systems Conference Report What is Systems Thinking? Expert Perspectives from the WPI Systems Thinking Colloquium of 2 October 2019 Matthew Amissah *, Thomas Gannon and Jamie Monat Electrical & Computer Engineering Department (Systems Engineering Program), Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609, USA; [email protected] (T.G.); [email protected] (J.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 7 February 2020; Accepted: 12 February 2020; Published: 27 February 2020 Abstract: Systems thinking is an approach to reasoning and treatment of real-world problems based on the fundamental notion of ‘system.’ System here refers to a purposeful assembly of components. Thus, systems thinking is aimed at understanding relationships between components and their overall impact on system outcomes (i.e., intended and unintended) and how a system similarly fits in the broader context of its environment. There are currently several distinct flavors of systems thinking, both in practice and scholarship; most notably in the disciplines of systems science, systems engineering, and systems dynamics. Each of these, while similar in purpose, has a distinct history and a rich set of methods and tools for various application contexts. The WPI Systems Thinking Colloquium held on 2 October 2019 was aimed at exploring the diversity of perspectives on systems thinking from these disciplines. The colloquium brought together world-renowned experts from both industry and academia to share insights from their research and practice. This paper offers a compilation of summaries of the presentations given. Keywords: systems thinking; systems science; complexity 1. Introduction Systems thinking is an approach to reasoning and treatment of real-world problems based on the fundamental notion of ‘system.’ System here refers to a purposeful assembly of components. Thus, systems thinking is aimed at understanding relationships between components and their overall impact on system outcomes (i.e., intended and unintended) and how a system of interest similarly fits in the broader context of its environment. There are currently several distinct flavors of systems thinking, both in practice and scholarship; most notably in the disciplines of systems science, systems engineering, and systems dynamics. Each of these, while similar in purpose, has a distinct history and a rich set of methods and tools for various application contexts. The WPI Systems Thinking Colloquium held on 2 October 2019 was aimed at exploring the diversity of perspectives in systems thinking from these disciplines. The colloquium brought together world-renowned experts from both industry and academia to share insights from their research and practice. The experts were asked to give a thirty-minute presentation reflecting their definition of systems thinking. Many of the presenters addressed this request by discussing methodologies, insights for systems thinking in education, and systems modeling. To elucidate commonalities in the presentations, each was parsed for systems thinking concepts that were mentioned or discussed. Figure1 below is a Pareto chart that shows the number of speakers who mentioned the concepts listed. Systems 2020, 8, 6; doi:10.3390/systems8010006 www.mdpi.com/journal/systems Systems 2020, 8, 6 2 of 26 Systems 2020, 8, 6 2 of 25 Figure 1. Number of speakers vs. systems thinking concept mentioned. For this this chart, chart, only only concepts concepts that that were were mentio mentionedned by bymore more than than one onepresenter presenter are shown. are shown. The Thecomplete complete list of list concepts of concepts collated collated are: are: Emergence, Emergence, problems problems cannot cannot be be solved solved by by technology technology alone, alone, integrative thinking,thinking, soft soft systems systems modeling, modeling, hard systems hard modeling,systems scenariomodeling, planning, scenario organizational planning, learning,organizational information learning, processing information transactions, processing context, transactions, perspectives, context, holisticperspectives, thinking holistic perspectives thinking (HTPs),perspectives well-structured (HTPs), well-structu problems,red ill-structured problems, problems,ill-structured wicked prob andlems, messy wicked problems, and messy out-of-the-box problems, solutions,out-of-the-box boundary solutions, of knowledge, boundary volatility,of knowledge, uncertainty, volatility, ambiguity, uncertainty, complex ambiguity, adaptive complex systems, cognitiveadaptive systems, structures, cognitive bivalent structures, logic, and bivalent multivalent logic, logic. and multivalent logic. Interestingly, severalseveral conceptsconcepts thatthat areare mentionedmentioned in the literature were not mentioned at all by the presenters. These These include include the the iceberg iceberg model, model, self self-organization,-organization, oscillation, oscillation, organized organized complexity, complexity, archetypes, and systemic root causecause analysis. It is not clear whether these omissions represent a trend away from these concepts in the systems thinking universeuniverse or whether this is simply an artifact of the set of speakers. It is our hope that fu futureture colloquia will address this issue. Subsequent sections of the paper offer offer a compilation of summaries of the presentations given. given. Each section title is followedfollowed byby thethe presenter’spresenter’s name.name. The full presentations and other conference materials can be accessed at the colloquium websitewebsite [[1].1]. 2. Systems Thinking a Catalyst for Purposeful Change by David Peter Stroh There areare systems systems thinkers thinkers who who can can benefit benefit from fr understandingom understanding how tohow manage to manage change, change, and change and agentschange whoagents can who benefit can benefit from understanding from understanding the core th principlese core principles and tools and oftools systems of systems thinking. thinking. This thoughtThis thought piece piece is intended is intended to serve to serve both both groups. groups. Donella Meadows [2] [2] definesdefines a system as an interconnected set of elements that is coherently organized in a wayway thatthat achievesachieves something.something. The vagueness of that last wordword signalssignals aa lot:lot: While systems may be perfectly designed to achieve someth something,ing, they are not necessarily designed to achieve what people most want them to. I believe then that systems thinking is the ability to understand these interconnections inin suchsuch aa wayway asas toto achieveachieve aa desireddesired purpose.purpose. Systems thinkingthinking helps helps leaders leaders meet meet four four challenges challenges of change of change in ways in that ways other that change other methods change domethods not: do not: 1. ItIt helps helps meet meet the challenge of motivation by showing people how theythey unwittinglyunwittingly contributecontribute toto the the very very problem problem they they are trying to solve andand thus stimulating them to question their own intentions,intentions, thinking, thinking, and and behavior. behavior. 2. ItIt helps helps meet meet the the challenge challenge of of collaboration collaboration by by showing showing people how their actions not only impact othersothers in in the the system but also impact themselves in uninten unintendedded and and often undesirable ways. ways. Everyone is in the same boat, and therefore everyone needs to be responsible for redesigning the boat to be more functional. Systems 2020, 8, 6 3 of 26 Everyone is in the same boat, and therefore everyone needs to be responsible for redesigning the Systems 2020, 8, 6 3 of 25 boat to be more functional. 3. ItIt helps helps meet meet the the challenge challenge of of focus focus by by guiding guiding people people to to target target leverage leverage points points instead of leading themthem to to assume assume that that change change occurs occurs by by doing doing as as much much as as you you can as fast as possible. 4. Finally,Finally, it helps meet the need for learning by directing people to continuously question their responsibility,responsibility, however unintentional, for current reality. The changechange processprocess II developed developed with with my my long-time long-time collaborator collaborator Michael Michael Goodman Goodman builds builds on theon creativethe creative tension tension model model introduced introduced by by our our colleague colleague Peter Peter Senge Senge in inThe The Fifth Fifth Discipline Discipline[ [3]3].. ItIt guides leaders and other stakeholders through aa four-stage changechange process,process, eacheach withwith its own tasks as shown in Figure2 2 below: below: Figure 2. Four stages of leading systemic change. Some recommended guidelines in using thisthis processprocess include:include: • Emphasize thatthat developingdeveloping a a shared shared understanding understanding of of the the current current system system and and why why it exists it exists is the is • firstthe first step step towards towards changing changing it. it. • Align stakeholders around a focusing question beginning with “Why?” such as “Why have we • been unable to solve this problem despitedespite ourour bestbest eefforts?”fforts?” • Develop a diagram that maps anan answeranswer toto thisthis question,question, notnot “the“the system”system” overall.overall. • • Ensure that your systems analysis shows people how they contribute to the problem,