Schools of Systems Thinking - Development Trends in Systems Methodology

2004 ◽  
pp. 31-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mats-Olov Olsson
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Development Trends ◽  
Systems Methodology

Varieties of systems thinking: The case of soft systems methodology

1994 ◽  
Vol 10 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 189-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter B. Checkland ◽  
Michael G. Haynes
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Soft Systems Methodology ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
Soft Systems

Critical Systems Perspective of Strategic Decision Making

2020 ◽  
pp. 55-80
Author(s):  
Jelena Nikolić ◽  
Dejana Zlatanović
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Critical Systems Thinking ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision Making ◽  
Critical Systems ◽  
Strategic Decisions ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
Soft Systems ◽  
Factors Affecting

Growing complexity and diversity of strategic decisions indicate the need for applying the appropriate holistic tools in strategic decision making. Thus, the chapter deals with the process of strategic decision making from the viewpoint of critical systems thinking, with emphasis on the role of values and context in strategic decision making. The main purpose is to show how systems thinking generally and critical systems thinking particularly can help decision makers involve different perceptions and values in the process of strategic decision making, as well as take into account context in which the strategic decisions are made. Considering the key internal and external factors affecting strategic decision making, the authors have selected three systems methodologies stemming from different paradigms: soft systems methodology as interpretive, team syntegrity as emancipatory, and organizational cybernetics as functionalist systems methodology. The way in which they can be combined, aimed at improving effectiveness of strategic decision making, has been presented.

Crisis in systems thinking

Kybernetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (7) ◽  
pp. 1915-1934
Author(s):  
Janos Korn
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Soft Systems Methodology ◽  
Scientific Enterprise ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
New Science ◽  
Future Developments ◽  
Informative Content ◽  
Current Systems

Purpose The current field of systems thinking consists of a variety of views, methods and a number of organisations involved with these views which suggests a state of confusion and fragmentation of the field which fundamentally is supposed to be a uniform view of structures or systems. This can be interpreted as a “crisis situation”. A resolution of the crisis in the form of a “new science of systems” is proposed. Assuming this new science becomes part of the field of systems thinking, a debate of the elements of the field is suggested with a view to consider its current state and future developments. “Crisis - resolution - debate” is the central theme of the paper. Design/methodology/approach The field of current systems thinking is described in terms of views, methods and organisations and is seen as the “problematic issue”. A “new science of systems” strongly rooted in natural language as its primary symbolism and consisting of three general principles of systems and linguistic modelling is outlined to be considered as the resolution of the crisis. A set of criteria is discussed for use of judging the quality of models and element of the field of systems thinking including the “new science of systems”. To demonstrate a preliminary use of these criteria, the same example is worked out using both, the “soft systems methodology” and “linguistic modelling” for comparison. Findings The universal view of parts of the world as structures or systems is inconsistent with the multiple methods basically pursuing the same purpose: modelling aspects of systems which prevail in current systems thinking. To try to resolve this anomaly an equally universally applicable approach, the “new science of systems” is proposed which can also serve as an aid to problem solving, in particular to an integrated systems and product design. This approach is to be part of the suggested debate of the field of systems thinking. In general, there is no alternative to the structural view. Research limitations/implications The “new science of systems”, if found acceptable, can offer research opportunities in new applications of accepted branches of knowledge like logic, linguistics, mathematics of ordered pairs, uncertainties and in the philosophy of science. New teaching schemes can be developed at classroom level combined with engineering as creator of novelties with linguistics as the symbolism to supplement mathematics. Further considerations can be given to current methodologies of systems thinking as part of a debate with a view of future developments in exploring pioneering ideas. New software is needed for working out the dynamics of scenarios. Practical implications The debate, if it takes place, should result in new developments in the field of systems thinking such as concepts accepted as fundamental in the discipline of systems. Applications of the “new science of systems” to larger scale scenarios and organisations guided by the universal scheme in Figure 1 and linguistic modelling with software are needed for development of schemes for problem solving schemes “utilising” or “producing” products. Social implications The “new science of systems” is rooted in accepted branches of knowledge; it is highly teachable at school and university levels and should lead to use by professionals and in everyday life activities once found acceptable. The use of the scheme in Figure 1 should help in clarifying confusing scenarios and to aid problem solving. Originality/value The suggestion of a debate is an original idea. The “new science of systems” consists of three general principles of systems implemented by linguistic modelling of static and dynamic states. Mathematics of uncertainty and topics from conventional science at the object level supplement the “new science” which together form the “scientific enterprise”. The notions of cognitive value and informative content of models are introduced for evaluating their cognitive worth.

scholarly journals A Bibliographic and Visual Exploration of the Historic Impact of Soft Systems Methodology on Academic Research and Theory

Systems ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Warren ◽  
Brian Sauser ◽  
David Nowicki
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Soft Systems Methodology ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Visual Exploration ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
Soft Systems ◽  
Complex Engineered Systems

Soft systems methodology (SSM), an analytic method commonly employed in engineering and business research, produces models focused on human activities and relevant structures used to explain complex, engineered systems. The original version of SSM involves seven stages; five address real-world aspects and observable data, while two stages leverage a systems thinking viewpoint. This approach allows the development of a simplified depiction of complex systems representative of the multi-perspective lenses used to comprehend the systemic complexity of a problem and provide a clearer picture to analysts and decision makers. This bibliometric meta-analysis of 286 relevant publications in engineering, business, and other social sciences fields explores the historic impacts of SSM on academic research and systems thinking in relevant publications that described or employed SSM for research from 1980–2018. This study produced descriptive narrative outcomes and data visualizations including information about top SSM authors, author citation impacts, common dissemination outlets for SSM work, and other relevant metrics commonly used to measure academic impact. The goal of this piece is to depict who, what, why, when, and where SSM had the greatest impact on research, systems thinking, and methodology after nearly 40 years of use, as we look towards its future as a methodological approach used to comprehend complex problem situations.

scholarly journals MODEL PENGELOLAAN KESELAMATAN KERJA NELAYAN DI PALABUHANRATU, KABUPATEN SUKABUMI

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fis Purwangka ◽  
Sugeng Hari Wisudo ◽  
Budhi H. Iskandar ◽  
Jonh Haluan
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Soft Systems Methodology ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
Soft Systems

Proses keselamatan dan kesehatan kerja seperti proses manajemen pada umumnya adalah penerapan berbagai fungsi manajemen, yaitu perencanaan, pelaksanaan dan pengawasan.Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah menginventarisasi dan mengidentifikasi aspek-aspek yang terkait dengan manajemen keselamatan kerja nelayan serta membangun model manajemen keselamatan kerja nelayan dari kondisi yang terjadi.  Pada penelitian ini digunakan metode berfikir secara sistem (systems thinking) dengan pendekatan metodologi sistem lunak (soft systems methodology). Hasil inventarisasi menunjukkan bahwa permasalahan dalam manajemen keselamatan kerja nelayan di Palabuhanratu umumnya terkait pengorganisasian dan pengelolaan secara terpadu. Pengelolaan manajemen keselamatan kerja nelayan menunjukkan ciri-ciri tidak sistemik dan ciri-ciri organisasi yang mengalami ketidakmampuan belajar.Model Konseptual Pengorganisasian Pengelolaan Sistem Manajemen Keselamatan dan Kesehatan Kerja (SMK3) dapat diimplementasikan dengan kondisi adanya perencanaan dan kebijakan yang mengatur tugas dan wewenang lembaga yang terlibat, adanya mekanisme komunikasi yang mudah dipahami, dibentuknya sistem pengawasan yang terukur, serta komitmen dari semua bagian yang terlibat. Model konseptual pengelolaan secara terpadu SMK3 dapat diimplementasikan dengan kondisi adanya komitmen dari semua lembaga yang terlibat, mekanisme komunikasi, koordinasi, dan keterbukaan informasi, dilakukannya pengawasan bersama dan kesetaraan kelembagaan dan kewenangan serta pelayanan yang terukur.

Systems Approach to Knowledge Synthesis

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiteru Nakamori ◽  
Andrzej P. Wierzbicki
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Knowledge Creation ◽  
Knowledge Integration ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Knowledge Synthesis ◽  
Basic Tool ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
New Approach

This article presents a systems approach to knowledge synthesis or construction, starting with a new systems thinking named the informed systems thinking, which should serve as the basic tool of knowledge integration and support creativity. Based on this new systems thinking, a new systems approach to knowledge synthesis or construction has been developed as a systems methodology that consists of three fundamental parts: how to collect and synthesize knowledge, how to use our abilities in collecting knowledge, and how to justify the synthesized knowledge. This article first describes the informed systems thinking and then introduces a new systems approach to knowledge synthesis and the features of this new approach from a viewpoint of knowledge creation.

Systems Approach to Knowledge Synthesis

2013 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Yoshiteru Nakamori ◽  
Andrzej P. Wierzbicki
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Knowledge Creation ◽  
Knowledge Integration ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Knowledge Synthesis ◽  
Basic Tool ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
New Approach

This article presents a systems approach to knowledge synthesis or construction, starting with a new systems thinking named the informed systems thinking, which should serve as the basic tool of knowledge integration and support creativity. Based on this new systems thinking, a new systems approach to knowledge synthesis or construction has been developed as a systems methodology that consists of three fundamental parts: how to collect and synthesize knowledge, how to use our abilities in collecting knowledge, and how to justify the synthesized knowledge. This article first describes the informed systems thinking and then introduces a new systems approach to knowledge synthesis and the features of this new approach from a viewpoint of knowledge creation.

scholarly journals Managing ambiguity in business. A holistic and innovative approach

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 843-851
Author(s):  
Oana Pop
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Wicked Problems ◽  
Soft Systems Methodology ◽  
Complexity Science ◽  
Theory Of Change ◽  
Systems Methodology ◽  
Soft Systems ◽  
Entrepreneurial Organization ◽  
Systemic Interventions ◽  
One Year

Abstract This article will look at the hurdles of dealing with ambiguity and the wicked problems that organizations are struggling with, by providing key insights from a one year team coaching program that the author had the opportunity to deliver in a Romanian entrepreneurial organization. Based on the actual methods used and highlighting the findings and impact of the program, we will reflect on how ambiguity manifests in organizational settings and how wicked problems can be defined. The methods employed are within the range of complexity science and are holistic approaches to systemic interventions within organizations that combine soft systems methodology, paradoxical theory of change, complex responsive processes approach with important concepts from systems thinking such as archetypes, feedback loops and modeling. One of the key objectives of the article is to reunite different academic approaches and link them to a case study as a way of adding value to these approaches and to reiterate that research needs, to find its rightful place in the practitioners’ toolkit and have a more meaningful and direct impact on the real struggles that business is faced with. The author’s expertize in systemic interventions is based on extensive practitioner experience, having been trained and certified as a systemic coach and facilitator, and therefore draws upon the work of other skilled practitioners that support companies in finding successful ways to address complexity. Although the article can be easily put in the complexity science and systems thinking area of academic interest, the research questions and insights are intended to serve the learning and the evolution of organizations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document