Blended systems thinking approach – diagnosis and design for regenerative transformation and change

Gosh, I didn’t realise how long it was since I’d done a blog post. I’ve been busy, head down, working but a lazy Christmas Eve has allowed me some time to start updating my blended systems thinking approach. Without giving away all of my commercial ‘secrets’ here is my basic outlined approach so far. As ever it’s a work in progress, changes often as I learn new things and the diagram is not as I want it to be just yet….having a think about that one.

This approach has been developed over my 10+ years of using systems thinking and pulling together all of the things that consistently work well for me. As ever, though, each situation is different and my approach differs depending on the situation and context in which I am working.

Diagnose – based on identifying imbalances in variety, identifying how a system self-organises and regenerates and how adaptable the system is to change.

Design from scratch – focussing on the perceived purpose of the system, based on the multiple perspectives of the stakeholders. Taking into account POSIWID and aiming for sufficient adaptability to manage entropy and emergence. Designing for positive emergence where possible.

Transform – based on shifting perspective, aligning values and perceived purposes and building a co-created identity. Building capacity by focussing on interconnections and interactions, enabling effective communication flows and aiming for requisite variety.

My Approach

Identify the system in focus and undertake context exploration

  • SSM – (rich picture, CATWOE, root definition, system map etc)
  • Multiple perspectives and motivations
  • Local rationality and ‘rules of the game’
  • Complexity drivers – internal and external
  • Multiple causes
  • Culture, identity and values
  • Work with 3 levels of recursion (the level of your system, the systems within it and the wider system of which it is a part

Identify the intended purpose of the system in focus as defined by the stakeholders and undertake a boundary critique

  • Boundary critique (at 3 levels of recursion if possible) is KEY to the first stages of the diagnosis. ** this stage should be done at he start of the diagnosis and NOT missed out**
  • Remember POSIWID

Understand the dynamics of the system (systems dynamics)

  • Identify the structure (stocks, flows, outflows and feedback) which determines behaviour over time
  • Understand connections underlying motivations and behaviour – For example – is there a focus on imposed targets? What kind of culture does it indicate if there is (i.e. a fear culture?) Is one member of staff imposing views upon others?
  • Identify the dominating feedback loop – what is the most important thing that is most limiting?
  • History of the system – what is the system’s long-term behaviour?
  • Consider feedback loops in terms of the VSM (every interconnection is a complexity equation and a feedback loop

Consider system statics and dynamics in terms of viability (viable system model)

  • VSM diagnostic
  • Variety imbalances – particularly identifying the critical imbalances
  • Pathological archetypes
  • System laws
  • Communication flows
  • Model of the system
  • Work out implications of the structural problems – do they match the symptoms or the problem. What insight do they provide for how an improvement can be designed?

 Undertake any further appropriate system diagnosis

  • Structural couplings
  • Otto Scharmer’s 3 enemies
  • Barry Oshry’s tops, middles & bottoms

Identify range of systemically desirable and culturally feasible options for improvement

  • Use MCA for prioritisation

Implementation

  • Small scale prototyping
  • Prototype small scale packages of change based around capability for making change without too much disruption
  • Change slowly and incrementally by changing one thing at a time
  • Aim to enhance total system properties like growth, stability, diversity, resilience, diversity
  • Identify a small group who want to try out the change and let them try it out. Make changes, as and when, until what you are trying out works. Do not be afraid to fail and make changes often until you start to get the outcomes you require.

Review & Repeat

  • This should be a continuous process and stages are not meant to be chronological. They are intended to be done concurrently and each point chosen from, depending upon what the situation requires. However, it is always preferable to do the boundary critique at the beginning of the diagnostic approach
  • Work fluidly and iteratively
  • Let the inquiry guide you and take you where it needs to go

 

Ideas/ approaches etc that interweave throughout – to make the model work

  • Facilitative and coaching style
  • Clean language
  • Non-violent communication
  • Learning our way together by “infecting” others with the concepts and ways of systems thinking
  • Being aware that we are all trapped inside our own minds so:

o   use isomorphic framing i.e. explaining using a situation which is similar to the one people are facing to help them understand it (delivering the suggestion of something that corresponds to a specific issue they know about)

o   explain how people have rigid mindsets and are unable to visualise the whole system and particularly unable to visualise from the perspectives of others

  • Being aware of how we:

o   are easily tricked

o   make lightening quick assumptions

o   use unconscious filters to filter the multiple stimuli in our situation. Our filtering is guided by our bedrock of assumptions (causes stereotyping and inaccurate assumptions)

o   don’t take on board multiple perspectives

o   often only see what we already know and we ignore critical information because our filters and cognitive structures are so strong. (Diagramming can help to expose that which we don’t see).

o   select observable data at a speed that tends to make leaps in abstraction

  • Remember that once we are anchored at the bottom of the ladder of inference our most underdeveloped skill is our peripheral vision
  • Slowing down the situation (i.e. by diagramming it) so that we can study it
  • Aiming to get a more accurate picture of the whole to open up our peripheral vision
  • Considering social connections – remember that people are socially connected and if we make it so that they stand out they may become socially excluded.
  • Adding in design features that encourage others to reach out and interact with others

Practitioner behaviour and actions

  • Work in a current rationality informed way – so that you can start to shift the rationality as you move forward with the work;
  • Learn the politics and protocols of the environment. Learn how those who are succeeding are manoeuvring around the politics – this will help you work out the ‘rules of the game’;
  • Remember that stress changes our ability to think and a lot of people in the situations using systems thinking are in high stress situations. Therefore, seek to find out what is needed to help people really “think” about the situation (do they need space/ permission/ to be away from the management/ someone to listen?);
  • Consider in advance how people might have negative reactions to systems thinking and pre-develop a set of positive responses to those emotions, rather than reacting negatively, on the spot, which can cause you to lose the respect of those you are working with;
  • Recognise where people have emotional investment and take care in this area. Work out the reason for the emotional investment. Is it valid?
  • Work to increase your own requisite response to other people’s emotional reactions to systems thinking (remember to look at things from another person’s point of view; how powerful will systems thinking feel to them?);
  • Understand what your own go to reflexes are in relation to negative reactions about systems thinking and learn a new set of reflexes to deploy in the event of those negative reactions;
  • Interpret any strong emotions in the situation (including your own). Passion often means people care – go to the root of what they care about and try and maintain that throughout the change. Show emotional empathy to gain buy in;
  • People need some degree of emotional stability to make learning more effective – try to build this kind of environment as you go along;
  • Do not only look at needs and purposes but also look at local rationality. Then, tie this to the flows of influence you identify (if you can). This will help you to identify powerful points that can be changed/ influenced or that might be difficult to change. Identify your potential brick wall areas;
  • Find out what people are upset about first – as part of their rationality – find out what is driving the human behaviour in the situation as well as identifying the dysfunctional aspects of the system (maybe the two go hand in hand?);
  • Try and identify any unrecognised fundamental impediments in current thinking. Are people prisoners to any of their frames of reference?
  • Use interactive planning (i.e. the future is subject to creation. Let the stakeholders define the desirable future). The stakeholders are the designers. Bring the whole system into the discussions right from the beginning;
  • Use judgement and common sense to set the scope;
  • Identify the problem and follow a natural path of inquiry. As each question is answered, move onto the next question that arises. Work fluidly and iteratively, let what you are looking at and what you are being exposed to guide you. It sometime helps not to set an exact route through the inquiry, but to let the inquiry guide you;
  • Take a genuine interest in people;
  • Scrutinize your own thinking as you go along;
  • Sell the problem you solve, not the product you use;
  • Continue to use different ways of presenting the info as this keeps the brain alive and helps it to learn.

Overcome change blindness by ensuring change is explicitly noticeable – when you don’t expect the change you can totally miss it

Advertisements

My blended systems thinking approach

My approach to applying systems thinking in my practice is ever changing. I use a blend of systems thinking methods/ models and concepts but I have found that I dip into and out of and consider a particular set of things quite routinely. I’ve captured them in the following diagram and listed them below.

My approach is iterative and I dip into and out of whatever methods/ models/ concept etc the situation I am in indicates I need to use. It’s very much a work in progress and is ever changing, but here it is so far:

Looking at: internal and external context and identity

  • Internal and external complexity drivers;
  • Purpose, need, demand;
  • Rationality, perception and motivation;
  • Culture;
  • Identity;
  • Rules of the game – how are those who are surviving manoeuvring the politics?
  • Values;
  • Any elements of human centred design that could be considered?

Considering the system of interest and its boundary and the impact of motivations (SSM, CSH)

  • SSM method;
  • Flows of influence – management, quality, objectives, budgets, performance measures, hierarchy, organisational culture, personalities, other departments, legislation, financial;
  • Motivations – Is there a focus on imposed targets? What kind of culture does it indicate if there is (i.e. a fear culture?) Is one member of staff imposing views upon other etc?
  • Control – is there resistance to change on a scale that could be problematic? Do different professional groups have different opinions?
  • Knowledge – are certain personalities manipulating/ dominating the situation?
  • Legitimacy – Is any resistance and conflict hindering the quality of the process? Is it justifiable? Can you identify how alternative behaviours might serve the goal? How would a different perspective of the organisation/ people open up opportunities?

Considering the systems dynamics (SD)

  • Identify the structure (stocks, flows, outflows and feedback) which determines behaviour over time;
  • Understand connections underlying motivations and behaviour – For example – is there a focus on imposed targets? What kind of culture does it indicate if there is (i.e. a fear culture?) Is one member of staff imposing views upon others?
  • Identify the dominating feedback loop – what is the most important thing that is most limiting?
  • History of the system – what is the system’s long-term behaviour?

Considering system statics and dynamics (VSM)

  • VSM diagnostic;
  • Variety imbalances – identify the critical imbalances;
  • Missing components and missing links;
  • Flows and blockages;
  • How is the system interacting with the environment?
  • Archetypes/ pathologies;
  • Strengths, weaknesses, barriers, pain pathways;
  • What are the symptoms of the behaviour of the system?
  • What are the engagement and relationships like?
  • Unfold the complexity of the primary systems;
  • Model the environment
  • What are the connections between the sub systems?
  • What are the connections between sub systems and environment?
  • Model the co-ordination mechanisms;
  • Connections (only look at the connections you need to);
  • Model the management functions – systems 3, 4,5, their interactions, connections to environment, operations and each other;
  • Go up and down 1 recursive level

Including further system analysis

  • Structural couplings;
  • Application of systems laws;
  • Application of the 12 rules;
  • Otto Scharmer’s 3 enemies – are they evident?
  • Work out implications of the structural problems – do they match the symptoms or the problem. What insight do they provide for how an improvement can be designed?
  • Human error factors – are any identifiable?

Identifying options for change (MCA)

  • Systemically desirable and culturally feasible options for change (using MCA)

Using prototype implementation (small scale prototyping)

  • Prototype small scale packages of change based around capability for making change without too much disruption;
  • Change slowly and incrementally by changing one thing at a time;
  • Aim to enhance total system properties like growth, stability, diversity, resilience, diversity

Reviewing & repeating

  • This should be a continuous process and stages are not meant to be chronological. They are intended to be done concurrently (to a point) and each point chosen from, depending upon what the situation requires
  • Work fluidly and iteratively;
  • Let the inquiry guide you and take you where it needs to go.