Wicked Problems and New Ways of Organizing: How Fe y Alegria Confronted Changing Manifestations of Poverty

Abstract

Abstract Wicked problems are causally complex, lack definite solutions, and re-emerge in different guises. This paper discusses how new ways of organizing emerge to tackle changing manifestations of wicked problems. Focusing on the wicked problem of poverty, we conducted a longitudinal study of Fe y Alegria (FyA), one of the world’s largest non-governmental organization, which provides education for the poor across 21 countries in Latin America and Africa. Drawing on archival and ethnographic data, we trace the historical narratives of how FyA defined poverty as a problem and developed new ways of organizing, from its foundation by a Jesuit priest in 1955 to its current networked structure. Our findings reveal the ongoing cycle of interpretive problem definition and organizing solutions for wicked problems. First, since there is no “true” formulation of a wicked problem, actors construct narrative explanations based on their understanding of the problem. Second, organizational solutions to a wicked problem are thus reflections of these narrative constructions. Third, emerging and changing narratives about what the problem is inspire new organizational responses. Our findings provide insights into the dynamic relationship between organizing for wicked problems, narratives, and the changing manifestations of wicked problems and grand challenges more broadly. Keywords Narratives Wicked problems Grand challenges Poverty Education Ways of organizing Citation Pradilla, C.A., da Silva, J.B. and Reinecke, J. (2022), "Wicked Problems and New Ways of Organizing: How Fe y Alegria Confronted Changing Manifestations of Poverty", Gümüsay, A.A., Marti, E., Trittin-Ulbrich, H. and Wickert, C. (Ed.) Organizing for Societal Grand Challenges (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 79), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 93-114. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X20220000079007 Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited Copyright © 2022 Camilo Arciniegas Pradilla, Jose Bento da Silva and Juliane Reinecke License This chapter is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial & non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode Introduction Recent years have seen increasing interest in understanding how organizations deal with wicked problems (Dorado & Ventresca, 2013; Ferlie, Fitzgerald, McGivern, Dopson, & Bennett, 2013; Grint, 2014; Reinecke & Ansari, 2016). Wicked problems are defined as societal issues that are extremely difficult or maybe even impossible to solve due to their incompleteness, ambiguity, and changing nature (Rittel & Webber, 1973). Previous studies on wicked problems have revealed the importance of framing the problem and its root cause(s) in ways that mobilize action amidst conflicting stakeholder values (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016), as well as the challenge of knowledge uncertainty when information regarding the problem and its solutions is incomplete (Brook, Pedler, Abbott, & Burgoyne, 2016; Camillus, 2008). However, scholars have recently begun to explore how organizations manage the dynamic complexity of wicked problems, which results from the unpredictable and unexpected ways in which wicked problems unfold due to interdependencies between known and unknown factors (Dentoni, Bitzer, & Schouten, 2018). Contextual complexity requires organizations to adapt and increase their own complexity accordingly (Schneider, Wickert, & Marti, 2017). Thus, organizing for wicked problems cannot be static, as wicked problems continually change and re-emerge in new guises. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the following question: How do organizations deal with the changing manifestations of wicked problems? The exploratory scope of the research question called for a qualitative inquiry. We chose to conduct a historical narrative analysis of the multinational non-governmental organization Fe y Alegria (which literally translates as “Faith and Joy,” and is hereafter abbreviated as “FyA”). Since its creation in 1955 in Caracas, Venezuela, FyA has been attempting to alleviate poverty through education in developing countries. We combined archival documents with semi-structured interviews of FyA members and ethnographic observations in FyA schools. This data set enabled reconstruction of the historical narratives defining poverty at different periods in the organization’s history, the changing organizational responses, and the organizational contexts in which these responses were elicited. Our findings reveal three critical insights on organizing for the changing manifestations of wicked problems. First, wicked problems such as poverty are constructed based on actors’ confrontation and interpretation of the problem in concrete action contexts. Second, how a wicked problem is constructed is intertwined with how responses are organized. Third, emerging and changing narratives about what the problem is inspire new organizational responses. These three points explain why the cycle of problem definition and organizing solutions is ongoing. This paper contributes to the literature on organizing for complex societal problems such as grand challenges and wicked problems by challenging us to rethink our objectives and understandings when studying them. Whereas these problems are currently studied as single entities whose solutions can be standardized and deployed, we emphasize their uniqueness and the narrative construction that shapes organizational responses, encouraging scholars and practitioners to embrace the dynamic complexity of the problem. Theoretical Context Wicked Problems Organizational scholars have recently focused on large-scale problems that are extremely complex, present little clarity, and involve multiple stakeholders (Ferraro, Etzion, & Gehman, 2015; George, Howard-Grenville, Joshi, & Tihanyi, 2016). Unlike the concept of grand challenges, which encompasses the possibility of solving an important societal problem through widespread implementation (George et al., 2016), the class of problems classified as “wicked” (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016) have no solution by definition. To illustrate, overcoming COVID-19 by developing a vaccine is very challenging but achievable in principle (and thus a grand challenge), whereas the wider problem of providing equitable access to medicine and vaccines across the world is wicked because it involves collaboration and interaction between multiple actors with different interests and priorities. Notwithstanding debates about whether wicked and tame problems can be ontologically demarcated (Alford & Head, 2017), the notion of “wickedness” provides a conceptual challenge to the ideology that all problems are solvable through proper managerial interventions. First introduced by Rittel and Webber (1973, p. 106), the concept of wicked problem denotes a social problem which is “ill-defined” and “never solved.” Examples of wicked problems include poverty (Dorado & Ventresca, 2013), inequality (Reinecke, 2018), climate change (Ansari, Wijen, & Gray, 2013; Schüssler, Rüling, & Wittneben, 2014), humanitarian crises (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016), illegal drug use (George et al., 2016), and health inequalities (Ferlie et al., 2013). Rittel and Webber (1973) introduced the notion of wicked problems to critique systems theory and two of its tenets: the belief in the possibility of establishing “explicit goals” (p. 156) and the belief in the “makeability” (p. 158) of the future. According to Rittel and Webber (1973), these two tenets of modern systems theory apply only to tame problems. Wicked problems, by contrast, always manifest a set of characteristics which all point to the impossibility of clearly defining the problem and, consequently, of solving it. For Rittel and Webber (1973, p. 161), “problem understanding and problem resolution are concomitant to each other.” This means we can only solve the problems which we can fully define. However, wicked problems have multiple explanations, with none being completely accurate. This complicates attempts to create diagnostic frames that define their cause, prognostic frames that identify possible solutions, and motivational frames that mobilize action if the problem seems intractable (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016). Therefore, it is impossible to determine whether a wicked problem has been solved. Because there is no way of testing eventual solutions to wicked problems, they can only be “re-solved” (Rittel & Webber, 1973, p. 160) once the consequences of eventual solutions unfold over time. The unfolding of an eventual solution always produces collateral effects or unintended consequences, which may be irreversible, thereby generating new eventual solutions. The fact that this cycle repeats indefinitely points to the uniqueness of the wicked problem. Organizing for Wicked Problems The implication of Rittel and Webber (1973) definition is that there is no single way of organizing for a wicked problem. Tackling a wicked problem entails facing the unknown, requiring the ability to organize for constant changes and increased levels of conflict among stakeholders. Hence, wicked problems require delving into social processes and collective dynamics (Weber & Khademian, 2008) that are extremely complex and impossible to simplify. Moreover, “solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false, but good-or-bad” (Rittel & Webber, 1973, p. 162). Multiple actors will always “differ widely” about any solution, not least because of their differing “value-sets” (p. 163). The proposed solutions for wicked problems are therefore highly normative and emotional (Grint, 2014), and might emerge from “a dynamic dialogical process in which relations between moral schemes are constantly (re-)negotiated through dynamic exchange” (Reinecke, van Bommel, & Spicer, 2017, p. 33). Such a dialogical approach can lead to normative compliance (Grint, 2014), resulting in some form of alignment of the multiple actors’ value regimes (Levy, Reinecke, & Manning, 2016). However, this normative alignment can only be achieved where all involved actors want to tackle the problem: “you cannot force people to follow you in addressing a Wicked Problem because the nature of the problem demands that followers have to want to help” (Grint, 2014, p. 245). For these reasons, organizations must resist the temptation to try to convert complex problems “into tractable managerial challenges” (George et al., 2016, p. 1887). Instead, organizations must find ways of dealing with three interlinked challenges that stem from the nature of wicked problems (Dentoni et al., 2018): (a) organizing for the unknown, (b) constantly (re-)aligning the value regimes of multiple actors, and (c) tackling the dynamic complexity that results from the unfolding character (i.e., constant change) of the wicked problem. We expand on these three characteristics below. First, wicked problems challenge an organizational design approach because “one cannot first understand, then solve” (Rittel & Webber, 1973, p. 162). In a complex problem setting, actors confront new problems that are unforeseen and possibly unforeseeable at the time they begin attempting to tackle the original problem. Drawing on pragmatist philosophy, scholars have conceptualized this as a problem of uncertainty. Grounding on Dewey, James, Mead, and Peirce, uncertainty diminishes as experimentation in the heart of social processes provides truth-value meanings for practical consequences. In this sense, organizing for wicked problems occurs not through abstract planning and theorization but, instead, through responding to concrete, situational problems that require engagement in problem-solving activities. A continual problem means that organizational solutions are always works in progress, rather than final products. Hence, organizing for wicked problems is a process of dynamic, ongoing interactions between emerging challenges and attempts to address them in concrete situations (Ansell, 2011). Second, organizations tackling wicked problems must find ways of accommodating different values and interests. This is important as the multiple actors involved may differ widely about the cause of the problem, possible solutions, and who should be held responsible for addressing it. Scholars have argued that “responsibility can be attributed to a target by framing an issue and its root cause in ways that allow such an attribution” (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016, p. 299). This can lead to framing contests and definitional struggles. Moreover, some actors are more likely to engage with wicked problems, for instance, when public awareness provides specific advantages in terms of reputation or sales and when there are clear benefits resulting from collective action (Dorado & Ventresca, 2013). Theoretically, drawing on pragmatist ideas, Ferraro et al. (2015) propose that accommodating different values and interests can be achieved through a participatory architecture and multivocal inscriptions. A participatory architecture comprises a structure and a set of rules that enable constructive interaction over time, while multivocal inscriptions privilege discursive and material activities representing a wide range of heterogenous actors, thus promoting coordinated action. By providing a degree of common ground, participatory structures guide the plurality of projects and goals of different constituents in a common direction. Finally, organizations tackling a wicked problem must address its unfolding nature, namely its constant changes over time. Rittel and Webber (1973) suggest it is impossible to determine whether a wicked problem has been solved. This poses challenges in terms of the allocation and exhaustion of resources. Moreover, the solutions deployed can create unintended consequences changing the nature or understanding of the original problem. The infinite cycle of responding to what the problem was and creating unintended consequences means that the problem to tackle is never the same. Some scholars have focused on the role of organizational forms and structures in tackling wicked problems. Schneider et al. (2017) argue that organizations may respond to environmental complexity by creating internal complexity or also collaborative complexity. One form of collaborative complexity are networked governance structures, which enhance opportunity discovery, innovation, and decentralization by promoting inter-organizational learning and joint problem-solving (Ferlie et al., 2013). It may also be argued that hybrid organizations, which combine different institutional logics (Gümüsay, Smets, & Morris, 2020), are better equipped to deal with value plurality and adapt faster to internal and external changes. Our study expands on the organizational challenge by exploring how organizations deal with the changing manifestations of wicked problems. Poverty as a Wicked Problem Poverty is a good example of a wicked problem, not least because it is hard to find agreement on its definition, cause(s), and solution(s) among academics. As reflected in Goal 1 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (“End poverty in all its forms everywhere”), poverty is a widely recognized social problem. Yet from a historical perspective, the social and material conditions that we today associate with “poverty” had to be first transformed into an identifiable social problem through historical frames and narrative explanations before they could be problematized (Wadhwani, 2018). What we term “poverty” is rooted in multiple social, historical, structural, political, geographic, economic, and other patterns and conditions (Woodward & Abdallah, 2010). It has many symptoms and can be the consequence of other problems. Poverty is commonly conceptualized in terms of measurable income or resources (Townsend & Gordon, 2000). The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP, 2016) defines poverty as the lack of necessary goods and services for an individual’s well-being, leading to material and physical deprivation. Based on this income-based definition, international agencies have defined poverty in terms of poverty lines, average household income, and international comparatives for the price of goods (Woodward & Abdallah, 2010). Scholars have increasingly challenged defining poverty in economic terms. Most prominently, Sen (2000) redefined poverty as lack of freedom, rather than income, focused on the deprivation of basic capabilities or genuine opportunities that an individual has reasons to value. Others such as Hills and Stewart (2005) define poverty as the conditions that exclude individuals from the normal functioning of society. Finally, Woodward and Abdallah (2010) describe poverty as the absence of individual human rights. This array of competing definitions indicates that there may be no ultimate definition. Instead, each definition rests on specific interpretive accounts to make sense of social and material conditions. Relatedly, there is no consensus on how to “solve” poverty. The specific interpretive accounts or frames defining poverty as a social problem motivate and legitimate certain institutional and organizational solutions (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016). If the poverty problem is interpreted as a lack of income, then solutions target increasing income through employment, entrepreneurship, and market-based strategies. These strategies can be seen in terms such as “inclusive capitalism” or “inclusive markets” that integrate the aspiring poor into the market economy through “bottom of the pyramid” approaches (Prahalad, 2004). If the problem is further broken down and framed as a lack of capital, which prevents the poor from increasing their income through entrepreneurship, then micro-finance seems a plausible solution to lift people out of poverty by providing access to capital resources. Conversely, if the problem is seen as norms that prevent market access, such as gender norms obstructing women from pursuing employment or entrepreneurial opportunities, then the solution could be to change these norms. However, attempts to ameliorate poverty often backfire. Hall, Matos, Sheehan, and Silvestre (2012) study of entrepreneurial tourism ventures in poor communities in Brazil shows how these often led to destructive outcomes for the communities, rather than empowerment. Many solutions do not work because the problem they target is only a symptom or manifestation of another problem. Thus, there are no “one-size-fits-all” or even “right” solutions to wicked problems: for such problems, solutions can only be better or worse. Following Rittel and Webber (1973) characterization of wicked problems, Table 1 details poverty as a wicked problem and identifies which dimensions of the problem account for the three ways of organizing we advanced above: for the unknown, for constant (re-)alignment of differing value regimes, and for dynamic complexity. Table 1. Characterizing Poverty Using Rittel and Webber’s Dimensions of Wicked Problems. Dimension Explanation Way of Organizing 1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem Defining poverty is impossible. Moreover, there will always be incomplete information about the causes For the unknown 2. Wicked problems have no stopping rule Poverty is an ongoing problem. The challenge of tackling poverty has never stopped, and many actors have always had different understandings of the problem For the unknown 3. Solutions to wicked problems are not true-or-false but good-or-bad There are different ways of ameliorating poverty, like education, but it is not possible to fully determine the truthfulness of such a claim. We can only say that educating the poor is good For the unknown Differing values 4. There is no immediate and ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem No clear-cut cause-effect link can be established between a solution and an alleged poverty amelioration. Solving poverty is not about testing hypotheses but about constant improvement For the unknown 5. Every solution to a wicked problem is a “one-shot” operation; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial and error, every attempt counts significantly Every time an eventual solution for poverty is implemented, there will be unintended consequences which cannot be undone Dynamic complexity 6. Wicked problems do not have an enumerable set of potential solutions There are no criteria to determine that all possible solutions to poverty have been identified Differing values 7. Every wicked problem is essentially unique Poverty manifests according to specific, local circumstances. Therefore, there are no “one-size-fits-all” solutions Dynamic complexity 8. Every wicked problem can be a symptom or consequence of another problem Poverty is a phenomenon involving social, historical, geographical, institutional, and economic problems Dynamic complexity 9. The choice of explanation of a wicked problem determines the nature of its resolution Poverty can be explained in numerous ways. For instance, the UNDP (2016) addresses poverty in terms of health, education and income, while Woodward and Abdallah (2010) address it as a human right issue Differing values 10. The planner has no right to be wrong Eventual solutions implemented to ameliorate poverty generate consequences, with great impact on those affected Dynamic complexity Methods To explore how organizations deal with the changing manifestations of wicked problems, we draw on a longitudinal case study of FyA, which has been devoted to education for poverty amelioration for over 60 years. Two main reasons motivated our approach. First, and as explained above, poverty is a paradigmatic example of a wicked problem: it is impossible to fully identify “the nature of the poverty problem” (Rittel & Webber, 1973, p. 161) or its solution. Second, FyA’s longevity makes it a “revelatory” case (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007, p. 27) that allows us to understand the changing nature of the wicked problem over time, and to examine the complex interplay with ways of organizing. Research Setting FyA is a satellite organization of the Society of Jesus, a Catholic religious order commonly known as the Jesuits. Founded by a Jesuit priest in the outskirts of Caracas, Venezuela, FyA’s core purpose has always been to alleviate poverty through education. Embracing the spirit of popular education (Freire, 1968/1996), FyA is premised on the belief that education empowers the poor and excluded. FyA expanded in the 1960s and 1970s into other Latin American countries. In 1987, the national autonomous nodes of FyA formed the International Federation of Fe y Alegria to bundle and coordinate their efforts. FyA currently operates more than 2,500 schools and technical centers in 21 countries. Though most of their operations are in Latin America (16 countries), FyA has recently expanded into Africa (3 countries) and Europe (2 countries). In total, FyA provides education for circa 1.5 million individuals (Federacion Internacional Fe y Alegria, 2016). Data Collection We assembled a longitudinal data set that spans from 1955 to 2017. We used historical methods, conducted semi-structured interviews, and analyzed the notes from ethnographic observations made during our visits to FyA locations. Archival data: We gathered 224 documents produced by FyA from 1960 to 2017. We were granted access to the FyA’s official archives in Bogota, Colombia, which contain many original manuscripts recording FyA’s history. These include letters by the founder, in which he explains his journey of tackling poverty across 10 Latin American countries, documents from each FyA national office, educational materials, strategic and operative plans, and promotional materials. Using archival documents produced at different points in time provided valuable insight into the evolving narrative constructions of the poverty problem. Interviews: We conducted 10 semi-structured interviews with the following individuals: the former and current secretaries of the International Federation FyA, with respective tenures of 5 and 15 years; the three longest-serving country managers of FyA; the FyA’s coordinator; and four project managers with over 10 years’ experience each. Interviews lasted from 45 minutes to 2 hours and focused on interpreting the challenge of poverty alleviation and FyA responses. Ethnographic observations: Observational data were derived from visits to seven countries where FyA has been operating: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, and Spain. We conducted observations at 22 schools in remote rural areas, slums, high-security prisons, and areas controlled by drug cartels and guerrillas. Visiting these places provided first-hand experience of the different challenges encountered and the types of organizational responses deployed to deal with the wicked problem of poverty in concrete local action contexts. Data Analysis Our data were subjected to narrative analysis (Riessman, 1993), which is particularly useful for examining efforts to create plausible accounts of a wicked problem, such as telling a “causal story” about what it is and how it can be made amenable to intervention (Reinecke & Ansari, 2016; Stone, 1989). Narratives contribute to the construction of social problems and their solutions because the narrative form inherently establishes causal claims regarding the objects and actions they represent (Wadhwani, 2018). By analyzing the case of FyA through a narrative perspective, we not only explored what happened and when but also revealed how events and experiences may relate to one another (Rhodes & Brown, 2005). Our narrative analysis involved four stages. First, to develop an understanding of FyA’s organizational development, we chronologically ordered key historical events, such as the foundation of FyA, the creation of a network of radio stations, and the expansion of FyA’s portfolio of activities. Second, we analyzed the narratives that evolved around each of these major events and explored their impact on the story’s plot (Riessman, 1993). This helped us to identify and locate shifts in the meaning of the wicked problem over time. For instance, the period from 1950 to 1970 favored an economic conception of poverty, whereas the years from 2000 to 2016 emphasized discrimination and exclusion as the major forms of poverty. We refer to the periods as the “economic poverty phase,” “invisible poor phase,” and “new forms of poverty phase.” Third, we focused on FyA’s responses to the changing manifestations of poverty over time, and the narrative explanations of the need for each specific response. Table 2 presents six key organizational responses deployed across the three phases; three of these responses will be explored in the Findings section. Fourth, to refine our understanding of how FyA responded to the changing manifestations of the wicked problem, we drew on classic pragmatist ideas such as James’s (1904) notion of experience as “a process of change.” We traced how experience shaped the narrative constructions of the problem and affected FyA responses. Table 2 summarizes our findings. Table 2. Data Analysis. PHASE ECONOMIC POVERTY THE INVISIBLE POOR NEW FORMS OF POVERTY PERIOD 1954–1961 1961–1976 1980–1996 1984–1986 2000–2017 2008–2017 LOCATION Venezuela - urban slums and rural areas Ecuador, Bolivia, Panama, Peru, El Salvador, Colombia, Nicaragua, and Guatemala Venezuela, Paraguay, Ecuador, and Bolivia Latin America Latin America Chad, Madagascar, DR Congo, and Guinea POVERTY PROBLEM Absence of public services (water, electricity, education, health, etc.) in the urban periphery of Venezuelan cities Latin American countries experience a lack of governmental investment in rural areas, an increase in the population of urban slums, and high rates of violence and illiteracy among poor people Cuts in social welfare make it difficult to educate prisoners and adults with no knowledge of work skills Countries with high levels of social disparities and lack of social policies Changes in the meanings of poverty to reflect systemic and historical issues of social exclusion and lack of equality and opportunities People of different ages, genders, and demographic profiles are illiterate; governments cannot sustain public investment; rural areas are left behind in development RESPONSE Construction of primary and secondary schools Empower communities to construct their own schools Build radio stations that provide complementary education Design an international federation Projects focused on gender, minorities, and violence topics Creating small, medium, and large initiatives ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT Autonomous schools in urban slums and rural abandoned areas Autonomous local and national organizations Independent radio stations with strong links to autonomous local and national organizations A federation of independent organizations that aim to propose local and national policies Autonomous organizations start to work based on a project methodology A network of independent organizations that work collectively to support and learn from one another Findings The Process of Organizing for Tackling the Dynamic Complexity of Wicked Problems In our analysis of FyA and its ways of organizing for managing the dynamic complexity of poverty, we uncovered that the process followed the following steps. Initially, actors define a problem based on their confrontation and understanding of it. When they agree on a preferred definition of the problem, a form of organizing is deployed. However, when external conditions put pressure o