemica implica.
Nella consapevolezza di tali limiti, il contributo traccia gli avanzamenti che il pensiero sistemico, e in particolare l’approccio sistemico vitale, ha fornito allo studio del concetto di sostenibilità, con specifico riferimento agli effetti sinergici che emergono dall’interazione e contemporanea considerazione delle istanze che provengono da ciascuno degli ambiti della sostenibilità, così come definiti da Elkington nellla triple bottom line
- …
