to Systems Thinking

Introduction

ABOUT THE SPEAKER

Zaipul Anwar Bin Zainudin
Lecturer in Institute of Product Design & Manufacturing, (IPROM) Universiti Kuala Lumpur Tel: 03-27154715, 019-3262427

Email: zaipul@gmail.com
Website: http://www.zaipul.com Blog: http://zaipul.com/category/blogs

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/zaipul
You may download softcopies of all my materials in this session from this link: http://www.zaipul.com/download/tech-innovation-mgt/ - To verify the URL, go to Download link at my website Zaipul.com

The significant problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of thinking at which they were created.
Albert Einstein

WHAT IS SYSTEMS THINKING?

Founded in 1956 by MIT professor, Jay Forrester. System thinking allows people to make their understanding of social system explicit and improve them in the same way that people use engineering principles to improve their understanding of mechanical system.

It is use to: Examining how we create our own problems Seeing the big picture Structure influences performance

SYSTEM THINKING APPROACH

Traditional analysis
Traditional analysis focuses on the separating the individual pieces of what is being studied; in fact, the word analysis actually comes from the root meaning to break into constituent parts.

Systems thinking
Systems thinking, in contrast, focuses on how the thing being studied interacts with the other constituents of the systema set of elements that interact to produce behaviorof which it is a part.

Examples of area System Thinking has proven its value include:

Complex problems that involve helping many actors see the big picture and not just their part of it Recurring problems or those that have been made worse by past attempts to fix them Issues where an action affects (or is affected by) the environment surrounding the issue, either the natural environment or the competitive environment Problems whose solutions are not obvious

Learning to see the world systemically Encourages us to see the whole as well as the parts.
WHOLE PARTS Holistic Thinking

Systems Thinking

!!!

??
Multiple (often) restricted views

??

Systems Thinking
Helps us explore interdependencies and looking for patterns.

Max Barret

Webecoist.com

Systems Thinking
Helps us understand feedback structures that change systems over time.

River Fractal - Hctor Garrido

Systems Thinking
Helps us understand results of our decisions

http://www.systems-thinking.org/theWay/theWay.htm

SYSTEMS THINKING TOOLS Causal Loop Diagrams

A useful way to represent dynamic interrelationships Provide a visual representation with which to
communicate that understanding

Make explicit one's understanding of a system

structure - Capture the mental model

Components of Causal Loop Diagrams

Variables - an element in a situation which may act or be acted upon Vary up or down over time (not an event) Nouns or noun phrases (not action words) Links / Arrows - show the relationship and the direction of influence between variables S's and O's - show the way one variable moves or changes in relation to another S or + stands for "same direction O or - stands for "opposite direction or B - Balancing feedback loop that seeks equilibrium or R - Reinforcing feedback loop that amplifies change

Types of Causal Loop Diagrams Reinforcing Loop

Structure
Employee Performance
S S

Behavior Over Time

Supportive Behavior

Perf. Level

Supervisors Supportive Behavior

Unsupportive Behavior Time

Types of Causal Loop Diagrams

Balancing Loop
Structure
Desired Inventory
S

Behavior Over Time

Discrepancy
O
100 ++

Actual Inventory

Actual Inventory
S

Desired Inventory

Inventory Adjustment

100 100 - -

Time

SYSTEMS THINKING ARCHETYPES

A class of tools that capture the "common stories in systems thinking
Powerful tools for diagnosing problems and identifying high leverage interventions that creates fundamental change

List of System Thinking Archetype

1. Fixes that Fail / Backfire
2. Limits to Growth/Success 3. Shifting the Burden / Addiction 4. Tragedy of the Commons 5. Drifting Goals

1. Fixes that Fail

S
Problem Symptom

Behavior Over Time

Fix

O
S

Delay

S
Unintended Consequences

Time

1. Fixes that Fail

Example: An example would be fixing problem of a squeaky wheel. Imagine someone who knows nothing about mechanics, mistakenly grab a can of water and splash it on the wheel. With great relief the squeaking stop for a while, it will return more loudly as the water join forces to rust the joint.

1. Fixes that Fail

Prescriptive actions: Increase awareness of the unintended consequences Cut back on the frequency with which you apply the fix Try to minimize the undesirable consequences Reframe and address the root problem, give up the fix that works only on the symtom Breaking fixes that fail merely alleviating a symptom, not really solving the problem. A two pronged attack of applying fix and finding fundamental solution will help to break the problem.

2. Limits to Growth
Structure
S

Behavior Over Time

Burnout

Target
S O

Growing Action

Perf. Level
Diminishing Returns

Corrective Action
S

Actual Performance

Positive Reinforcement

Time

2. Limits to Growth

2. Limits to Growth
Example: At the beginning of a quality improvement campaign, significant gains in quality and productivity were achieved. Once this achieved, the level of improvements plateaus.

The next wave of improvements are more complex and tougher to manage. Later the lack of organization-wide support leads to limited/diminishing quality and productivity of the whole organization (it becomes stagnant or diminish).

2. Limits to Growth
Prescriptive actions: Beware of doing more of what worked in the past. If your growth has stalled, look at both reinforcing and balancing loops to try to find interrelationships between your success strategies and potential limits. Look for other potential engines of growth. The real leverage in limits to growth scenario lies in its early phases. The choice between plateauing or peaking often depends on length of balancing loop delay and our response to it.

3. Shifting the Burden

Quick fixes + _ _ Problem/symptom _ _ + Source of problem /Root cause _
Time

Behavior Over Time + Side effects

Efforts Quick fix

Problem symptom

Capacity of system to fix itself

3. Shifting the Burden

Apply Patches + Behavior Over Time + Feeling of Okay
Apply patches

_ _ Damage of Road
_

Damage of road

+
_ + Proper Road Contruction

Proper road construction

Time

3. Shifting the Burden

Example: Problem of pot holes on the road. The problem is handled by applying patches with immediate effect, thereby solving the problem for a while. The primary source of the problem is overlooked, that is the overall quality of the road construction. The origin of the problem should be identified and solved in the long-term run or else the quality of the road will be further diminished.

3. Shifting the Burden

Prescriptive actions: Strengthen the long-term solution. If possible, support only long-term solution. If you must address the symtoms right away, do so with restraint. As you strengthen long-term capability, do what you can to reduce dependency on the short-term fix.

4. Tragedy of the Commons

S

Net Gains for A

S S

As Activity
S

Resource Limit
S

Total Activity
S S

Gain per Individual Activity

Time

B
S

Bs Activity
S

Net Gains for B

Time

4. Tragedy of the Commons

Fixed Budget
S

Investment in features
S

Success from Product Investment

S

Investment in Integration

DELAY
Investment in Integration
S

Perceived Success from Integration

Time

B
O

Success from Product Investment

S

Time

Fixed Budget

Investment in features

4. Tragedy of the Commons

Example: Traffic jam in Kuala Lumpur. Everyone wishes to avoid traffic jam will use the highway. At first there is room for everyone, but after sometimes critical threshold has been reached, each driver brings about decrease in average speed. As individuals each person feels he or she is a victim of traffic but in effect they all conspired as a group to create traffic jam.

4. Tragedy of the Commons

Prescriptive actions:

In any of the tragedy situations, there must be an overriding legislation for common good. To protect common resources some form of regulation should be introduced. Re-evaluate the nature of the commons to determine if there are ways to replace, renew or substitute the resources before it becomes depleted.

5. Drifting Goals
O

Goal

Pressure to Lower Goal

S S

Goal

Gap

Time
S O

Actual
S

Corrective Action

Delay

5. Drifting Goals
S

Perceived Desired Temperature

O S

Tolerance for Temperature

Temperature Gap
S O

Temp

Time
Hop Out

5. Drifting Goals
Example: If you put a frog in cold water and slowly bring the water to boil the frog will jump out when it gets uncomfortable or even died in the boiling water If you put a frog in boiling water, it will croak IMMEDIATELY.

5. Drifting Goals
Prescriptive actions:

Establish a clear transition plan from current reality to the goal including realistic timeframe to achieve the goal. Determine whether the drift in performance is the result of conflicts between the stated goal and implicit goals in the system. Anchor the goal to an external frame of reference (benchmarking).

Systems Thinking
Case Study

Crop Damaging by Insects

Reducing Crop Damage by Insects:

When an insect is eating a crop, the conventional response is to spray the crop with a pesticide designed to kill that insect. Putting aside the limited effectiveness of some pesticides and the water and soil pollution they can cause, imagine a perfect pesticide that kills all of the insects against which it is used and which has no side effects on air, water, or soil.

Is using this pesticide likely to make the farmer or company whose crops are being eaten better off?

Reducing Crop Damage by Insects:

If we represent the thinking used by those applying the pesticides, it would look like this:
Pesticide Application
1.
O

Insects Damaging Crops

The letter indicates how the two variables are related: an s means they change in the same direction - if one goes up then the other goes up, and an o means they change in the opposite direction - if one goes up then the other goes down (or vice versa).

2.

This diagram is read a change in the amount of pesticide applied causes the number of insects damaging crops to change in the opposite direction.
The belief being represented here is that as the amount of pesticide applied increases, the number of insects damaging crops decreases.

3.

Reducing Crop Damage by Insects:

Number of Insect A Damaging Crop
O O

Number of Insect B Pesticide Application

S S

Number of Insect B Damaging Crop Total number of Insects damaging crop

S

Reducing Crop Damage by Insects:

4. 5. The problem of crop damage due to insects often does get better - in the short term. Unfortunately, what frequently happens is that in following years the problem of crop damage gets worse and worse and the pesticide that formerly seemed so effective does not seem to help anymore. This is because the insect A that was eating the crops was controlling the population of another insect B, either by preying on it or by competing with it. When the pesticide kills the insects A that were eating the crops, it eliminates the control that those insects were applying on the population of the other insects, insects B). Then the population of the insects B that were being controlled explodes and continue to damage the crops.

6.

7.

8.

Reducing Crop Damage by Insects: So now how do you solve the problem of Insect B damaging the crop?

Find the solution..

Reducing Crop Damage by Insects The solution:

With this picture of the system in mind, other actions with better long-term results have been developed, such as Integrated Pest Management, which includes controlling the insect eating the crops by introducing more of its predators into the area. These methods have been proven effective in studies conducted by MIT, the National Academy of Sciences, and others, and they also avoid running the risk of soil and water pollution.

To more about Systems Thinking, read this book! THE FIFTH DISCIPLINES
Personal Mastery Shared Vision Mental Models

Systems Thinking Team Learning

References
Warfield, J. Societal Systems, Intersystems, 1989. Joseph OConnor & Ian McDermott. The Art of Systems Thinking, Thorsons, 1997. Senge, P.M.
The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization, Doubleday, 1990. The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies and Tools for Building A Learning Organization, Doubleday, 1994.

System Dynamics / Systems Thinking Mega Link List http://www.uni-klu.ac.at/users/gossimit/links/bookmksd.htm The Way of Systems (System Archetypes) http://www.outsights.com/systems/theWay/theWay.htm Daniel Aronson, Overview of Systems Thinking, 1996-8 http://www.thinking.net