DOCSLIB.ORG

System Governance Analysis of Complex Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
System Governance Analysis of Complex Systems Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Engineering Management & Systems Engineering Management & Systems Engineering Theses & Dissertations Engineering Winter 2013 System Governance Analysis of Complex Systems Behnido Y. Calida Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/emse_etds Part of the Industrial Engineering Commons, and the Systems Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Calida, Behnido Y.. "System Governance Analysis of Complex Systems" (2013). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Dissertation, Engineering Management & Systems Engineering, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/8pjq-6e64 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/emse_etds/63 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Engineering Management & Systems Engineering at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Engineering Management & Systems Engineering Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SYSTEM GOVERNANCE ANALYSIS OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS by Behnido Y. Calida B.S. March 2000, University of the Philippines M.E.M. December 2009, Old Dominion University A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY December 2013 Approved by: les Keating (Direi Adrian Gheo/ghe (Member) Patrick Hester (Member) ames Pyne (Member) ABSTRACT SYSTEM GOVERNANCE ANALYSIS OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS Behnido Y. Calida Old Dominion University, 2013 Director: Dr. Charles Keating The purpose of this research was to develop and deploy a systems-based framework for analysis of complex governance systems using a multimethodology research design. Two research gaps motivated this research: : (1) lack of an integrated conceptualization of a system governance construct, (2) an absence of studies that consider both the governed and governing systems as well as the emergent interactions that arise from within complex governance systems. The research focused on three primary questions: (1) What are the distinctive characteristics of governance?; (2) What system-based framework can be developed for analysis of governance in complex systems?, and (3) What results from deployment of the framework in a field setting? The multimethodology research design that guided the effort included three primary phases. First, the literature was synthesized to derive a set of governance elements. This synthesis was accomplished across an extensive and multidisciplinary literature set by a novel method of content document clustering analysis to reveal important elements of governance. Second, a conceptual framework for analysis of system governance was constructed from the confluence of extant governance literature and systems theory. This governance system analysis framework was informed by Bunge’s (2003) system perspective to advance the understanding of governance that will be meaningful in a given practice. Finally, a case based application of the analysis framework was conducted to examine implications of the framework from a field perspective The original research provided contributions to theory, methodology, and practice. From a theoretical perspective, the research contributed to the body of knowledge by providing: (1) a literature derived set of generalizable elements of governance, and (2) the development of a systems-based framework to be used to analyze complex governance systems. From a methodological stand-point, the research advanced an integrated multimethodology research design that featured: (1) a novel content analysis approach for synthesis of diverse literature; (2) the development of an integrated systems analysis method; and (3) a rigorous single-case study application within the engineering management discipline. Lastly, from a practical perspective, the systems framework provided a foundation for derivative approaches to enhance practices related to system governance. V This dissertation is dedicated to my family, to whom I am deeply blessed for their love, patience and support throughout this journey. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my gratitude and thanks to family, friends, mentors, advisors and organizations that provided intellectual, financial and motivational support for this disseration to arrive at its completion. To my academic family, friends and colleagues who encouraged, advised and challenged me to stay the course, in particular my advisor Dr. Chuck Keating, for sharing with me his wealth of experience acting as my valued advocate and mentor in the scholarly process; my dissertation committee members Dr. Adrian Gheorghe, Dr. Patrick Hester and (the recent addition) of Dr. James Pyne for their questions, contributions, time and for sharing their expertise in engaging my intellectual curiosity throughout this dissertation and in other research activities. To the faculty and staff of the Engineering Management and Systems Engineering department, for the support, encouragement, research collaborations, funding and resource-infrastructure support. To past and future Ph.D. students/fellows, thank you for the laughs, the discussions and the company which truly makes the seemingly lonely research/writing nights more colorful. To my wife Rachelle and two sons Sean and Andrei, for enduring, nurturing and giving me my strength, inspiration and best hopes for the future. To my parents on the other side of the globe, for breathing me life into this world, their constant prayers and for their sacrifices so I could have the best opportunities growing up. To my siblings Tricia, Ahron and Colai, for the lifelong memories and future experiences I pray we will have an opportunity to share again. To my in-laws and extended family, for their words of encouragement and timely guidance at important junctures of my dissertation journey. My deepest appreciation for their faith and confidence in me is beyond words. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................ix LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................x INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1 1.1 Research Background.......................................................................................................1 1.2 Problem Overview ............................................................................................................5 1.3 Research Purpose, Objectives Statement and Research Questions ............................. 8 1.4 Research Significance .................................................................................................... 12 1.5 Chapter Summary ...........................................................................................................14 LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................................... 17 2.1 Overview of Body of Knowledge Scope ......................................................................18 2.2 State of the Literature in Systems Philosophy and Approach .....................................22 2.3 State of the Art in Governance ...................................................................................... 32 2.4 Synthesis of General Themes for Governance .............................................................41 2.5 Critique of the Literature ...............................................................................................47 2.6 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................... 50 METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK............................................................................52 3.1 Paradigm and the Research Process ..............................................................................52 3.2 Justification for “Paradigm” in Research ..................................................................... 57 3.3 Rationale for Multimethodology ................................................................................... 62 3.5 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................... 64 RESEARCH DESIGN......................................................................................................... 66 4.1 High-Level “Multimethodology” Research Design .................................................... 66 4.2 Quantitative Phase using Content Analysis .................................................................68 4.3 System Framework Development .................................................................................78 4.4 Qualitative Phase: Single Within-Case Study ..............................................................80 4.5 Final Step: Validation, Conclusion and Write-up ....................................................... 97 4.6 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................... 99 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION........................................................................................100 5.1 Content Analysis: Detecting Key Governance Themes ............................................ 100 5.2 System Governance Analytic Framework Development
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity This Page Intentionally Left Blank Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity
    Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity This Page Intentionally Left Blank Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture SECOND EDITION Jamshid Gharajedaghi AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • HEIDELBERG • LONDON NEW YORK • OXFORD • PARIS • SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO Butterworth-Heinemann is an imprint of Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann is an imprint of Elsevier 30 Corporate Drive, Suite 400, Burlington, MA 01803, USA 525 B Street, Suite 1900, San Diego, California 92101-4495, USA 84 Theobald's Road, London WC1X 8RR, UK This book is printed on acid-free paper. Copyright © 2006, Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Science & Technology Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone: (+44) 1865 843830, fax: (+44) 1865 853333, E-mail: [email protected]. You may also complete your request on-line via the Elsevier homepage (http://elsevier.com), by selecting “Support & Contact” then “Copyright and Permission” and then “Obtaining Permissions.” Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gharajedaghi, Jamshid. Systems thinking : managing chaos and complexity : a platform for designing business architecture / Jamshid Gharajedaghi. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-7506-7163-7 (alk. paper) 1. System analysis. 2. Chaotic behavior in systems. 3. Industrial management. 4. Technological complexity. I. Title. T57.6.G52 1999 003—dc21 98-55939 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
    [Show full text]
  • AFRI and NIWQP Project Directors Meeting
    AFRI and NIWQP Project Directors Meeting Washington, D.C October 12-13, 2016 United States Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture Agriculture and Food Research Initiative/National Integrated Water Quality AFRI and NIWQP Annual Project Directors Meeting United State Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture Washington D.C 20024 Welcome to the 2016 AFRI/NIWQP Annual Project Directors Meeting The USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) welcomes you to the FY 2016 USDA- NIFA AFRI and NIWQP Annual Project Directors’ Meeting. The meeting brings together project directors, co- project directors, graduate students and collaborators from the National Integrated Water Quality Program (NIWQP, FY 2010-2014), the Agricultural and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), Water for Agriculture Challenge Area (FY 2014,-2015), AFRI Foundational RENRE (FY 2011- 2013) program and AFRI Foundational BENRE (FY2014 - FY2015). The purpose of the meeting is for NIFA staff to interact with awardees and learn more about the success of their projects, identify outcomes and learn about current research needs. It will also provide the opportunity for awardees to get the most recent updates on program priorities and new programs. This year we have added additional breakout sessions for more interaction and networking opportunity. We expect that the interaction among awardees will provide the opportunity for collaboration that will help in the development of future NIFA awards. We hope that everyone who attends will be enriched and impressed by the exciting science, innovation and productivity of your fellow awardees. Thank you for coming! Sincerely, James (Jim) Dobrowolski Nancy Cavallaro Dewell Paez Nat’l Program Leader Nat’l Program Leader Program Specialist 202 -401-5016 202-401-5176 202-401-4141 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] AGENDA Wednesday, October 12, 2016 7:00 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Consciousness and Its Evolution: from a Human Being to a Post-Human
    Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej w Lublinie Wydział Filozofii i Socjologii Taras Handziy Consciousness and Its Evolution: From a Human Being to a Post-Human Rozprawa doktorska napisana pod kierunkiem dr hab. Zbysława Muszyńskiego, prof. nadzw. UMCS Lublin 2014 Table of Contents Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 Chapter 1: Consciousness, Mind, and Body …………………………………………………… 18 1.1 Conceptions of Consciousness …………………………………………………………. 18 1.1.1 Colin McGinn’s Conception of Consciousness ……………………………………….... 18 1.1.1.1 Owen Flanagan’s Analysis of Colin McGinn’s Conception of Consciousness ….…….. 20 1.1.2 Paola Zizzi’s Conception of Consciousness ………………………………………….… 21 1.1.3 William James’ Stream of Consciousness ……………………………………………… 22 1.1.4 Ervin Laszlo’s Conception of Consciousness …………………………………………... 22 1.2 Consciousness and Soul ………………………………………...………………………. 24 1.3 Problems in Definition of Consciousness ………………………………………………. 24 1.4 Distinctions between Consciousness and Mind ………………………………………... 25 1.5 Problems in Definition of Mind ………………………………………………………… 26 1.6 Dogmatism in Mind and Mind without Dogmatism ……………………………………. 27 1.6.1 Dogmatism in Mind …………………………………………………………………….. 27 1.6.2 Mind without Dogmatism …………………………………………………………….… 28 1.6.3 Rupert Sheldrake’s Dogmatism in Science …………………………………………….. 29 1.7 Criticism of Scientific Approaches towards Study of Mind ……………….…………… 30 1.8 Conceptions of Mind …………………………………………………………………… 31 1.8.1 Rupert Sheldrake’s Conception of Extended Mind …………………………………….. 31 1.8.2 Colin McGinns’s Knowing and Willing Halves of Mind ……………………………..... 34 1.8.3 Francisco Varela’s, Evan Thompson’s, and Eleanor Rosch’s Embodied Mind ………... 35 1.8.4 Andy Clark’s Extended Mind …………………………………………………………... 35 1.8.5 Role of Mind Understood by Paola Zizzi ………………………………………………. 36 1.9 Mind in Buddhism, Consciousness in Tibetan Buddhism ……………………………… 36 1.9.1 Mind in Buddhism ……………………………………………………………………… 36 1.9.2 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Solin JSE February 2017 General
    Journal of Sustainability Education Vol. 12, February 2017 ISSN: 2151-7452 Book Review of Systems Thinking Made Simple: New Hope for Solving Wicked Problems Jeremy Solin (University of Wisconsin-Extension, ThinkWater) [email protected] Abstract: In this book review the author summarized the text, Systems thinking made simple: New hope for solving wicked problems by Derek and Laura Cabrera (2015). In the text, cognitive thought is described as a complex adaptive system and four simple rules of thinking are included as an approach to problem solving. Keywords: cognition, complex adaptive systems, sustainability education, systems thinking, thinking Dr. Jeremy Solin is the Wisconsin Coordinator and National Program Manager of ThinkWater, a national campaign supported by USDA to help people of all backgrounds and ages think and care deeply about water. He’s worked in the environmental and sustainability education fields for the past 20 years. Book Review of Systems Thinking Made Simple: New Hope for Solving Wicked Problems As an educator for the past 20 years, I would have told you that systems thinking was at the core of my approach to teaching – helping people understand things from a critical systems perspective. What I have come to realize is that my understanding of systems thinking was helping people understand systems science, but not using systems science to understand their own thinking. Dr. Derek Cabrera a cognitive and systems scientist at Cornell, and author, along with his partner Laura, of Systems Thinking Made Simple: New Hope for Solving Wicked Problems, helped me to connect systems and thinking. In Systems Thinking Made Simple, the Cabrera’s lay out the case for understanding thinking as a complex adaptive system (CAS).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Umpleby Stuart Reconsidering Cybernetics
    UMPLEBY STUART RECONSIDERING CYBERNETICS The field of cybernetics attracted great attention in the 1950s and 1960s with its prediction of a Second Industrial Revolution due to computer technology. In recent years few people in the US have heard of cybernetics (Umpleby, 2015a, see Figures 1 and 2 at the end of Paper). But a wave of recent books suggests that interest in cybernetics is returning (Umpleby and Hughes, 2016, see Figure at the end of Paper). This white paper reviews some basic ideas in cybernetics. I recommend these and other ideas as a resource for better understanding and modeling of social systems, including threat and response dynamics. Some may claim that whatever was useful has already been incorporated in current work generally falling under the complexity label, but that is not the case. Work in cybernetics has continued with notable contributions in recent years. Systems science, complex systems, and cybernetics are three largely independent fields with their own associations, journals and conferences (Umpleby, 2017). Four types of descriptions used in social science After working in social science and systems science for many years I realized that different academic disciplines use different basic elements. Economists use measurable variables such as price, savings, GDP, imports and exports. Psychologists focus on ideas, concepts and attitudes. Sociologists and political scientists focus on groups, organizations, and coalitions. Historians and legal scholars emphasize events and procedures. People trained in different disciplines construct different narratives using these basic elements. One way to reveal more of the variety in a social system is to create at least four descriptions – one each using variables, ideas, groups, and events (See the figures and tables in Medvedeva & Umpleby, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • 82 Chapter IV Niklas Luhmann's Communicative Systems Theory
    Chapter IV Niklas Luhmann’s Communicative Systems Theory Framework With his concentrated formulations in Ecological Communication (1989), Luhmann deals with ecological communication far more directly than Bateson. In principle, that must make it easier to introduce his framework, especially given the additional facility his highly systematic approach to both writing and composing was supposed to impart. In reality, however, it is no less difficult introducing Luhmann in the current context because of the following factors: One, he has been no less lucky than was Bateson at having been “discovered” and had his general thought introduced by the excellent introducers to his individual books that have been translated into English.1 Two, the temptation to introduce Luhmann’s overall social theory, instead of focusing strictly on his theory of EC, is enormous: The temptation is only transformed into a treacherous pressure because of his systematic style of writing and conceptualization in which each one of his individual philosophical forays is to a great extent a specific replay of his overall philosophy. For example, his theory of EC is, in most ways, a tightly- designed and shortened localization of his larger philosophy of social systems. Three, and in relation to the above, it is also very tempting to introduce the history of systems theory as a whole (part of which I have done already in the earlier part of this essay), make a comprehensive gesture at placing Luhmann’s particular interventions within it (constitutive of his overall systems philosophy), and then to place his theory of EC within the above two. And, four, Luhmann’s work is highly self-referential, obtuse, abstract, and frightfully repetitive! What follows below does not completely resolve the above technical difficulties of introducing—some of which translate, on the whole, into the age-old problem of detecting and managing avoidable detail.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Systems Theory?
    What is Systems Theory? Systems theory is an interdisciplinary theory about the nature of complex systems in nature, society, and science, and is a framework by which one can investigate and/or describe any group of objects that work together to produce some result. This could be a single organism, any organization or society, or any electro-mechanical or informational artifact. As a technical and general academic area of study it predominantly refers to the science of systems that resulted from Bertalanffy's General System Theory (GST), among others, in initiating what became a project of systems research and practice. Systems theoretical approaches were later appropriated in other fields, such as in the structural functionalist sociology of Talcott Parsons and Niklas Luhmann . Contents - 1 Overview - 2 History - 3 Developments in system theories - 3.1 General systems research and systems inquiry - 3.2 Cybernetics - 3.3 Complex adaptive systems - 4 Applications of system theories - 4.1 Living systems theory - 4.2 Organizational theory - 4.3 Software and computing - 4.4 Sociology and Sociocybernetics - 4.5 System dynamics - 4.6 Systems engineering - 4.7 Systems psychology - 5 See also - 6 References - 7 Further reading - 8 External links - 9 Organisations // Overview 1 / 20 What is Systems Theory? Margaret Mead was an influential figure in systems theory. Contemporary ideas from systems theory have grown with diversified areas, exemplified by the work of Béla H. Bánáthy, ecological systems with Howard T. Odum, Eugene Odum and Fritj of Capra , organizational theory and management with individuals such as Peter Senge , interdisciplinary study with areas like Human Resource Development from the work of Richard A.
    [Show full text]
  • Detangling the Wicked Problem of Modern Crime
    WEBS OF DECEIT: DETANGLING THE WICKED PROBLEM OF MODERN CRIME drhgfdjhngngfmhgmghmghjmghfmf For: 2016 Fram Applied Critical Thinking Speaker Series PAMELA J. SYDELKO DIRECTOR: SYSTEMS SCIENCE CENTER GLOBAL SECURITY SCIENCES DIVISION ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY Pamela J. Sydelko Education PhD M.S. in Soil B.S. in Botany MBA Candidate Science Systems North Dakota Skills Science University University the State Something aboutUniversity me that of you should know of Illinois of Chicago University Hull, UK 1982 1984 2004 Present Experience Environmental Spatial GIS Integrated Executive Systems Science Modeling M&S Management Science the zero 1985 1988 1994 2003 2004 2014 U.S. Army Argonne Construction National Engineering Laboratory Research Laboratory 2 WHAT IS A SYSTEM? EVOLUTION OF SYSTEMS THINKING Systems HARD AND SOFT SYSTEMS THINKING Thinking CRITICAL SYSTEMS THINKING (CST) RadialSYSTEMIC List INTERVENTION-SmartArt This is example for a subtitle WHAT IS A WICKED PROBLEM? Wicked Problems PROPERTIES OF WICKED PROBLEMS COMPLICATED VS WICKED PROBLEM? Brainstorm OUTLINE The Inter- STOVE-PIPED GOVERNMENT agency GOVERNMENT CZARS AND TASK FORCES Proposal PARTICIPATORY SYSTEMIC PROBLEM STRUCTURING Crime at ANTICIPATORY SYSTEMS the Urban Edge SYSTEMIC ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN EVALUATION OF METHODS AND PROCESS 3 4 WHAT IS A SYSTEM? . A System is a set of interacting or interdependent components forming an integrated whole and serving a common purpose 5 FOUNDATIONS OF SYSTEMS THINKING? "Modern science is characterized by its ever-increasing specialization, necessitated by the enormous amount of data, the complexity of Ludwig von Bertalanffy techniques and of Systems thinking has theoretical structures “There appear to exist roots in the General within every field. Thus general system laws which apply to any Systems Theory that science is split into was advanced by system of a particular Ludwig von innumerable type, irrespective of the Bertalanffy in disciplines continually particular properties of the1940’s.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems Thinking Is the Process of Understanding How Things Influence One Another Within a Whole
    Systems Thinking Systems thinking is the process of understanding how things influence one another within a whole. In nature, systems thinking examples include ecosystems in which various elements such as air, water, movement, plants, and animals work together to survive or perish. In organizations, systems consist of people, structures, and processes that work together to make an organization healthy or unhealthy. Systems Thinking has been defined as an approach to problem solving, by viewing "problems" as parts of an overall system, rather than reacting to specific part, outcomes or events and potentially contributing to further development of unintended consequences. Systems thinking is not one thing but a set of habits or practices [1] within a framework that is based on the belief that the component parts of a system can best be understood in the context of relationships with each other and with other systems, rather than in isolation. Systems thinking focuses on cyclical rather than linear cause and effect. In science systems, it is argued that the only way to fully understand why a problem or element occurs and persists is to understand the parts in relation to the whole. [2] Standing in contrast to Descartes's scientific reductionism and philosophical analysis , it proposes to view systems in a holistic manner. Consistent with systems philosophy , systems thinking concerns an understanding of a system by examining the linkages and 1 / 8 Systems Thinking interactions between the elements that compose the entirety of the system. Science systems thinking attempts to illustrate that events are separated by distance and time and that small catalytic events can cause large changes in complex systems .
    [Show full text]
  • Gregory Bateson, Cybernetics, and the Social/Behavioral Sciences
    GREGORY BATESON, CYBERNETICS, AND THE SOCIAL/BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES ABSTRACT Gregory Bateson's interdisciplinary work in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology was profoundly influenced by the ideas set forth in systems theory, communication theory, information theory and cybernetics. As is now quite common, Bateson used the single term cybernetics in reference to an aggregate of these ideas that grew together shortly after World War II. For him, cybernetics, or communication theory, or information theory, or systems theory, together constituted a unified set of ideas, and he was among the first to appreciate the fact that the patterns of organization and relational symmetry evident in all living systems are indicative of mind. Here, we must not forget that due to the nineteenth century polemic between science and religion, any consideration of purpose and plan, e.g., mental process, had been a priori excluded from science as non-empirical, or immeasurable. Any reference to mind as an explanatory or causal principle had been banned from biology. Even in the social/behavioral sciences, references to mind remained suspect. Building on the work of Norbert Wiener, Warren McCulloch, and W. Ross Ashby, Bateson realized that it is precisely mental process or mind which must be investigated. Thus, he formulated the criteria of mind and the cybernetic epistemology that are pivotal elements in his "ecological philosophy." In fact, he referred to cybernetics as an epistemology: e.g., the model, itself, is a means of knowing what sort of world this is, and also the limitations that exist concerning our ability to know something (or perhaps nothing) of such matters.
    [Show full text]
  • NOT ALL VISUAL MAPS ARE CREATED EQUAL the Cognitive Style of Visual Maps
    NOT ALL VISUAL MAPS ARE CREATED EQUAL The Cognitive Style of Visual Maps is an approximation of describes, summarizes, predicts, and leads to behavior in mental model real world the way you think about the real all or part of the real world situation or environment in which situation or environment in you are working which you are working informs through feedback consequences of which inform adapta- tion; selective effect on viability and on competition among model WHITE PAPER NO. 2 • FEBRUARY 2018 NOT ALL VISUAL MAPS ARE CREATED EQUAL 2 n Why You Should Map: The Science Behind Visual The Cognitive Style of Modern Maps Mapping (#1 in a 3-part series of short white papers) Figure 1 illustrates a few of the most popular approaches to you learned why visual/tactile maps are so critically visual mapping: a) mindmaps, b) concept maps, c) network Iimportant to your success in any domain. But, not all visual maps, and d) dsrp network maps. Underlying each of these maps are created equal. The best maps: visual approaches is an architecture: the implicit or explicit 1. help us align our ideas with the real world and real structure of the map style. This architecture is usually action, and; (although not always) predicated on assumptions about how 2. help us to avoid costly pitfalls associated with forcing the human mind structures information, or inversely how real-world phenomena (square peg) into a particular human knowledge (subject matter, etc.) is structured. cognitive style (round hole). Mind maps (Figure 1a) developed by inventor Tony Buzan It is important to evaluate the cognitive style that underlies rely on an assumption that the underlying structure of visual mapping tools and techniques before using them to human thought is radial (emanating from a central point) have better ideas that lead to better action.
    [Show full text]
  • 3. Systems Inquiry and Its Application in Education
    3. SYSTEMS INQUIRY AND ITS APPLICATION IN EDUCATION Bela H. Banathy INTERNATIONAL SYSTEMS INSTITUTE 3.1 PART 1: SYSTEMS INQUIRY theory, the science of complexity. In defining systems theory, I review the key ideas of Bertalanffy and Boulding, who were The first part of this chapter is a review of the evolution two of the founders of the Society for the Advancement of of the systems movement and a discussion of human sys- General Systems Theory. Later, the name of the society was tems inquiry. changed to the Society for General Systems Research, then the International Society for Systems research, and recently 3.1.1 A Definition of Systems Inquiry to the International Society for the Systems Sciences. Systems inquiry incorporates three interrelated domains 3.1.1.1.1. Bertalanffy (1956, pp. 1—10). He suggested of disciplined inquiry: systems theory, systems philosophy, that “modem science is characterized by its ever-increasing and systems methodology. Bertalanffy (1968) notes that in specialization, necessitated by the enormous amount of data, contrast with the analytical, reductionist, and linear-causal the complexity of techniques, and structures within every paradigm of classical science, systems philosophy brings forth field. This, however, led to a breakdown of science as an a reorientation of thought and world view, manifested by an integrated realm. “Scientists, operating in the various dis- expansionist, nonlinear dynamic, and synthetic mode of ciplines, are encapsulated in their private universe, and it is thinking. The scientific exploration of systems theories and difficult to get word from one cocoon to the other.” Against the development of systems theories in the various sciences this background, he observes a remarkable development, have brought forth a general theory of systems, a set of inter- namely, that “similar general viewpoints and conceptions related concepts and principles, applying to all systems.
    [Show full text]