Notes on reader introducing systems approaches prt1&2

Notes on-Systems Approaches to Managing Change:

Parts 1&2Overview of systems thinking & Systems

DynamicsA Practical Guide

Eds. – Martin Reynolds & Sue Holwell

Part 1&2 – Read as part of TU811 OU Course: Systems Tools for managing Change

Notes: James Cracknell BA (Hons.)

Chapter 1Introducing Systems

ApproachesIntroduction 1.1

Five approaches

1. System Dynamics (SD) –1950’s Jay Forrester

2. Viable Systems Model (VSM) – 1960’s Stafford Beer

3. Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) – 1970’s Colin Eden

4. Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) – 1970’s Peter Checkland

5. Critical Systems Heuristics (CSH) – 1070’s Werner Ulrich

Nature of Complex Systems

Three situations reported in 2009 during Easter week.

a) Hillsborough Football disaster 20 years on

b) Somalia – the impact of pirating

c) Orangutans – a new population for an endangered species

Key points from each story

Hillsborough

The tragedy continues to permeate the psyche of English football 20 years further on. Despite improvements in safety in grounds there is a continued sense that justice was far from being delivered. Cover ups at every level as well as poor leadership, dire communication and abject confusion persists to the day.

Somalian Pirates

Headlines surrounded the death and rescue of European and US citizens in yet another hostage situation. It was though, the wider repercussion that were occupying the copy with analysis on what it means for fishing industries of the Seychelles and tourism along the Kenyan coast. The costs were being counted in terms of jobs and extended hardship. Cruise ships were no longer stopping meaning a loss of trade, in fact they were avoiding the region all together.

OrangutansDespite the discovery of a new population the species remains on the endangered list. The rainforests of Indonesia, the natural habitat, are being decimated as Palm oil is classed as a ‘clean burning fuel’. The eco fuel was now being harvested with devastating consequences for the species. The light was also shone on widespread exploitation of workers and the politics of energy production

Big, Big Issues- 1.2.1

Three contrasting stories – a few common threads

• Local issues have causes and consequences which extend the impact

• That the problems were unbounded and paid no respect to national borders

• All stories came with multiple perspectives often conflicting

• That the backdrop cannot be ignored –2009 and the Global economy was reeling from Global Banking Crisis –poverty, global warming, and ice melting

Human life gets in the way

No obvious answers to any of these stories, different people will take opposing perspectives, different priorities and change, intentional or otherwise has consequences that ripple.

Messes and Difficulties – 1.2.2

Issues of concern

• Complex to straightforward

• Minor hiccup to catastrophic

Continuum between concept of:

Difficult or a Mess

Difficult Mess

One dimensional continuum

Mess - Characteristics

• Many interlocking aspects

• Involves more people

• Greater implications related to outcomes

• Different guises

• Longer time scale

• Greater uncertainty

• Hard to articulate

• Multiple trajectories

• Question, assumptions, and weightings

• Many perspectives all dynamic

Difficult

• The answer is known but not discovered

• Can be conceptualized

• Take for granted context

• Articulate the solution

Two dimensional Mess

DifficultMess

Certain

Un

cert

ain • Indicates overall Scale

• Uncertain – means multiple perspectives

• Difficulties can be conceptualised

Why think in systems?Simplifies the thinking around complex realities. The means to handle the detail, bring it to the foreground, identify different behaviours from multiple perspectives.

Terms to describe ‘Messes’

• Swamp – Donald Schon

• Wicked problems – Horst Rittel

• Resource Dilemmas – Neils Roling..

..

Perspectives on Systems Thinking – 1.2.6

No one way of thinking about systems

• Different typologies of approach to analysis

• Emphasis in thinking between man and nature

• Complexity in its very nature• Choices of approaches

dependent upon perspective of user, nature of event

Four perspectives under consideration

Perspective 1: Three Traditions of System

Thinking(West Churchman, Peter Checkland,

Werner Ulrich, Mike Jackson & others)

Three sets:Hard, Soft & Critical

Hard

Soft

Critical

Hard systems

The presumption that systems ‘actually exist’ .

Losing this assumption facilitated new more abstract constructs

Soft Systems

Moving away from the concept of ‘hard systems’ –

to ‘soft systems’ as the means to transfer and

impart knowledge. “Epistemological Constructs rather than real World entities” (p10)

Definition of epistemological – scientific study of knowledge, its acquisition and communication’

Critical systems

To address some of the inadequate aspects of Hard and Soft by considering the ‘power relations’ – wider enforced changes on society

Gerald Midgley – The evolution of systems thinking & practice –

Three ‘Waves’ or phases of inquiry

Wave Description

Wave one A focus on ‘concrete’ issues with common purpose

Wave two Soft focus – people, their perspectives, wants an needs

Wave three Emphasis on ‘power relations’ the reengineering of social morals, actions and attitudes that shape the context

As a systems thinking practioner what value would I gain from thinking of systems like this? The focus of the three-part model is about the situation, its relevance to this analysis.

Hard & soft carry with it gender specific overtones. Overcome by a change in terminology to ‘Functionalist, Interpretivist, Emancipatory’.Thinking in silos makes it harder to identify any synergies or cross over between the three models

Issues related to the three-part model

Perspective 2: Systems Thinking for Situations – 1.2.6.2Systems of system methodologies (SOSM)

To classify system approaches aligned to a specific problem situation (Jackson, 1990)

Dimensions of matrix

Complexity - of the situation, its interrelatedness and interdependencies.

Participants – Perspectives

Unitary – Hard – Machine

Pluralist – Soft – Organism

Coercive – Critical - Prison

Matrix

Participants

‘Systems’ i.e. problem situation

Unitary ‘ hard’ systems – machine metaphor

Pluralist ‘Soft’ systems –organismic metaphor

Coercive ‘critical’ systems – prison metaphor

Simple Simple unitary: e.g. systems engineering

Simple pluralist: e.g. Strategic assumption surfacing and testing

Simple coercive: e.g. critical systems heuristics

Complex Complex unitary: e.g. systems dynamics, viable systems model

Complex pluralist:e.g. soft systems methodology

Complex coercive: (non available)

Adapted from Jackson 2000, p.359 –Taken from Reynolds & Howe p.11

Total Systems Intervention (TSI)Flood and Jackson (1991)

Drawing different methods together in a three-fold process

1. Creative analysis of the situation

2. Choice of a suitable systems approach

3. Implementation of that approach

Two significant difficulties

1. Assumption that ‘all’ situations fall neatly into one of the six available boxes

2. Assumption that a particular approach is only suitable for a specific problem

Nothing is ever this neat and thinking like this can detract from exploration of the alternatives.

Perspective 3: Influences Around Systems Approaches (Ison & Maiteny) –1.2.6.3

• Synergistic thinking

• Cross fertilisation

• Innovation

• Moving away from the rigidity of the matrix classification

• Broaden out the way systems thinking fits into other domains

• Role of individual users

Difficulties arising

• One-way influences – that is this perspective is reaching out whilst others are not necessarily reaching in

• Casting a wider net can mean important practitioners are missed off

Perspective 4: Grouping of System Thinkers (Ramage & Shipp) – 1.2.6.4

• Matching individual system thinkers to their discipline

• Purpose of typology – to “provide a foothold for the readers’ engagement with the 30 systems thinkers covered” (Ed. Reynolds, Howe, 2010, p14)

• Authors personal mapping

Seven Groupings – 30 ThinkersGroupings Thinkers / Practioner

Early cybernetics Gregory Bateson (1904 – 1980), Norbert Wiener (1894 – 1964), Warren McCulloch (1898 – 1969)

Soft & Critical systems C. West Churchman (1913 – 2004), Russell Ackoff (1919- ). Peter Checkland (1930 -), Werner Ulrich

(1948-), Michael C. Jackson (1951-)

Complex Theory Ilya Prigogine (1917 – 2003), Stuart Kauffman (1939 -), James lovelock (1919 -)

General systems theory Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901 – 72), Kenneth Boulding (1910 – 1993), Geoffrey Vickers (1894 – 1983)

Later cybernetics Heinz von Foerster (1911 – 2002), Stafford Beer (1926 –2002), Humberto Maturana (1928 -), Niklas Luhmann

(1927 – 1998), Paul Watziawick (1921 – 2007)

Learning systems Kurt Lewin (1890 – 1947), Eric Trist (1911 – 1993), Chris Argyris (1923 -), Donald Schon (1930 – 1997), Mary

Catherine Bateson (1939 -)

System dynamics Jay Forrester (1918 -), Donella Meadows (1941 – 2001), Peter Senge (1947 -)

Controversy and Paradox

• It is not representative of a comprehensive collection of groupings and thinkers

• It is a starting point for first arrivals

• Groupings are contentious within the field

• Paradox – by creating this type of typography –interdisciplinary links are broken thereby stepping outside the systems thinking mindset

Our Own Perspective 1.2.7

Attained goal – to understand how:

• Different system approaches relate to each other

• The various schools of thought

• They can be used in practice by relating to specific situations

The Five Systems – (slide 2) have been chosen because of they address:

• Rich interplay between ‘situation’, ‘practioner community’ and ‘methodology’

• Connection to the three motivations for using a systems approach, namely –‘interrelationships, different perspectives and power relations

Five approaches to strategy making – 1.2.9

Systems dynamics (SD) 1.2.9.1


Viable System model (VSM) 1.2.9.2


Strategic options Development and Analysis (SODA, with Cognitive Mapping) 1.2.9.3


Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) 1.2.9.4


Critical Systems Heuristic (CSH) 1.2.9.5

Chapter 2 – Systems Dynamics

To create a representation of a real world situation often complex in nature.

A systems approach to the management of change.

Uses diagrams as the means of communicating the present situation, the interconnections, causes and outcomes as well as unplanned for secondary effects. Business thinking meets social thinking

Feedback leads to dynamic behaviours

Ways of Interpreting Situations in Business and SocietyChanging Perspectives – 2.1.1

From above we see the whole picture and gain on perspective.

At street or road level we get another. Both are as valid, both provide information and both offer contrasting perspectives.

“What appears to be chance, may, from a different perspective, have a systemic cause” p26

Event Orientated Thinking

Events create problems

Solutions fix problems

Congestion leads to the building of more roads

Unruly binge drinking leads to a need for more police

Drug crime leads to more police taking drugs off the street

“The problem presents itself as a discrepancy between an important shared goal and a capricious current situation” P26

Feedback Systems Thinking 2.1.3

Solutions are not isolated from their environment or context – the are ‘sympathetic’

Problems and solution coexist and are interdependent

5th Discipline – Peter Senge –5 disciplines for effective organisational change

Illustration of Feedback Systems Thinking 2.1.4• Fig 2.3A representation of the complexity of traffic congestion and the unintended consequences of certain actions. The position of boundaries is very dependent upon the perspective and a matter of judgement

A Shift of Mind –2.1.5Fig 2.4 Feedback perspective

• People involved in strategy development will hold counter views which will lead to conflicting and partial perspectives.• Advantages of thinking in feedback loops is an appreciation of where the goal or desired future state, and existing state create the discrepancy• Nothing is considered as a one-size fits all solution and actions will create extended situations• “The performance of the enterprise as a whole arises from the interplay of these interlocking feedback processes,”

Discussion and

Thoughts

Linear thinking is often seen in business and government, in decision that are made and not looking at the extended ramifications of those decisions. This leads to the conclusion that many of the problems that we have now are a consequence of linear thinking.

The introduction of the feedback loops emphasises the complexity and ripple effects that decisions, that are made in good faith and for the right reasons, may become the problems of the future.

Causal Loop DiagramConcepts & Tools 2.1John Moorcroft

Rules and approaches

• Cause and effects alongside the

means for feedback. The diagram is a

tool to visualise these relationships

• Constructed using a mix of words,

phrases, links and loops.

• Conventions to be noted – the ‘+’

means - If the cause increases then the

effect increases too relative to what it

would otherwise have been

- The ‘-’ means that if the cause

increases then the effect decreases

relative to what it would otherwise

have been

The central element

R Reinforcing loop – amplifies and reinforces change

B Balancing loop – a change in a variable leads to a counteracting

change

Naming conventions – identify each loop as a way of creating

a narrative

DELAYDelays – the identification of a time lag between a cause and

effect (the variables)

Slow to respond shower:Narrative, Causal Links & Polarity 2.2.1.1

Process in a Shower ‘System’ –2.2.1.1 • The causal feedback loop provides a lot of qualified information in a combined space.• The detail useful in construction of ‘algebraic simulation’ : (goal – actual)• Be aware of what links actually mean in real world; behavioural responses in respect of economic, social and physical laws• Quantitative aspects – how much does temperature rise for a given increase in water flow?• Temperature gap to ‘flow of hot water’ the most important link as embodies decision making process• What is the corrective action required? –Overreaction and iteration leads to flux• People have the control – how they choose to adjust the tap setting • Our own decision making processes

Sensing the gap – stand under a shower in scuba gear and you have no sense of the gap – feedback loop collapses

Simulation of a Shower and Dynamics of Balancing Loops – 2.2.1.3

Dynamics of balancing loop• Balancing loops crop up

everywhere• Goals set by human,

social and biological needs

• Business sets sales goals, quality standards etc.

• Government’s – inflation, money supply, Growth and health

• Humans – temperature, blood flow, digestive goals

• Balancing processes far from perfect so corrective action can lead to over and undershooting

From Events to Dynamics

and Feedback Structure:

Drug Related Crime

• 2.2.2 P38

Puzzling Dynamics

Key points of problem

• Community witnessing

‘apparent’ rise in drug fueled

crime

• Anecdotal evidence suggests

police action getting results

• Goal of system is tolerable

situation – reported growth

based off estimated information

• We know there is reinforcing

feedback at work because we

see ‘growth’

• Malignant feedback entwinned

with police, communities and

drug users that crosses

boundaries

Feedback Loops in drug related crime

2.2.2.1

• Consider the basic vocabulary – hypothesised reasons for crime to rise.

• Indicate the boundary of the problem

• All factors lead to a closed loop of cause and effect –a crime spiral

• Two negative links – so loop is reinforcing

Central variable in question & starting place for story

Community responsePolice action –

inside the force

The world of the drug user – addicts not driven by price. Increase in price adds to crime

Scope and Boundary of Factors in drug Related Crime2.2.2.2

• Loop is not the only one

• Try knew loops• Challenge

conventional thinking• Keep loops simple• Focus on observable

problems• Qualitative feedback• Always ask what else

An Aside: More Practice

with link Polarity and Loop types

2.2.2.3

• Any individual link connects two concepts (A&B) – ‘A’ is the cause and ‘B’ the effect

• For each link we imagine ‘all other influences are held constant’ (ceteris paribus)

Purpose and Use of Causal Loop Diagrams: A Summary

2.2.2.4

Creates overviewDiscloses

interconnectionsVisual summation

Uncovers Mental Models

Displays dynamic behaviours

Expands thinking

Extrapolation of the future based on existing

or new behaviours

Feedback on ‘observed performance’ recorded

and highlighted

Basic Tips: Picking and Naming Variables 2.2.2.5

Words are vital

• Variables must be ‘Nouns’• Augment nouns to target or

clarify variable• Think in terms of being able to

measure• Ground words in facts• Concepts can be ‘hard’ – easily

measurable – ‘new products’ ‘new hires’

• Concepts can be ‘soft’ –intangible such as moral, isolation, perceptions

• Always have in mind a means to measure or quantify (score) even intangible

• Pick phrases “delivery lead time” rather than the less clear ‘delivery performance’

Basic Tips: Meaning of Arrows and Link Polarity2.2.2.6

Arrows are visual drivers• Change in cause leads

to change in effect• Polarity works for

both tangible as well as intangible

• The effect on the variable is to change it ‘more than it would otherwise have been’

Marketing budget

Impact on sales +

Industry reputation

Customer’s interested +

Not as clear as a ‘Causal Loop’

Basic Tips: Drawing, Identifying and

Naming Feedback Loops2.2.2.7

• Feedback loops for the system thinker are the equivalent of a political cartoon for the cartoonist. • A series of feedback loops on a whiteboard can identify the primary characteristic of an organization• The message is given added weight because it focuses on the dominant features

Basic Tips: Drawing, Identifying and

Naming Feedback Loops2.2.2.7

5 Tips for visual layout

• Use curved lines• Important loops are

circular• Organise diagram to

minimise cross-over of lines

• Avoid ‘Chart Junk’ – any added to aspect that only serves to clutter and distract

• Iterate – get ready to start and refine

• Label clearly following conventions of polarity

Excerpts from ‘Orchestra in a Complex World’ (Bernhard Kerres) 2.2.6

A 3 year study and consultation to develop a

strategic agenda for growth

• Five major indicators of success

1. Delivery of high-quality

performances to attract, retain

top musicians and conductors

2. Create challenging and

interesting programs appealing

to audiences old and new

3. Attract top managers and staff,

engage and motivate volunteers

4. Raise and sustain visibility

through media. Produce

recordings, get broadcast and

extract favourable reviews

5. Continue to develop a successful

school’s outreach programme,

engage with local communities

so as to raise appreciation for

music

A qualitative approach to understanding success from a multi-dimensional perspective

Success of Performances and Quality of Orchestra

2.2.6.1

Fig 2.32

Questions to consider about Fig 2.32What are our measures of success?

• Artistic success• Financial success

Quantifiable means of gauging artistic:• Quality of performance

(reviews)• Challenges of programme

(musicians & audience)Quantifiable means of gauging financial:• Sell tickets• Attract sponsorship

Combined long term measures• Season ticket uptake and

general growth in audience base

What is missing and what is needed from Fig 2.32?• Adequate explanation of the role ‘Media’ plays in success

Represented by the ‘dotted line and ?’

• No reinforcing loops to success – once these have been identified the engines of growth can be articulated

The Importance

of Brand 2.2.6.2

Brand – the image it generates in people’s minds linking the values with the qualities of the organisation to its audience.

First feedback loop (R1) – Brand Growth Engine• The existence of the loop does not

mean that it is always a virtuous circle can be ‘vicious’ under adverse circumstances

• Media now has a more clear role in success

Attracting Musicians

2.2.6.3

An orchestra needs musicians R2 Best Musicians Musicians consider• Brand• Soloists• Conductors

Success with Fundraising2.2.6.4An orchestra needs access to state funding. To achieve this it needs:• A strong brand• To attract right supporters• To engage and motivate

volunteers• Fundraising acumen – often

teams of experienced people

• Corporate involvement

It is a defined pot that all arts are targeting.

• Private donors• Allegiances and loyalties• Geographic know-how very

different

Conclusion from Orchestra Study2.2.6.5A diagram like this is a ‘map’ from which the main features and their potential interconnectedness can be determined. It takes ‘iteration’ and often done in a social learning environment. The whole team therefore needs to recognise and agree with the ‘descriptive overview’ of the current situation. Stakeholder’s perceptions are therefore vital to gain a fuller picture. Use of a trained facilitator is therefore vital to the chances of success

End of Part 1 and Part 2

Notes by James Cracknell BA (Hons.)

As part of TU811 OU Course Systems

Tools for Managing Change

Reynolds, M. and Holwell, S. (2010) Introducing Systems Approaches, in Martin Reynolds, Sue Holwell (Eds.) Approaches to managing Change: A Practical Guide. London: Springer in association with The Open University