隨著全球化的發展，廿一世紀的國際安全情勢更為錯綜複雜，其中「恐怖攻擊」具備成本低、效果高、機動性強的條件，讓恐怖攻擊行動沒有時間、空間的限制，亦無道德、規範的侷限，此種全然改變戰爭本質的非傳統型態戰爭行為，儼然已成為危害國際社會發展與人類生存的一種新形態危機。 今日國際社會所要面對的「恐怖攻擊」危機，是由人為所誘發的危機。受到不同社會系統內政治、文化、經濟、種族、宗教等因素相對之間的動態性互動影響，使得危機的源頭更趨向於多元與複雜，因此，若能及早偵知危機預將發生或能判明引爆危機的原由，對於危機管理甚有助益。 針對「動態性複雜」問題，Peter M. Senge發展一套源自於系統動力學的「系統思考」途徑，透過「資訊回饋」的特性，由整體思考方式與觀察環狀因果的互動關係，能看出一再重複發生的結構型態，釐清複雜事件背後運作的簡單結構，並經由模式設計改善組織及工作指導準則。 研究發現，在危機管理的系統思考途徑中，事件層次的反應式作為僅能有限度地預防危機與處理危機；行為變化型態層次的順應變動中的趨勢，能從變動趨勢中警覺危機、發現危機與危機處理，若要全方位預防危機、有效危機處理以避免後遺，就必須從系統結構層次的觀點著手，改造行為的變化型態。 依據九一一事件的分析，人為所誘發危機的關鍵在於「人」，以及「人與人的互動關係」，爭奪的重點就在「利益」，也就是「得」與「失」之間；恐怖主義濫殺無辜，不可原諒也不可寬容，但另一方面，反恐政策也不應如美國政府在九一一事件後「擴張軍武、推銷軍售、共同發展武器」等作為就可以達成。 美、英等強權國家在探討反恐策略為何失敗、譴責恐怖攻擊手段兇殘之際，是否也應該反省文明衝突與族群對立的源頭，以及阿富汗、伊拉克人民的死傷慘狀，以及在其他地方所發生的殺戮與飢餓問題，才能避免強權國家一意孤行的後果，由全球的無辜者共同承擔。同時，基於地球的資源有限，如何和平共處、分享資源，才是遠離「人為誘發危機」的最佳方法。 / Following the development of globalization, the international security situation of 21st century becomes more complicated. The "terror attack" has the conditions of low cost, high effect, and high mobility, which make the terrorist no limitation of time and space and no restriction of moral and norm. The kind of non-traditional type warfare behavior completely changes the nature of war. That solemnly becomes the new type crisis to endanger the development of international community and the existence of human being. Today’s international community should face the "terror attack" crisis which is brought out by mankind. The factors of politics, culture, economy, race, and religion of different kind of community systems have relatively dynamic interaction effect which makes the crisis origin trend to more diverse and complicated. For this reason, if we can early detect the cause of the crisis, when and where, it will be very helpful for crisis management. Being aimed at "dynamic complexity", Peter M. Senge developed the "systems thinking" approach from systematic dynamics which goes through the characteristic of "information feedback" from the interaction of integrated thought manner and observed circle effect, and find out the repeated configuration to clear the back performance of simple structure of complicated event, and improve the guidelines of organization and work by mode design. Findings discover that during the approach of systems thinking of crisis management, event-arrangement behavior can only limitedly prevent from crisis and handle crisis. The variation-orientated trend of behavior variation arrangement can watch crisis, discover crisis, and handle crisis from variation trend. If someone wants to dimensionally prevent crisis, effectively handle crisis and avoid sequela, he should do it from the viewpoint of systematic constructive arrangement and to change the behavior variation type. According the 911 analysis, the key point of man-made crisis is "man", and the key point of argument from "interaction of the men" is "benefit", which is between "to gain" and "to lose". The terrorism causes the death of innocence, which can not be forgiven. But in the other side, counter-terrorist policy should not be achieved by "arms drive, promoting military sale, and mutually developing weapons", provided from US government after 9/11. When the powerful states, such as US, UK, probe into failure of counter-terrorist policy and condemn the cruel measure of terrorist attack, they should make themselves-examination of the fountainhead of civilization conflict and clan confrontation, and the casualty of Afghanistan and Irapi, and the slaughter and starvation of other places. Considering those things, we can avoid the result of powerful state doing, which put on the innocence of the world. At the same time, based on the limited resources of the earth, the best way to keep off "man-made crisis" is to live peace and to share resources.

What usually goes unaddressed in the consultancy literature is an exploration of how consultants make sense of their contributions in particular when they come to work in politically laden contexts. Resulting conflictual debates with clients and colleagues severely influence how their advice is responded to. Against this background, consultants’ ability to determine and predict future outcomes of their work is hardly problematized. Additionally, consultants are mutually dependent on both colleagues and clients. This dependency underpins power differentials and the struggle which arises when these are contested can often take violent forms, such as misrecognition, humiliation or public shaming. The central argument put forward in this thesis is that tolerating (the potential for) misrecognition and/or for violence when goals are not met or when power fluctuates is an important, yet rarely mentioned, aspect for being recognized as a consultant. These aspects deserve as much attention as the often ideal-typical forms management consulting is said to take in the mainstream management literature because they speak to the irremediably incomplete and rather probabilistic nature of consultants’ advice, and the multiplicity of (often not anticipated or undesired) meanings their work evokes. In order to make sense of the flux and flow of organizational activity, the plethora of responses such activity calls out and its attendant ambiguities are considered and critically reflected upon. The theory of complex responsive processes of relating (Stacey, 2007, 2010; Griffin, 2002; Shaw, 2002), theories of recognition, (Honneth, 1994, 2008; Kearney, 2003; Ricoeur, 2005), Hegelian dialectics and neo-pragmatist thought (Bernstein, 1983, 1991) are provided as non-orthodox views on human organizing. A perspective is proffered which pays attention to the inchoate, ambivalent and indeterminate dimensions of organizing as a way to make sense of how these simultaneously and paradoxically order, regularize, and normalize human activity. Particular attention will be paid to negotiations which take place in microinteractions to exemplify that it is not pre-planned human cooperation but the intermingling of intentions of people who are mutually dependent on one another which paradoxically gives rise to regular population-wide patterns and spontaneous change. To make sense of what these insights mean for a practising consultant a view is offered where our reflections (thought) on our interactions (practice) at once form and are being formed by one another. An attempt is made to move beyond the practice/theory dualism by taking a pragmatist view which claims that thought and action only ever arise together, thus rendering an understanding of consultative intervention in which thought comes before action idealized and rather dubious. It will be argued that the most important contribution consultants can make is to try to stay radically open, and to try to keep on exploring as long as possible the multiplicity of narratives which constitute the differing perspectives of organizational reality.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-05T17:05:26Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 23 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / A presente pesquisa volta-se ao estudo de perdas não técnicas de distribuição de energia elétrica, visando a proposição de um plano estruturado de ações para atenuação do problema a partir de um método que alia as abordagens de Pensamento Sistêmico e Planejamento por Cenários (PSPC) e do Processo de Pensamento da Teoria das Restrições (PP TOC). Para tanto, será adotada a pesquisa-ação, através das etapas de exploração, pesquisa aprofundada, ação e avaliação. O referencial teórico necessário para a realização da pesquisa aborda os temas Perdas Não Técnicas de energia elétrica, Pensamento Sistêmico, Planejamento por Cenários, Método PSPC e Processo de Pensamento da Teoria das Restrições. O plano de ação obtido resulta de uma visão compreensiva da realidade estudada e de uma abordagem estruturada para a atenuação de perdas não técnicas no contexto abordado. As ações resultantes foram analisadas e a avaliação dos resultados atingidos com a pesquisa foi realizada de forma qualitativa por meio de entrevistas a três / This research turns to the study of non-technical losses in electricity distribution, aimed at proposing a structured plan of action to reduce the problem from a method that combines the approaches of Systems Thinking and Planning Scenarios(PSPC) and Thinking Process of the Theory of Constraints (PP TOC). To do so, will be adopted action research, through the stages of exploration, deep research, action and evaluation. The theoretical framework necessary for carrying out the research addresses the issues non-technical losses of electricity, Systems Thinking, Planning Scenarios, PSPC Method and Thinking Process of the Theory of Constraints. The plan of action obtained results from a comprehensive view of reality studied and a structured approach to the mitigation of non-technical losses to the context discussed. The actions were analyzed and the evaluation of the results achieved by the research was conducted qualitatively through interviews with three distinct audiences: the multidisciplinary team involved in

Submitted by Maicon Juliano Schmidt (maicons) on 2015-06-05T13:48:30Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Guilherme Sperling Trapp.pdf: 2436697 bytes, checksum: e28516dbd4b7d9f11a41310b229ce39a (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-06-05T13:48:30Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Guilherme Sperling Trapp.pdf: 2436697 bytes, checksum: e28516dbd4b7d9f11a41310b229ce39a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-03-05 / CAPES - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / O mercado de geração de energia está em contínua expansão no Brasil. Este mercado é formado por diferentes fontes de geração de energia, as quais acarretam diferentes impactos socioeconômicos e ambientais atreladas as suas operações. Estes impactos geram externalidades na forma de dano para a sociedade e a compensação destes não é de consenso comum entre os atores envolvidos. Neste sentido, a presente dissertação busca, através da aplicação do método do pensamento sistêmico, criar um modelo computacional de dinâmica de sistemas que possibilite a avaliação do custo sistêmico total, considerando as externalidades sociais econômicas e ambientais da geração de energia. Para este fim foi aplicada uma adaptação do método do PSPC - Pensamento Sistêmico e Planejamento por Cenários. Na primeira fase, gerou-se um entendimento maior sobre a temática; em seguida,realizou-se a construção do modelo computacional; e, posteriormente, o modelo foi aplicado a três usinas reais a fim de se fazer uma avaliação da inserção da energia eólica frente a substituição das fontes hidroelétrica e termoelétrica a carvão. Os resultados obtidos apresentaram uma evolução no entendimento na comparação do real custo da energia para sociedade, devido ao aprendizado proporcionado pela utilização do pensamento sistêmico em conjunto com a modelagem dinâmica de sistemas. Os dados encontrados também apontaram para uma mudança nas decisões sobre a matriz energética, se adotado um custo sistêmico para avaliação de novos projetos. / The power generation market still expanding in Brazil. This market consists of different sources of power generation, which cause different socioeconomic and environmental impacts besides its operations. These impacts generate externalities in the form of damage to society and the compensation of these are not common consensus among stakeholders. In this way, this thesis research through the application of systems thinking method, create a computer model of systems dynamic that enable the evaluation of the total systemic cost, considering the externalities of power generation. To this end was applied an adaptation of the method PSPC - Systems Thinking and Planning for Scenarios. In the first phase was generate a greater understanding on the subject. After there was the construction of the computational model, and finally the model was applied to three real plants in order to assessment the option of wind energy against replacement of hydroelectric sources and thermal coal. The results showed an evolution in understanding the comparison of the real cost of energy to society due to the learning provided by the use of systems thinking in conjunction with the systems dynamic modeling. The data also pointed to a change in decisions about energy matrix, if adopted a total systemic cost for evaluation of new projects.

Submitted by Silvana Teresinha Dornelles Studzinski (sstudzinski) on 2016-12-22T15:47:04Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Rodrigo Girotto Nuncio_.pdf: 9015441 bytes, checksum: ba36ba65e33dd26150cf94e964a158aa (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-12-22T15:47:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rodrigo Girotto Nuncio_.pdf: 9015441 bytes, checksum: ba36ba65e33dd26150cf94e964a158aa (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-10-28 / Nenhuma / No atual contexto de ambientes complexos, competitivos e dinâmicos, estratégia é um tema amplamente estudado nas organizações e academias. No entanto, há poucos estudos sobre desdobramento e implementação da estratégia em si, bem como sobre a eficácia de sua implementação. Este estudo propõe a investigação dos principais fatores causadores das discrepâncias entre os objetivos do planejamento estratégico e o resultado obtido ao final da execução do plano. Dessa forma, objetiva estudar os fatores considerados como críticos para o processo de desdobramento. Para tal investigação, a pesquisa utiliza os artifícios do pensamento sistêmico para analisar as relações causais que há entre as variáveis encontradas através de uma pesquisa bibliográfica e por meio de uma pesquisa de campo com profissionais da área do planejamento e execução da estratégia. Ao final, este trabalho faz a proposição de um artefato que auxilia a mitigar os fatores críticos do processo de desdobramento. Como método de pesquisa, utiliza-se o Design Science Research para nortear os passos condutores do estudo e construir o artefato proposto. Esta pesquisa é, ao seu final, avaliada e validada por especialistas da área de estratégia empresarial. / In the current context of complex, competitive and dynamic environments, strategy is a topic widely studied in organizations and academies. However, there are few studies on deployment and implementation of the strategy itself, as well as on the effectiveness of its implementation. This study aims to investigate the main factors causing the discrepancies between the objectives arising from the strategic planning and the result at the end of the implementation of the plan, regarded as critical to the deployment process. For this investigation, this research uses the artifice of systems thinking to analyze the causal relationships between the variables found through a literature search and a field research with professionals of strategy planning and execution. At the end this paper propose an artefact to assist in mitigating the critical factors for the deployment process. As a research method, this paper uses the Design Science Research as guiding the step in conducting the research and construction of the proposed artefact. This research is, at the end, evaluated and validated by experts in the field of business strategy.

因應未來社會，需要從教育的點滴工程著手。學校為教育的主要場域，教師的教學影響學生學習的成效與關鍵能力的養成。面對複雜而快速變遷的時代，需要培育出具有良好思考力、未來想像力以及團隊合作能力的下一代。本研究採取個案研究方法，以一所位於台北市區國小內高年級的班級做為研究對象，此班級利用綜合活動時間實施系統思考教學，當中包含任教教師與26位學生，利用教室觀察與訪談法、輔以影片分析、學生作品分析、系統思考活動評量、學生自陳式反思問卷、想像力測驗、時間觀量表等工具，探究實施系統思考教學的教師角色(包含教師個人特質、工作動機、專業知能、教學信念和教學技巧)與系統思考教學的交互影響；對於教師班級經營、師生互動與班級氣氛的營造，進一步探究綜合教學實施與經營，與學生對於系統思考的理解和養成之間的關係。再者探究教學活動與培養學生未來想像力之關聯，而課程當中融入小組討論和遊戲教學，藉此探究教學歷程與學生團隊合作能力培養的相關性。本研究以因果回饋圖呈現研究結果，主要發現有以下五點: 1.系統思考教師扮演教室的結構者、引導者，時時精進系統思考認知與教學技巧，帶領學生關注根本重要的事。 2.系統思考教學實施增進師生互動關係和班級正向氣氛，鼓勵學生討論、發表意見與想法，營造班級共同思考與學習的氛圍。 3.系統思考教學培養學生系統思考力，從小關注世界當中重要的事件，瞭解其趨勢變化與關鍵結構，嘗試根本解決問題。 4.系統思考教學實施幫助啟發學生未來想像力，鬆動思考開啟創意想像，展開未來行動具備未來時間觀。 5.系統思考教學當中活動的形態，有助於學生提升團隊合作技巧與能力進而建立共同願景。 由以上研究結果瞭解系統思考教學教師扮演重要的結構者，啟發學生展開思考、想像，進而自主學習創造未來。在未來若要讓系統思考教學更能培養學生面對未來的關鍵能力，教師在課程設計上應將系統思考和未來想像的精神相結合，並且拉長時間、擴大空間，讓學生擁有充分的自主空間，學習思考，掌握根本而重要的事。 / Nowadays schools are still playing an important role in our education. We have to improve our education to let our children adapt to their futures. The way of teaching will influence our students’ learning. In the future world, we should cultivate our children the abilities of thinking skills, future imagination, and teamwork. The current case study selected a sixth grade class in elementary school. There were two teachers and 26 students in this class. In this study, sources and analyses of the data included: classroom observations, interviews, video analyses, students’ work analyses, systems thinking assessments, imagination tests, and ZTPI. Through the data analysis process, it can be inferred that whether the teaching of systems thinking can influence the teachers and students in the class.The purpose of this research is to use the systems perspective on offering advice and ideas regarding how to use systems thinking teaching in class to improve the students’ learning.The results are listed below: 1.Teachers played a role of guiding students and leaded them to what concerns to the root of any given problem. 2.Teaching processes included enhancing good interactions between teachers and students, and building up the positive classroom climate.Through these processes, students had more chances to discuss and share with each others.At the same time, they showed much respect for others, such as listening to others patiently. 3.With the systems thinking ability, students started to care about what is happening around the world and to attend the changing trend.They try to find the important structure behind the problem and solve it with leverage solution. 4.This class inspired students’ future imagination, expanded their ways of thinking and encouraged them to take actions for the future. 5.Through this class, students gained more team work skills and built shared visions. To conclude, the teaching of systems thinking can help our children to think more deeply and systematically. This way of teaching encourages our children to broaden their minds and take actions for their futures.If teacher can combine systems thinking with future imagination in instructional design, students can have more opportunities and time to learn what is the most important value in their life.

The purpose of this study was to make a contribution towards decision–making in complex environmental problems, especially where data is limited and associated with a high degree of uncertainty. As a young scientist, I understood the value of science as a measuring and quantification tool and used to intuitively believe that science was exact and could provide undisputable answers. It was in 1997, during the Safety Assessments done at the Vaalputs National Radioactive Waste Repository that my belief system was challenged. This occurred after there were numerous scientific studies done on the site that was started since the early 1980’s, yet with no conclusion as to how safe the site is in terms of radioactive waste disposal. The Safety Assessment process was developed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to transform the scientific investigations and data into decision–making information for the purposes of radioactive waste management. It was also during the Vaalputs investigations when I learned the value of lateral thinking. There were numerous scientists with doctorate and master’s degrees that worked on the site of which I was one. One of the important requirements was to measure evaporation at the local weather station close to the repository. It was specifically important to measure evaporation as a controlling parameter in the unsaturated zone models. Evaporation was measured with an Apan that is filled with water so that the losses can be measured. Vaalputs is a very dry place and water is scarce. The local weather station site was fenced off, but there was a problem in that the aardvark dug below the fence and drank the water in the A–pan, so that no measurements were possible. The solution from the scientists was to put the fence deeper into the ground. The aardvark did not find it hard to dig even deeper. The next solution was to put a second fence around the weather station and again the aardvark dug below it to drink the water. It was then that Mr Robbie Schoeman, a technician became aware of the problem and put a drinking water container outside the weather station fence for the aardvark and – the problem was solved at a fraction of the cost of the previous complex solutions. I get in contact with the same thinking patterns that intuitively expect that the act of scientific investigations will provide decision–making information or even solve the problem. If the investigation provides more questions than answers, the quest is for more and more data on more detailed scales. There is a difference between problem characterization and solution viidentification. Problem characterization requires scientific and critical thinking, which is an important component but that has to be incorporated with the solution identification process of creative thinking towards decision–making. I am a scientist by heart, but it was necessary to realise that apart from research, practical science must feed into a higher process, such as decision–making to be able to make a practical difference. The process of compilation of this thesis meant a lot to me as I initially thought of doing a PhD and then it changed me, especially in the way I think. This was a life changing process, which is good. As Jesus said in Mathew 3:2 And saying, Repent (think differently; change your mind, regretting your sins and changing your conduct), for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Geography and Environmental Studies))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

The purpose of this study was to make a contribution towards decision–making in complex environmental problems, especially where data is limited and associated with a high degree of uncertainty. As a young scientist, I understood the value of science as a measuring and quantification tool and used to intuitively believe that science was exact and could provide undisputable answers. It was in 1997, during the Safety Assessments done at the Vaalputs National Radioactive Waste Repository that my belief system was challenged. This occurred after there were numerous scientific studies done on the site that was started since the early 1980’s, yet with no conclusion as to how safe the site is in terms of radioactive waste disposal. The Safety Assessment process was developed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to transform the scientific investigations and data into decision–making information for the purposes of radioactive waste management. It was also during the Vaalputs investigations when I learned the value of lateral thinking. There were numerous scientists with doctorate and master’s degrees that worked on the site of which I was one. One of the important requirements was to measure evaporation at the local weather station close to the repository. It was specifically important to measure evaporation as a controlling parameter in the unsaturated zone models. Evaporation was measured with an Apan that is filled with water so that the losses can be measured. Vaalputs is a very dry place and water is scarce. The local weather station site was fenced off, but there was a problem in that the aardvark dug below the fence and drank the water in the A–pan, so that no measurements were possible. The solution from the scientists was to put the fence deeper into the ground. The aardvark did not find it hard to dig even deeper. The next solution was to put a second fence around the weather station and again the aardvark dug below it to drink the water. It was then that Mr Robbie Schoeman, a technician became aware of the problem and put a drinking water container outside the weather station fence for the aardvark and – the problem was solved at a fraction of the cost of the previous complex solutions. I get in contact with the same thinking patterns that intuitively expect that the act of scientific investigations will provide decision–making information or even solve the problem. If the investigation provides more questions than answers, the quest is for more and more data on more detailed scales. There is a difference between problem characterization and solution viidentification. Problem characterization requires scientific and critical thinking, which is an important component but that has to be incorporated with the solution identification process of creative thinking towards decision–making. I am a scientist by heart, but it was necessary to realise that apart from research, practical science must feed into a higher process, such as decision–making to be able to make a practical difference. The process of compilation of this thesis meant a lot to me as I initially thought of doing a PhD and then it changed me, especially in the way I think. This was a life changing process, which is good. As Jesus said in Mathew 3:2 And saying, Repent (think differently; change your mind, regretting your sins and changing your conduct), for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Geography and Environmental Studies))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011.

This exploratory qualitative case study provides a description of the Glencree Centre for Peace and Reconciliation’s practice in addressing deep-rooted conflict, from the Republic of Ireland. This research grew out of practical problems from the field of conflict resolution in Canada, in particular interest-based mediation, in addressing deep-rooted conflict. Using an extended epistemology, data is harvested from praxis to create naturalistic generalizations: guidelines for addressing deep-rooted conflict. The research findings are the result of a synthesis of three data sources: interviews with facilitators from Glencree, textual data, and nearly five months of onsite observation. The main themes derived from the research include: Glencree’s Diverse Practice; Glencree’s Approach to Conflict; Glencree’s Identity; Glencree’s Approach to Deep-Rooted Conflict; and Implementing Glencree’s Approach. This study is intended as a snapshot in time of a set of dynamic and emergent ideas addressing conflict in practice. Through an inductive research design, findings from praxis are related to theory from the field of conflict resolution. In addition, implications for addressing deep-rooted conflict are identified, including Glencree’s emphasis on the need for flexibility as a characteristic for conflict work, and an underlying worldview incorporating aspects of dynamic systems theory and chaos theory.

This study examines the emerging notion of learning partnerships. As the study of such partnerships is a nascent research field, no single definition has yet emerged in the literature. However, within an uncertain and rapidly changing global context, two strategic initiatives have been identified which will support individuals, communities and organisations in their transition to a knowledge-based economy whilst building capacity for change and renewal. These two strategies are fostering learning communities/regions/towns and developing learning partnerships between multiple stakeholders. The term "learning partnership" has appeared in a wide variety of literatures including those of adult learning, management, social science and education. Working papers and emerging case reports identify a diversity of applications and a range of operational models or configurations that link multiple stakeholders. Learning partnerships have been associated with vocational education and training, innovation and research, lifelong learning, organisational learning and knowledge cultivation. These literatures reveal a paucity of Australian research to explain how multiple stakeholders form and develop these configurations, particularly in the Queensland context. The purpose of this study is to build deeper understanding of the meaning of a learning partnership in the Australian and (more precisely) the Queensland context. A working definition of a learning partnership, adopted as the basis for the research, indicates a strategy designed to foster continuous learning, collaboration, innovation and renewal in response to the demands of the knowledge-based economy and knowledge and learning societies. The research focuses on organisational arrangements in order for the researcher to gain deeper understanding from the key stakeholders in their work environments. Three diverse situations were selected for detailed exploration of their issues, relationships, activities, processes and working knowledge. With a view to contributing to emerging theory, an organisational case study methodology was adopted to identify and explore the nature of the relationships and issues confronting the key stakeholders in three Queensland-based learning partnerships. An interpretive theoretical framework draws on the social theory of symbolic interactionism and the "systems thinking" of General Systems Theory. An interpretivist perspective influenced the case study research strategy and guided data collection, analysis and reporting. Within the case studies, data collection methods included observations, informal meetings, synergetic focus groups, semi-structured interviews, diary notes, researcher memos and documents. From these multiple data sources, the researcher was able to assemble three case files. The inductive process for within-case analysis for the case reports, and later, cross-case analysis, integrated as a form of constant comparison technique, was used as a basis for presenting findings. These findings are reported as three separate "in progress" models to address three interrelated research questions. The case reports explain complex and interconnected organisational arrangements - evolving, adapting and responding to internal and external tensions. While there is considerable activity which could be regarded as representing learning partnerships, there is no cohesive policy framework to support such partnerships, and much ambiguity, "muddy" definitions and unclear terminology. It appears that a "new breed" of knowledge-worker is emerging - linking, networking, interacting, exchanging - to work across organisational intersections. The study shows that like "herding cats", co-ordinating and managing the inter relationships at the organisational intersection take time, resources, vision, processes for interaction, individual willingness and "in-kind" support. Whilst there is opportunity for linking disparate groups to cross-fertilise ideas, working knowledge, and information, and there is the potential to cultivate a knowledge and learning ecosystem (a fertile compost heap for knowledge generation and an innovative learning system) - "intellectual horsepower" - such configurations may also derail, realign or stagnate. It is individual stakeholders who form the relationships, interact, share ideas, and build networks, and it is the individual who maintains the relationships, engages in the process and learns from the experience. Therein lies a paradox between the strength of diversity of the collective (synergies) and their weakness as the relationships may be compromised by a single individual who withdraws or transfers. Drawing on a computing analogy, this could be akin to "corruption" in a system which may not be sufficiently robust to tolerate ambiguity, or a system that is too inflexible to survive threats while maintaining the momentum to adapt and renew. On the basis of this research it would appear that a more robust or resilient paradigm is emerging with interconnected, blurred boundaries and much "talking and thinking" about more sustainable futures. The study identifies these as indicative of wider social and economic changes. The thesis proposes three conceptual models as particularly useful in interpreting these "shifting systems and shifting paradigms": the concentric, the centripetal, and the plutonic.