Applying Systems Archetypes

Applying Systems Archetypes Daniel H. Kim and Colleen P. Lannon S o, you’ve chosen a problem you want to study using systems thinking tools. You gather together some coworkers, round up Contents some flip-chart paper and markers, and sit down to work. But, Systems Archetypes as “Lenses” . 2 after an hour of trying to match the problem to a particular archetype and drawing diagrams that quickly look like The Copy-Center Dilemma: “Tragedy of the Commons” spaghetti, you give up in despair. It all seems so simple when and “Shifting the Burden” you read about it; why is it so difficult to actually do? Productive Conversations and Deeper Inquiry Applying archetypes such as “Shifting the Burden,” “Fixes That Fail,” and “Limits to Growth” to a problem can be a Systems Archetypes as Structural Pattern Templates . .3 confusing and difficult process. It is easy to spend a lot of time Lengthening Delivery Times: “Drifting Goals” in Action trying to figure out which archetype best matches your Seeing Similar Structures Across Diverse Situations particular situation, or trying to get your arrows to go in the right direction. But before you let yourself get caught up in the Systems Archetypes as Dynamic Theories . .5 notion that there is one “right” way to use the archetypes, let’s “Success to the Successful”: An Example of explore several possibilities. Archetypes can be used in at least Technology Transfer four ways: Managers as Researchers and Theory Builders 1. as “lenses”; 2. as structural pattern templates; Systems Archetypes as Tools for Predicting Behavior . .9 Identifying Predetermined Elements 3. as dynamic scripts (or theories); Creating (Not Forecasting) Your Future 4. as tools for predicting behavior. The primary value of any of these approaches is that each Guidelines for Designing Systemic Interventions . .10 provides a different method for initiating discussion and Long-Term Commitment gaining insight into a problem or issue. One method, or a combination of several of them, may best fit your team’s Appendix A: Systems Archetypes at a Glance . .12 particular situation—or your own preferred learning style. For Appendix B: Using the Archetypes . .15 example, a team may choose to focus on the theories behind the archetypes to enrich its understanding of the dynamics within its organization. Or an individual who thinks in terms of patterns might be drawn to using the archetypes as pattern templates to grasp the structure underlying a particular problem. In this volume, we examine these four ways of applying the systems archetypes, and then introduce guidelines for taking Applying Systems Archetypes effective action in problem solving. @1997 by Pegasus Communications, 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 photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the publisher. For additional copies contact: IMS002E [email protected]. Applying Systems Archetypes 2 Pegasus Communications, Inc. (tel) 781-398-9700 www.pegasuscom.com Systems Archetypes photocopy jobs in the order in which in a “Tragedy of the Commons” struc- as “Lenses” they arrive at the center—in short, on a ture lies in having a single governing first-come, first-served basis. authority manage the commons, the When using systems thinking tools to However, during a recent growth rush-job system can be seen as an address an organizational issue, it is spurt at the company, employees from appropriate role for the division’s often helpful to employ the archetypes at numerous departments had begun administrative head. first simply to initiate a general inquiry inundating the copy center with photo- If we look at the same situation into the nature of the problem. Using an copy jobs. As the copy center’s work through the lens of a different arche- archetype in this way can be similar to load ballooned, employees type, however, we can see other putting on a pair of special eyeglasses. If began complaining potentially relevant we look at a situation through the lens of about the issues. For example, “Trying on” the “Shifting the Burden” story line, we length of we know that the different stories leads us to will ask different questions and focus on time it took story line of the different things than if we use the the center to ask provocative questions and can “Shifting the “Tragedy of the Commons” archetype. It complete ultimately reward us with Burden” archetype is not a question of which one is “right” their copying productive conversations. says that a problem but, rather, what unique insights each jobs. To ensure that symptom cries out to be archetype offers. “Trying on” different every department’s needs were met, the fixed. In “Shifting the Burden” situa- stories leads us to ask provocative ques- division established a system whereby tions, we tend to implement a solution tions and can ultimately reward us with employees can ask the administrative that alleviates the symptom in the short productive conversations. head of the division to assign rush-job run rather than to invest in a more last- To use the archetypes as lenses, we status to their copy projects. Projects ing solution. Resorting to a quick fix need a basic understanding of the main given this priority status thus get han- reduces the pressure to examine the lessons, key elements, and outcomes or dled before other copy jobs that may deeper structures that may lurk at the high-leverage actions that are embodied have arrived first at the copy center. root of the problem. in each archetype (see Appendix A, The scenario has all the classic fea- Looking at the copy center situation “Systems Archetypes at a Glance” on p. tures of a “Tragedy of the Commons” from the perspective of this archetype, 12). This level of understanding allows archetype. A large number of players we might be prompted to wonder us to analyze a situation, identify poten- (the individual departments) are com- whether the rush-job solution will send tial story lines at work, explore their peting for a single resource, or “com- the signal that the division’s administra- implications, and gain some initial mons” (the copy center’s capacity). The tive head will “bail out” the departments understanding of the problem under incentive is for each department to have whenever the copy center gets over- study. their photocopy jobs prioritized. loaded. The departments, having come However, the combined total of their to depend on these bailouts, may fail to efforts will eventually hurt the other make an effort to manage their own The Copy Center Dilemma: departments, as the copy center is work flow better. And the division over- “Tragedy of the Commons” forced to handle more and more rush all will neglect to think of other options and “Shifting the Burden” jobs. The irony of the situation is that for solving the problem, such as aug- For example, consider the problem of despite the inevitability of this out- menting copy services at times. Over A-B-C, a large company in which mul- come, it is in no department’s interest time, the fix may become so entrenched tiple departments must rely on one to stop having their copy jobs priori- that it turns into a permanent “Band- photocopy center for their copying tized; in fact, the longer it takes to get Aid solution” that will shift the wrong needs. In an effort to meet all the priority jobs completed, the more each kind of responsibility to the division. For departments’ needs fairly, the manager department will request priority status one thing, the division’s administrative of the photocopy center completes the for their jobs. Yet because the leverage head will be spending more and more Applying Systems Archetypes 3 Pegasus Communications, Inc. (tel) 781-398-9700 www.pegasuscom.com time approving rush jobs instead of Productive Conversations contribute insight into the problem at doing his or her own work. In this case, and Deeper Inquiry hand. Using the archetypes as “lenses” the “Shifting the Burden” archetype Looking at the world through the also puts our primary focus on systemic reveals how the short-term solution lenses of archetypes is an effective structures and not on individuals. This is shifts the burden of responsibility and approach because it reminds us that particularly important at the initial stage overextension from the individual there are multiple ways of perceiving of problem diagnosis, because it lets us departments to the division. any issue—and all of these ways can engage people in the diagnosis process without triggering defensiveness. If you decide to take the approach TRYING ON DIFFERENT EYEGLASSES of using the archetypes as “lenses,” try answering the questions listed in the Questions to Ask When Putting on Each of the Archetype “Lenses” accompanying sidebar to gain insight Drifting Goals into your problem and to see which G Are there goals or standards that are eroding over time? lenses may be relevant (see “Trying on G Are people focused on achieving the goal or on reducing the discomfort of not achiev- Different Eyeglasses”). ing the goal? Escalation G Are there two or more players of equal power whose individual actions can be per- ceived as a threat by the others? Systems Archetypes G Does each player have the capacity to retaliate with similar actions? as Structural Pattern Fixes That Fail Templates G Have actions been taken to respond quickly to a crisis without much consideration of long-term consequences? When talking about complex organiza- G Have similar actions been taken in the past in response to similar crises? tional issues, it is easy for a team to Growth and Underinvestment stray from the main topic into sideline G Do investments tend to be made as a reaction to growth rather than in anticipation of issues that are not very relevant to the growth? issue at hand.

Load more