Reflection in self-organised systems - Information Systems Foundations: Constructing and Criticising - page 111

situation as their multiple interactions support further generation of information and
knowledge, which is then embedded in the organisational environment.
Faced with a problem, the purpose of one particular cluster in the system will have an
impact on other clusters, and vice versa (i.e. organisational networks are affected by
each cluster's reflection on information and ideal). These trigger self-organisation of
clusters at a different level with a much more informed image of the problem-solving
ideal. Because of the cooperation among clusters, reflection from different perspectives
arises, allowing the emergence of new alternatives.
At this point it is worth noting that clusters constantly accommodate in order to target
best alternatives. They can therefore structure themselves, generating new patterns,
stimuli, actions, and eventually new clusters. The clusters come together because of
problems at an organisational level. This initiates the third level. The cooperative system
carried on from the second level strengthens the availability of information from past
experience, facilitating the forecasting and reflection on business trends.
At this level, an organisation is in a position to reflect upon complex environmental
changes and put itself in a position where blueprints and information systems templates
are no longer required. Consistent reflective processes allow the system to monitor and
be aware of changes in the environment and are therefore an important asset for the
organisation as they assist further development of capabilities and help ensure market
position.
As pointed out earlier, decentralisation is one of the key characteristics of self-organised
systems, and one that enhances reflection. A decentralised organisation does not follow
a hierarchical system. In fact, they focus on a more linear structure. Here, actors are
empowered to act based on their own knowledge and perceptions, and no longer have
to go through extended decision channels. They start to offer solutions as soon as they
are faced with a problem and they are no longer inhibited or held back waiting for in-
structions from superiors. There is now an internal culture for constant information-
knowledge development. Being able to self-reflect indicates that the organisation has
placed itself in an advantaged position by establishing a circle of learning, auto-analysis
and multiple ideals for problem solving.
With each level of problem solving, there are three opportunities for reflection (Raelin,
2001):
1. Anticipatory reflection occurs prior to the relevant experience (often at the planning
stage).
2. Contemporaneous reflection occurs at the moment of the relevant experience (as
with Schon's reflection-in-action).
3. Retrospective reflection looks back at the relevant experience (as with reflection-
on-action).
Mathiassen (2002) explains that, in systems development, the timing of reflection depends
on whether the task is constructive, evolutionary or an intervention. When the task is
constructive, requirements need to be taken into account to design the system required,
and therefore reflection needs to be done before construction or action takes place. When
dealing with evolutionary systems, the situation is already ongoing, and probably not
stable, so the developer needs to reflect as the development takes place - it requires re-
flection-in-action. With intervention, the current situation and the problems associated
with it need to be explored, alternatives suggested and implemented. This requires both
reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action.