Group items tagged

A potential danger in a systems approach is that there is a risk of overjargonizing and getting lost in complex terminology, maps and paralysis by analysis. One of the key themes that emerged from the discussion is that many people are starting to experiment with systems thinking but that it can be daunting or confusing to explain, operationalize or find common agreement. Does system thinking imply a rigorous and dynamic mapping of key actors, power relationships and other factors in a community (Yes)? But then how does systems thinking differ from a solid context analysis (still needs more explanation)? A potential danger in a systems approach is that there is a risk of overjargonizing and getting lost in complex terminology, maps and paralysis by analysis. One of the key themes that emerged from the discussion is that many people are starting to experiment with systems thinking but that it can be daunting or confusing to explain, operationalize or find common agreement. Does system thinking imply a rigorous and dynamic mapping of key actors, power relationships and other factors in a community (Yes)? But then how does systems thinking differ from a solid context analysis (still needs more explanation)? 

Systems thinking The fact that ecological sustainability is a property of a web of relationships means that in order to understand it properly, in order to become ecologically literate, we need to learn how to think in terms of relationships, in terms of interconnections, patterns, context. In science, this type of thinking is known as systemic thinking or "systems thinking." It is crucial for understanding ecology, because ecology - derived from the Greek word oikos ("household") - is the science of relationships among the various members of the Earth Household.

Systems thinking is an approach to integration that is based on the belief that the component parts of a system will act differently when isolated from the system's environment or other parts of the system. Standing in contrast to positivist and reductionist thinking, systems thinking sets out to view systems in a holistic manner. 

At IDEO, we're often asked to share what we know about design thinking. We've developed this website in response to that request. Here, we introduce design thinking, how it came to be, how it is being used, and steps and tools for mastering it. You'll find our particular take on design thinking, as well as the perspectives of others. Everything on this site is free for you to use and share with proper attribution.

To provide instruction on key concepts and tools of systems thinking. While utilizing the WebEd site, participants will: develop skills and knowledge in the use of systems thinking concepts and tools. experience and practice interactive, inquiry-based instructional and school improvement strategies. use systems thinking tools to analyze issues and identify high leverage interventions. investigate possible applications relevant to their work.

Systems thinking. An individual or organization must first be able to put forward a new solution or set of solutions to a pressing social challenge. This sounds obvious, but we're suggesting that organizational theories of change, business plans, and other foundational materials need to reflect systems thinking. The most important tool in the new systems entrepreneur's suite is the ability to embed the solution into the larger system being targeted.

Systems thinking, according to HU, has two important dimensions. One is the establishment of a new paradigm that understands global issues as inherently complex, multi-dimensional, conflictive and open to outside influence and intervention. A problem like slavery, for example, may seem intractable because of the economic interests it serves; in fact, the institutional and organizational linkages-the supply chains-that comprise slavery's power structure are vulnerable. The first step in system thinking is to map those linkages to better understand how they fit together and pinpoint their likely weak points. The next step is to devise a strategy that combines public advocacy, coalition building, insider lobbying, and investigative journalism to target those linkages, forcing those implicated in slavery, wittingly or unwittingly, to reform, and weakening the larger circuit of power over time.

If you are a systems thinker, you might sometimes feel you are going a little crazy. We still live in command-and-control land and our assumptions haven't caught up to the realities of the world. If you have begun to act and talk like a systems thinker, you may be treated a little like the court jester. Actually, I'd say it was closer to the boy who declared the emperor wasn't wearing any clothes. Nonetheless, this is what it's like being a systems thinker. You see and say things that others think are a little crazy. Alternatively, people hear your words, but you realise after a while that they are processing them with an analytical mindset and so misunderstand the whole thrust of thinking systemically. We are all prisoners of our own flat-earthisms, after all. So you are either side-lined because your ideas seem a little far-fetched ("If there is no hierarchy, how do you control people????") or what they think they understand is not what you intended.

When we're dealing with different interacting levels of a system, seemingly minor details can rise to the top and become important to the system as a whole. We need "Field biologists" to catalog and study detarticails and portions of our complex systems, including their failures and bugs. This kind of biological thinking not only leads to new insights, but might also be the primary way forward in a world of increasingly interconnected and incomprehensible technologies.

This topic forms part of the Systems Thinking knowledge area (KA). It identifies systems principles as part of the basic ideas of systems thinking. Some additional concepts more directly associated with engineered systems are described, and a summary of system principles associated with the concepts already defined is provided. A number of additional "laws" and heuristics are also discussed.

but we sensed the outcome could easily become a 'touchpoint solution' that might address a particular facet of trauma, but wouldn't take into account the deeper reasons why these problems existed," Seth explained.

The Waters Center for Systems Thinking is an internationally recognized leader in system thinking capacity building. We are dedicated to providing the tools and methods that help people understand, track, and leverage the connections that affect their personal and professional goals.

The Thinking Tools Studio is brought to you by the Waters Center for Systems Thinking. We are committed to delivering benefits to users through engaging, innovative and applicable content free of charge and full of learning.

The Schumacher Institute is a think tank. We believe that our planet faces complex social, economic and environmental crises that are hard to solve, however, we are optimistic that solutions can be found. We apply systems thinking to explore and test sustainable options, which acknowledge the complexity of our world. We see social justice as integral to sustainability and look for answers that are fair to all, within the limits the Earth can sustain.

Design thinking is in our genes. For decades IDEO has pioneered the human-centered design approach to solving complex problems. In 2010 asked-how might we open up method enabling people everywhere spark innovation where it's needed most? Our answer: OpenIDEO. iDEO "design thinking"

When creating new services for clients, we very often don't delve deep enough into the organisation that delivers the service. Service solutions are often limited to pragmatic improvements that lie directly in the customer experience, what many consider 'the art of the possible'. But by combining classic service design and user journey mapping techniques with notation from Systems Thinking, we can go deeper into understanding WTF's really going on inside our organisations.

Our Philosophy & Guiding Principles Social systems work as they do because of how we work - how we think and interact. Our habitual ways of thinking and acting typically lead to change efforts shaped by mechanical problem solving and unproductive competition, often among otherwise well-intentioned interveners. In effect, we try to control complex processes that cannot be controlled, and in so doing miss the real opportunities for deeper and more long-lasting change. By contrast, natural systems demonstrate harmony, balance, integration, and ongoing evolution. The new knowledge we see emerging in the world shapes organic processes of change that result in social systems that are more resilient, sustainable, and adaptive. These "integral" learning and change processes knit "inner" and "outer" change, and are both deeply personal and inherently collective.

The Bootcamp Bootleg is an overview of some of our most-used tools. The guide was originally intended for recent graduates of our Bootcamp: Adventures in Design Thinking class. But we've heard from folks who've never been to the d.school that have used it to create their own introductory experience to design thinking.

The Institute for New Economic Thinking was created to broaden and accelerate the development of new economic thinking that can lead to solutions for the great challenges of the 21st century.

OK, this post is already way too long, but one final thing. Physicists, I think, become even more drawn to economics when we look into economics and see broad resistance to research pursuing this "complexity" perspective. It seems instead that most of mainstream research tries to get around system complexity with mathematical tricks, rather than facing up to it. I'm thinking about ideas like representative agents, or rational expectations. The assumptions make it possible to build models without having to deal with the complexity of interactions and the emergent structures they create; but the resulting models, naturally, look very pale and questionable as models of anything real. When physicists see that a small minority of ("heterodox") economists also find the standard approach hugely limiting, they feel an urge to help out. And they believe that some of their ideas can help.