JITTA

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY THEORY AND APPLICATION

REFLECTION, PRAGMATISM, CONCEPTS AND INTUITION

MAUREEN LYNCH, University of Adelaide

Faculty of the Professions, Tel: 061 8 8303 7400, E-mail: maureen.lynch@adelaide.edu.au

MIKE METCALFE, University of South Australia

School of Management, Division of Business, Tel: 061 8 8302 0268, Fax: 061 8 8302 0512,
E-mail: mike.metcalfe@unisa.edu.au

ABSTRACT

While there have been many calls to use reflection in information systems
(IS) research, the intent of those who linked the word to inquiry, the pragmatists,
seems to be unclear. They suggested that sensory inputs (experiences) are
reflected off specific concepts, either intuitively or explicitly. This paper argues
that it may help to distinguish two types of reflection, ‘intuitive reflection’ and
‘concept reflection’. The former involves reflection without an explicit and
formal process of selecting and considering the concept (idea, stance) that is to
be used to reflect on a past sensory experience. Explicit concept reflection
involves selecting a specific concept against which to reflect. The reflection
literature is revisited using this distinction. Without a clearer understanding of
the pragmatic stance on thinking as re-viewing, the useful pluralist and
emancipatory implications of using reflection are in danger of being missed.

THE PROBLEM STATEMENT by distinguishing between intuitive reflection

and the explicit use of well defined concepts.
Numerous researchers call for
reflection (Reynolds 1998; Kember et al 1999; INTUITIVE AND EXPLICIT CONCEPTS
Bjerknes 1992; Mathiassen and Purao 2002)
without making clear what is to be reflected The pragmatist who wrote the most
against what. Are we to reflect our sensory about reflection is Dewey (1910). He
input against an ideal or are we to reflect specifically argues that thinking starts with the
against various conceptions of the world? The reflection of sensory inputs (experiences)
latter is very much the pragmatic intent when against some concept (ualisation); a
advocating reflection. This specific meaning of comparison. Rigorous thinking starts with the
reflection is often not made clear, which reflection of sensory inputs against explicit
means the powerful pragmatic inquiry method concepts, self-consciously selected. Reflective
is not being fully exploited. This paper aims to thinking suggests a sequence of:
re-emphasise the pragmatic intent and use this • The need to make a choice, and the selection
to revisit the reflection literature. It will do this of one option.

Ken Peffers acted as the senior editor for this paper.

Lynch M. and M. Metcalfe, “Reflection, Pragmatism, Concepts and Intuition,” Journal of Information
Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 7:4, 2006, 1-10.
Maureen Lynch and Mike Metcalfe

• Recollection of experiences related to that

option. These experiences are sensory inputs
CONTRIBUTION
from past events, actions, or advice. The contribution this paper makes to
• Comparison of those experiences the IS community includes:
(intuitively or explicitly) against some • Providing a review of the reflection
concept. literature.
• Consideration of the consequences of that • Reiterating the pragmatic intent when
option as highlighted by the particular using the word ‘reflection’. Given the
concept used. pragmatics were one of the main
proponents of reflection, this seems
One of Dewey’s examples involves
appropriate.
choosing whether to take the train, bus or taxi
to get to an appointment across town. He • Assisting those undertaking action
thinks of one option, say, the train, and selects research to ensure their reflection uses an
the concept of ‘timeliness’ (arriving on time). explicit concept.
He then reflects one against the other to • Providing supporting evidence to the
highlight the consequences (logical sequence argument that the classification of
of events) of the option of taking the train. If reflection into ‘intuitive’ and ‘explicit use
that option is problematic he then goes through of concepts’ is useful.
the sequence again with another option, say
taking the bus. Interestingly, Polya, in his
famous ‘How To Solve It’ (1945), suggests the would appear to be able to think about, reflect
same problem solving method. When stuck on on, a recent project without needing to first
a maths problem, look for concepts used to think about some concept to reflect against.
provide solutions to previous problems to see Dewey’s response would be that this is wrong.
if any are useful with the new problem. We intuitively use concepts (or parts thereof)
to reflect off when thinking; even though we
Notice there are at least two important may not be aware we are doing it. In the case
elements of this pragmatic act that need to be of Dewey’s transport problem he may have
mentioned in this paper. The first is having ‘intuitively’ chosen the concept of ‘timeliness’
some experience, be it from everyday work or over status, comfort or environmental
from a controlled experiment. The second is responsibility. The rigorous thinker is aware of
reflecting against a particular concept, which concepts he or she is using to reflect.
intuitively or in an explicit self-conscious
manner. Pierce (1878) seems to argue there Intuitive concepts are thought to be
will be one best concept through which to similar to schemas, patterns, mental models, or
reflect, but James (1907/1910) opens up the automatic thinking as discussed in the
idea that the reflection will be more psychological literature (Allport 1954) and
informative if a comparison were made with a perhaps like a priori as discussed in the
range of concepts rather than just seeking one philosophical literature. This subconscious
ideal. Using Dewey’s example of thinking application of a concept is thought to be so
about transport to get across town, past practised, that we do it without being aware.
experiences might have been reflected upon However, it is thought possible to make one
using concepts like comfort, speed, fun, aware of one’s subconscious choice. Our
novelty or environmentally friendly. These concerns, such as food, status, safety and
concepts will suggest different choices of friendship, may well provide some intuitive
transport to get to his appointment. concepts. Others can be explicitly learnt like
‘environmentally-friendly’, morality or
Dewey has obviously had an impact on ‘project-management’. Language allows us to
information systems through his influence on be encouraged to use alternative concepts.
Herbert Simon’s and Donald Schon’s work.
However, his specific use of the term As an exercise, may we ask you to
‘reflection’ to explain thinking may have been reflect on ‘organisations’. Intuitively you
underestimated because it would appear that might think about the experience of your
we can think without using explicit concepts present place of employment and reflect on it
against which to reflect. For example, we using concepts of ‘status’, ‘power’ or

2
 Reflection, Pragmatism, Concepts and Intuition

‘change’. Morgan, in ‘Images Of Cause of the Act

Organization’ (1986), used a range of explicit (a) Why did it happen?
concepts that he, Pepper (1942) and Lakoff (b) What (instruments) made it happen?
(1993) call conceptual metaphors. These (c) Who made it happen?
include reflecting on organisations through the (d) With what instruments?
concepts of ‘machinery’, ‘adaptive organism’,
‘systems’ and others. Their argument is that Circumstances of the Act
using these explicit concepts to reflect opens (e) When did it happen?
many more ideas about organisations. The (f) Where did it happen?
wider management literature has used many (g) How did it happen, in what manner?
other concepts such as core competency,
competitive advantage, irony and strategy, to Result of the Act
reflect on organisations. (h) What Happened?
Importantly, pragmatic reflection has a These are picked up in the modern
particular understanding of how decisions are reflection literature by Mezirow (1991). He
made (Dewey 1910, chp.6) which differs reduces them down to three groupings which
significantly from that which might be called he renames as content reflection (what we
the ‘traditional’ one associated with Herbert did), process reflection (how we did it and
Simon (Newell and Simon 1972; Metcalfe how well we did it) and premise reflection
2005; Gilbert 1991). The traditional one being (why we did it and the consequences).
that we observe a problem, remain neutral It could be said that Aristotle’s
while collecting evidence in support of questions are calling for reflection. However,
numerous alternative solutions and then we there is a significant difference in emphasis
choose a solution. This would suggest for compared to Dewey’s point about reflecting
explicit concepts reflection, the task becomes off concepts. For example when asking ‘What
one of appreciating a problem and then happened’, there is no suggestion of what
thinking about it using a range of different concept might be used to think about this
concepts until a useful one is found and using question. So using the example of the failure
that to make a choice. Rather, Dewey’s of the various Ambulance emergency services
reflective thinking means that, when we computerised systems (Flowers 1996), to ask
encounter a problem, our intuitive concepts the ambulance drivers what happen will get a
will immediately suggest a solution. For different answer from asking the patients, the
example, when told users are not happy with a hospital administrators and the IT developers
particular application, the intuitive concept of who will give intuitive reflections perhaps
user training may be enacted and the intuitive based on their professional training. Each
solution generated of increased user training. different answer may well be ‘true’ in its own
Rigorous reflection then becomes one of using right. Further, setting up a research project
a range of explicit concepts to reflect on this asking the same question using the concepts of
intuitive solution. If this intuitive solution leadership, systems evaluation, criminal
becomes untenable, then another intuitive activity and compassion will get different
solution will need to take its place and then the responses again. The same is true of all
explicit concepts reflection process starts Aristotle’s questions. A pragmatist when
again. This pragmatic approach to decision asked, “What happened?” should respond, “I
making therefore makes maximum use of have an intuitive response (reflection) to that
participants’ past experiences as these generate question but what concepts do you want me to
the intuitive solutions. use to reflect further?”
To emphasise the distinctive approach
of reflection in pragmatism, it may be useful to ALTERNATIVE CLASSIFICATIONS OF
compare it to the alternative of Aristotle’s REFLECTION
Causes. He suggests the system of questions
which some readers will associate with It is being suggested here that it is
Kipling’s six serving men (Hookins 2005). useful to distinguish intuitive from explicit
concept reflection to underline the pragmatic
intent when calling for reflection. This
includes Dewey’s view of thinking where all

Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 7:4, 2006. 3

Maureen Lynch and Mike Metcalfe

thinking involves reflection between our the young, evaluation by being approached by
sensory input (experiences) and some concept. numerous ‘blind’ people, destroying
If the concept is not explicitly appreciated by environments and being able to communicate
the thinker then, if understanding takes place, over long distances outside the human audible
an intuitive one from past experiences must range. The concept ‘elephant’ does seem to
have been provided by our brains. This seems encourage a particular reflective stance.
to assume differing levels of reflective
King and Kitchener (1994) seem to
competence. Some people seem competent
provide support for the intuitive/explicit
enough to select the concept against which
pragmatic divide being argued for in this
they reflect, while others reflect against
paper. They talk in terms of cognitive
concepts unawares. This differing ability is
competence providing three main stages which
assumed to exist only until people are made
they call
aware that they can select alternative concepts
against which to reflect. • pre-reflective,
• quasi-reflective and
The human cognitive development
• reflective judgement.
researchers, like Piaget (1973) and Bateson
(1973) have studied the development of our The quasi reflective stage would appear
thinking skills during childhood. Their to be thinking that includes being able to see
research, and other mentioned below, seems to something from other people’s point of view,
suggest that intuitive reflection may be present to use metaphors and methods like random
in children but explicit concepts reflection word brainstorming. The latter, reflective
comes later in life, taking some years and judgement stage, is the ability to use explicitly
effort to develop. a series of different concepts to interpret the
same world events. While many people may
The ability to see some event from
achieve this final stage, there is expected to be
someone else’s view apparently does not start
a considerable range in people’s skills to
until aged about seven or eight years.
perform these mental tasks. While lining up
Arguably, this means the ability to use a range
with the intent of pragmatic reflection, it does
of concepts through which to reflect takes
not emphasise the idea that a mentally
much longer for our brain to achieve. The
developed person will be reflecting off
necessity to lecture on double loop learning in
concepts (even if only intuitively).
University courses, and the observation of a
lack of explicit concepts reflection in some Hatton and Smith (1995) contend that
middle aged people, support the argument that there are five developmental classifications of
concepts reflection not only needs reflection, technical, descriptive, dialogic and
considerable cognitive skill, but it also needs critical, each with its own purpose and
explicit practice. Personal experience of characteristics.
undergraduates’ responses when asked to
Smyth (1986) describes technical
compare how different professions might
reflection as being:
respond to a complex social problem
reinforced this. The same is true of getting characterised by the application or
undergraduates to apply Morgan’s implementation of existing knowledge to
organisation metaphors to case studies. It can the attainment of given ends. This is
take some students a while to confine their reflection of a technical-rational kind that
reflections to one metaphor. An even more culminates in instrumental action. (p. 18)
testing example comes from the experience of
It does not examine the social context,
using the ‘random word’ brainstorming
in fact, it takes the context for granted
technique. With this, people are given a
(Kemmis 1985). Technical reflection involves
random word and asked to use it to reflect on
auditing the existing competencies and skills
some problem. For example, someone could
to assess their adequacy, in efficient
be asked to use the randomly generated word
completion of a given task using a set of given
‘elephant’ to reflect on the problem of
criteria for success. Hatton and Smith (1995)
designing an information system. Elephants in
maintain that technical reflection is a crucial
the context of IT make me think of long
aspect for young professionals’ development
memory, cumbersome, family protection of
and foundation for other forms of reflection.

4
 Reflection, Pragmatism, Concepts and Intuition

Recognition that there are alternative leadership. Then, in adult life, other concepts
(re)actions or paths possible to achieve some are appreciated like justice, equity, respect,
goal, and being able to justify the choice of loyalty and democracy. Exactly what order
one constitutes descriptive reflection (Hatton concepts become available to our minds would
and Smith 1995). It is called ‘describing’ seem to depend on our upbringing and interest
because of the ability to describe the process in engaging with the concerns of people
of deciding which action to take. Hatton and different from ourselves.
Smith (1995) report that descriptive reflection
Mezirow (1991) points out that the
is often used by individuals to describe the
nature of critical reflection requires there to be
context of the situation and the reasons, based
a ‘hiatus’ during which the analysis of one’s
on personal judgement, for taking that action.
intuitive concepts takes place. Brookfield
It is then used to build the next form of
(1990) explains critical reflection is comprised
reflection.
of three stages: firstly, identification of one’s
Dialogic reflection involves intuitive concepts; secondly, examination of
retrospective analysis of a situation or action, those for validity and accuracy; and thirdly,
comparing the action taken with available reforming the concepts, taking into account
alternatives and viewing the action from issues highlighted in the scrutiny.
different frames. Pee et al (2002, p. 578)
Reynolds (1998, pp. 189) asserts that
describe it as ‘a form of discourse with one’s
critical reflection has the following
self, mulling over reasons and exploring
characteristics that differentiate it from the
alternatives.’ Hatton and Smith (1995, pp. 49)
other forms of reflection:
assert that ‘such reflection is analytical or/and
integrative of factors and perspectives and may • It is concerned with questioning intuitive
recognise inconsistencies in attempting to concepts… a process of making evaluations,
provide rationales and critique’. often moral ones, and not simply using
concepts of a practical, or technical nature.
Critical reflection ‘involves an analysis
of power and control and an examination of • Its focus is social rather than individual…the
the taken-for-granteds within which the task of socially situated nature of intuitive concepts
problem is situated’ (Reynolds 1998). Critical must be taken into account for reflection to
reflection, considered the highest form of have any meaning.
reflection (Hatton and Smith 1995; Stein 2000; • It pays particular attention to the concept of
Knight 1996; Raelin 2001), requires ‘power’. Perhaps the most notable
recognition of events through cultural, social, distinction of critical reflection is in terms of
political and historical frames. Hatton and the attention paid to questioning relations
Smith (1995, pp. 35) describe critical between power and knowledge and the way
reflection as: even a person’s intuitive concepts is
inevitably influenced by their position in
involving moral and ethical criteria,
hierarchies of power and privilege.
making judgements about whether
professional activity is equitable, just and • It is concerned with the emancipation
respectful of persons or not. In addition, concept.
critical reflection locates any analysis of King and Kitchener (1994) argue that
personal action within wider socio- critical reflection is similar to, but not the
historical and politico-cultural contexts. same as, reflective judgment. They maintain
From the intent of pragmatic reflection, that critical reflection requires a set of skills
Hatton and Smith (1995) appear to be that can be learned from a limited set concepts
suggesting a development through the such as power, ethics or emancipation,
concepts being used to reflect. At first the whereas reflective judgment requires creative
concepts come from life’s social experiences development of a range of alternative and
from our families and friends particularly relevant concepts. They suggest it is necessary
when growing up. Fairness and compassion to work through the other stages of reflection
are examples. Then some concepts are before the concepts required for reflective
provided from scientific or professional judgment can be appreciated.
education like measurement, efficiency and

Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 7:4, 2006. 5

Maureen Lynch and Mike Metcalfe

Although Stein (2000, pp. 1) claims Mention of reflection to most readers

that adults can learn to reflect using critical will bring up thoughts of single-loop and
concepts if they are taught the processes: double-loop learning (Jepsen, Mathiassen et al.
‘assumption analysis, contextual awareness, 1989; Knight 1996; Brockbank and McGill
imaginative speculation and reflective 1998; Williamson and Iliopoulos 2001;
scepticism’, he concurs with Hatton and Smith Mathiassen 2002; Mathiassen and Purao 2002;
(1995) that the incidence of critical reflection McGill and Brockbank, 2004). So what is the
in students in their studies and studies of relationship between these and the previously
others is very rare. Hatton and Smith (1995) discussed intuitive and concepts reflection? It
found that, despite the methods used to is thought that single loop reflection maps onto
promote the critical concepts, the majority of intuitive reflection. For example, Argyris and
students remain using technical concepts. Schon, (1996) report single-loop reflection in
Techniques such as action research projects the management context to mean evaluating
and journal writing, incorporating questions to past experiences only in terms of increased
trigger thought processes, have been proven to efficiency to reach a short term profit
be successful in facilitating the explicit use of objective. Management training makes
these technical and other non critical concepts consideration of efficiency and effectiveness
for reflection (Hatton and Smith 1994; intuitive in managers. Another example draws
Mathiassen and Purao 2002). However, they on Knight's (1996) explanation of single loop
argue that specialised skills in the educator and reflection using the question ‘are we doing
non-traditional educational processes are things right?’. If this is answered with no
required if critical concepts are to be used with discussion about what is meant by ‘right’ then
ease. only single loop reflection is occurring. Again
it is thought that answering without asking
Reflection on all levels is recognised as
what is meant by ‘right’ would be an intuitive
a learning concept. Critical reflection, with its
answer, using the intuitive concepts of the
focus on cultural, political and historical
respondent. Dooley (1999) uses the example
concepts, is considered essential to any
of a buggy whip manufacturer in the early 21st
information systems education to encourage
century improving his processes in order to
developers to adopt inclusive, ethical work
make finer buggy whips. Single loop reflection
practices (Reynolds 1998; Hatton and Smith
is when the manufacturer does not look
1995). However, the pragmatic intent does
beyond his immediate task to take into account
more than encourage use of critical concepts.
the strategic changes occurring in transport.
It includes making people aware they can use
After many years making whips, he does not
alternative concepts to appreciate alternative
think through the concept of strategic change,
truths. In this way they can improve the
but rather uses only the intuitive reflection of
choices and so improve their lives. For
whip design efficiencies. Brockbank and
example, the concept of ‘systems’ enlightened
McGill (1998) describe single-loop reflection
problem solvers locked into the ‘cause and
in the context of higher education where
effect’ concept.
perhaps single loop is like trade school
training rather than the critical thinking
REFLECTION AND DOUBLE LOOP required in a university course. Trade school is
LEARNING expected to teach the students to reflect
The distinction between intuitive and intuitively on efficiency and effectiveness,
explicit concepts reflection was made to while a critical education is expected to get
overcome the feeling that reflection could be students to question which concepts they are
undertaken without using a concept against thinking through.
which to reflect. This clarification can now be There is a place for intuitive or single
used to re-interpret the double loop learning loop reflection. Knight (1996) argues that on
literature (Argyris and Schon 1996) to provide occasions there is use for this type of reflection
further explanation both of double loop because of a need for ‘developing and
learning and the pragmatic intent of reflection improving the realisation of relatively fixed
as always being against concepts. goals and objectives’ (Knight 1996, pp. 13).
Courtney et al (1998) describe single loop as
low-level reflection as it involves only keeping

6
 Reflection, Pragmatism, Concepts and Intuition

to a set of rules and is simply error correction, single loop to double loop by setting up a
but it is still viewed as valuable for day-to-day series of concepts through which to reflect.
activities and is necessary for progress to be The first move from professional training to
made within the established frameworks critical education may be to know when and
(Brockbank and McGill 1998). how to activate this switch from intuitive to
concepts reflection or from single to double
Double loop reflection is described by
loop learning.
Argyris and Schon (1996) and Courtney et al.
(1998) as a different type of reflection from So, in summation, it appears that single
single-loop. It incorporates the first loop with a and double loop reflection can be better
second loop. In the language of this paper, this explained by referring back to its pragmatic
second loop centres on the evaluation of an roots and the distinction between intuitive vs
experience using explicit and varied concepts. concepts refection. The advantage of doing so
It recognises that evaluation of past actions is to be clearer about distinguishing the two
and the resulting consequences identified loops which, given the number of translations
through intuitive concepts alone may not be from Argyris and Schon’s original, suggests
valid or extensive enough. Above in Dewey’s still causes problems with practitioners.
transport example, double loop reflection Further, using the intuitive vs concepts
involved explicitly identifying concepts like language ties this reflection literature in with
‘comfort’ and the ‘environment’ and using the pluralist and multiple perspective
these to evaluate the transport alternatives. epistemologies and it also re-emphasises one
Using Flood and Romm’s (1996) questions, of the principal intent of pragmatism, that of
double-loop learning would ask, ‘Are we emancipating people world through useful
doing things right AND are we doing the right concepts.
things’. This paper is arguing that, in order to
answer the second question, we need to reflect REFLECTION IN OR ON ACTION
through a variety of different concepts.
Mathiassen and Purao (2002) emphasise that At the start of this paper, it was
double-loop reflection questions assumptions suggested that there is a passage of time after a
and values. Mezirow (1991) and Weber sensory experience before reflection and
(2003) maintain that double loop reflection meaning is assigned. This passage of time may
necessitates taking into account one’s be a millisecond or many years. Intuitive
assumptions, biases and political influences reflection suggests a very small time period
when considering current beliefs and being between the sensory experience (action) and
prepared to challenge them, thereby being in a the reflection to interpret the sensory input. It
position to critique or evaluate with an open can be easily seen how evolution would select
mind. Both of these also suggest the need for a for this. There would be an advantage in being
range of concepts to highlight the assumption able to make a quick response to the sensory
inherent in any one concept. The example of input of a predator. The threat would need to
double-loop learning that Dooley (1999) gives be very quickly reflected upon using the
is the occasion in the 1980s when Royal Dutch concept of predator. When there was some
Shell delayed its intuitive plans for the doubt, it would be better to use the predator
acquisition of new oil fields when it foresaw concept intuitively, as the default. Reflection
the drop in oil prices and the demise of the using explicit concepts seems like a luxury
Soviet Union. Scenario planning can be seen afforded only to those who can take some time
as an explicit exercise in shifting intuitive over reflections. The reflection literature has
concepts to alternative explicit ones. long discussed this issue of timing, mentioning
two or perhaps three different time bands. The
Double loop learning would seem to mainstream thought is that there are two main
suggest ‘standing outside of yourself’, or time bands (eg. Schon 1995) called reflection-
seeing the common place in a new light in-action and reflection-on-action. A third,
(Brockbank and McGill 1998). Using explicit prior, time band has been mentioned.
concepts seems an obvious way of doing this
systematically. Examples of explicit frames Reflection-in-action is when reflecting
include the environment, global forces, and and action take place almost simultaneously.
ethics. Put another way, we can switch from Raelin (2001) calls it contemporaneous
reflection. Hatton and Smith (1995) and Lee

Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 7:4, 2006. 7

Maureen Lynch and Mike Metcalfe

and Sabatino (1998) suggest this short time of Raelin (2001, pp. 19) argues for
reflection, which requires the practitioner to anticipatory reflection which occurs prior to
draw on their knowledge almost the experience. This is analogous to reflecting
simultaneously while executing the action, as on the future. Dahlborn and Mathiassen
difficult if anything but intuitive reflection is (1995) and Mathiassen (2002) seem to support
to be used. Schon (1995) suggests that this by calling for reflection coming before the
reflection-in-action is scheduled into work action of developing a new human activity
practices so that it is almost routine and taking system. However, our reading of James
place alongside the work experience. It is (1907/1910) and Dewey (1910) is that it is
unstructured, spontaneous reflection that takes impossible to reflect on something that has not
place in real time. It is analogous to tacit been a past sensory experience. What will
knowledge, and single loop learning. occur is the mind will assume a past sensory
experience which is analogous to the future
However, when an unusual, unexpected
project and reflect on what it knows. This is
or complex situation takes place, almost by
remindful of the old adage that planning can
definition, intuitive reflection no longer
only ever be like driving a car by looking
suffices; there is need to recognise the switch
through the mirror; trying to interpret the past
to using explicit concepts reflection, or
so as to guess at the future. Reflecting on how
reflection-on-action as Schon calls it. This
analogous past projects are likely to be with
necessarily comes distinctively after the action
the future, hopefully using a range of
(Schon 1995; Mathiassen and Purao 2002).
alternative concepts, does however seem
Smyth (1986) argues that technical reflection,
useful.
which involves evaluation of the adequacy of
skills and capabilities used for a particular
task, usually takes place immediately after the
SUMMATION
event when the consequences are known; This paper has argued for the pragmatic
higher levels of reflection take place later. intent of reflection. Pragmatism popularised
Smith and Lovat (1995) advise continuing reflection, but it has its own epistemology and
reflection over a prolonged period of time after ideology. This seems to have been repressed in
the action to ensure alternatives to the action much of the literature on reflection resulting in
taken are fully investigated. an exclusion of the pluralist dimension of
reflecting so central to pragmatism. What is
Reflection-on-action is often structured
reflected off alters what is seen. Developing
where actors are ‘coached’ through a series of
reflection skills becomes a matter of
activities (Seibert 1999) and learning and
developing innovative concepts against which
reflection are influenced by peers, supervisors
to reflect. Useful being defined as opening up
or educators so that it ‘takes on a social
alternative actions for people to take to
dimension’ (Jarvinen et al. 2001, p. 288).
improve their lives. For systems developers
Mezirow (1991, pp. 13) explains that this
this means looking for concepts like systems
reflection requires a ‘hiatus’ between action
thinking, critical social theory, e-commerce,
and reflection ‘to reassess one’s meaning
knowledge management, self-organisation and
perspectives and, if necessary, to transform
mobility to think about the action of designing
them.’ It is easy to see how concepts
of useful information systems.
reflections, perhaps using innovative concepts,
could be systematically applied as reflection-
on-action.

REFERENCES
Allport, G., The nature of prejudice, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley,1954.
Argyris, C., and D. Schon, Organizational Learning 11, (2 ed.) Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley
Publishing Company, 1996.
Bateson, G., Steps to an Ecology of Mind, St Albans, England: Granada Publishing Limited, 1973.
Bjerknes, G., "Dialectical Reflection in Information Systems Development", Scandanavian Journal of
Information Systems, 1992, 4, pp. 55-77

8
 Reflection, Pragmatism, Concepts and Intuition

Brockbank, A., and I. McGill, Facilitating Reflective Learning in Higher Education, Buckingham,
Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1998.
Brookfield, S., "Using Critical incidents to Explore Learners' Assumptions", in: Fostering Critical
Reflection in Adulthood, J. Mezirow (ed.), Jossey-Bass Inc, San Franscisco, 1990.
Courtney, J., D. Croasdell, and D. Paraadice, "Inquiring Organisations", Australian Journal of Information
Systems, 1998, 6:1.
Dahlbom, B., and L. Mathiassen, Computers in Context, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers Inc, 1995.
Dewey, J., How We Think, New York: Dover publications, 1910.
Dooley, J., "Problem-Solving as a Double-Loop System, Adaptive Learning Design", 1999, Available at:
http://www.well.com/user/dooley/problem-solving, last accessed November 2004.
Flood, R., and N. Romm, Diversity Management: Triple Loop Learning, New York; John Wiley & Sons
Ltd,. 1996.
Flowers, S., Software Failure: Management Failure, New York: John Wiley, 1996.
Gilbert, D.T., "How Mental Systems Believe", American Psychologist, 1991, 46(2), pp. 107-119.
Hatton, N. and D. Smith, "Reflection in Teacher Education: Towards Definition and Implementation",
Teaching and Teacher Education, 1995, 11:1, pp. 33 - 49.
Hookins, T., "Developing A Questioning Model" in: Ph.D, University of South Australia, 2005.
James W., Pragmatism, Cleveland: World Publishing (Meridian), 1907/1910
Jarvinen, A.and E. Poikela., "Modelling Reflective and Contextual Learning at Work", Journal of
Workplace Learning, 2001 13:7/8, pp. 282 - 289.
Jepsen, L.O., L.Mathiassen and P.A.Nielsen, "Using Diaries", Behaviour and Information Technology 1989,
8:3, pp. 109 - 124.
Kember, D., A. Jones, A. Loke, J. McKay, K. Sinclair, H. Tse, C. Webb, F. Wong, M. Wong, E. Yeung,
"Determining the level of reflective thinking from students' written journals using a coding scheme
based on the work of Mezirow", International Journal of Lifelong Education, 1999, 18:1, pp. 18 - 30.
Kemmis, S., "Action Research and the Politics of Reflection" in: Reflection: Turning Experience into
Learning, D. Walker (ed.), Kogan Page Ltd, London,. 1985.
King, P. M. and K. S. Kitchener, Developing Reflective Judgment, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
1994.
Knight, B., "Reflecting on 'reflective practice'", Studies in the Education of Adults, 1996, 28:2, pp. 162.
Lakoff, G., "The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor" in: Metaphor and Thought, A. Ortony (ed.),
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993, pp. 202-251.
Lee, D. and K. Sabatino, "Evaluating guided reflection: a US case study", International Journal of Training
and Development, 1998, 2:3, pp. 162-170.
Mathiassen, L., "Reflective Systems Development" in: Reflective Systems Development, 2002,
http://www.cs.auc.dk/~larsm/rsd.html, last accessed 18 September 2006
Mathiassen, L., and S. Purao, "Educating reflective systems developers", Information Systems Journal,
2002, 12, pp. 81-102.
McGill, I., and A. Brockbank, The Action Learning Handbook, (First ed.), London: RoutledgeFalmer, 2004.
Metcalfe, M., "Conjecture First Problem Solving", Systems Research and Behavioural Science, 2005, 22:6,
pp 537-546.
Mezirow, J., Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc, 1991.
Morgan, G., Images of Organization, Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications, 1986
Newell, A. and H.A. Simon, Human Problem Solving, Englewood Cliffs: N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1972
Pee, B., T. Woodman, H. Fry, E. Davenport, "Appraising and assessing reflecton in students' writing on a
structured worksheet", Medical Education, 2002, 36:6, pp. 575-585.
Pepper, S.C., World Hypotheses: A study in evidence, Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press,
1942
Piaget, J., Psychology and Epistemology, London: Allen Lane, 1973.
Pierce, C.S., "How to Make Our Ideas Clear", Popular Science Monthly, 1878, 12, pp. 286-302.

Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 7:4, 2006. 9

Maureen Lynch and Mike Metcalfe

Polya, G., How To Solve It, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1945.
Raelin, J., "Public Reflection as the Basis of Learning", Management Learning, 2001, 32:1, pp. 11-30.
Reynolds, M., "Reflection and Critical Reflection in Management Learning", Management Learning, 1998,
29:2, pp. 183-200.
Schon, D., The Reflective Practitioner, Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1995.
Seibert, K., "Reflection-in-Action: Tools for Cultivating On-the-job Learning Conditions", Organizational
Dynamics, 1999, 27:3, pp. 54-65.
Smith, D., and T. Lovat, Curriculum: Action on Reflection Revisited, (third ed.), Wentworth Falls, N.S.W.,
Australia: Social Science Press, 1995, pp. 279.
Smyth, W. J., Reflection-in-Action, Victoria, Australia Deakin University. 1986
Stein, D., "Teaching Critical Reflection. Myths and Realities No 7", Columbus, OH, Eric Clearing House on
Adult, Career and Vocational Education, 2000, http://www.inspirediving.com/business/reflection.htm,
Last accessed April 2004
Weber, R., "The Reflexive Researcher", MIS Quarterly, 2003, 27:4, Editorial, pp v-xiv.
Williamson, A., and C. Iliopoulos, "The learning organization information system (LOIS): looking for the
next generation", Information Systems Journal, 2001, 11, pp. 23 - 41.

AUTHORS
Maureen Lynch is a Mike Metcalfe presently
research associate in the works at the University of
Faculty of the Professions South Australia, where his
at the University of main duties are PhD thesis
Adelaide. Previously she adviser. His own PhD is
was the Program Director from Adelaide University,
for the Business on group problem solving.
Information Systems Co He has published 6 books
operative Program in the School of and over 60 lead author
Accounting and Information Systems at the refereed academic articles on problem solving
University of South Australia – a position she using pragmatic systems thinking and
held for four years. Before that, she lectured argumentative inquiry, in journals that include
in information systems both in South Australia Systems Research and Behavioral Science, IT
and overseas. Her research interests are in & People, Informal Logic and the European
reflective learning and, in particular, the Journal Of Information Systems. He grew up
design of journals to aid reflective learning. in England, Egypt, Germany, Wales, Aden,
and Singapore, moving to New Zealand in
1985. Mike has worked in the merchant navy,
the British Army Parachute Regiment
Reserves, the construction and food industry
as a system designer, six Universities as a
lecturer, and as senior policy adviser to the
Deputy Premier and Treasurer of South
Australia. http://www.business.unisa.edu.au/
management/Research/irg/

10