2012/02 CS0005 Systemic Thinking for Planners and Designers

This document is accessible (and may be updated) at http://garymetcalf.com/aalto/201202-cs0005 .

• This is revision 0212 (as posted at January 3, 01:00 CET).

jump to: [Pre-course Preparation] [Concurrent Studies] [Tuesday, February 28] [Friday, March 2] [Between sessions] [Tuesday, March 6] [Due (to be decided)]

jump to: [Dialectics] [Grading] [Tools]

jump to: References [Cluster 1] [Cluster 2] [Cluster 3] [Cluster 4] [Cluster 5] [Cluster 6] [Cluster 7]

Course instructors:

• Aija Staffans, aija.staffans@tkk.fi
• Katri-Liisa Pulkkinen, katri.pulkkinen@opendesign.fi
• Gary Metcalf, http://garymetcalf.com and http://syscoi.com/commons/members/garymetcalf/

This course is listed as CS0005, with the code of Syst Think P D.  Sessions are scheduled as:

• 28.02.12, tue 10.00-16.00
• 02.03.12, fri 10.00-16.00
• 06.03.12, tue 10.00-16.00

From a systemic perspective, this course is seen as a complement to Systemic Thinking of Sustainability Communities, CS0005, with the code of Syst Think Su C.  While the core systems concepts between the two courses are compatible, the underlying philosophy, models and methods have different emphases.

Pre-course Preparation

This course is accelerated and intensive.  Students can prepare in three ways:

1. Content relies primarily on access to journal articles (although students are welcomed to buy or borrow books they find of interest).  Web links are provided using the Digital Object Identifier System to journal articles (and previews at Google Books, if available).  Having ensured working access to the university library system before the eight-day lecture period precludes panic as the amount of content covered in lectures rapidly accumulates.
2. Online communication is preferred in places with public visibility.  Student should (a) establish their own blogs (e.g. wordpress.com provides space for free); and (b) establish an identity on the Systems Community of Inquiry forum for Systemicists at http://syscoi.com/commons/groups/systemicists/forum/ that is used as the online hub for notifications.  The notification system on at syscoi.com will send e-mail summaries once per day, or students can get near-real-time feeds through an RSS reader (e.g. Google Reader).
3. As a relaxed way of covering some of the course ideas, there are links to web video (e.g. Youtube) in lists of references below.  Watching speakers or lecturers online may provide complementary (or divergent) views to the lectures that will aid learning during the course lecture period.

Having accomplished these three activities in advance of lectures may reduce stress.

Since all materials are available online, students are welcomed to:

• (a) use laptops to class to refer to links, take notes (and/or fact-check the instructor!); and
• (b) record the lectures (e.g. if English isn't your first language), with the warning that listening twice may be less productive than just doing the readings!

Lectures are intended to be interactive learning opportunities.  Active engagement and asking questions in real time takes advantage of higher bandwidth exchanges than can be done via written electronic media.

[jump to top of page]

Concurrent Studies

The February 2012 session of CS0005 recognizes that about half of students in this intensive course are also enrolled in A-36.3600 Sustainable Urban Design offered by the Department of Architecture from January through April. 

A.36.3600 is neither a prerequisite nor a corequisite for CS0005.  Since students are, however, already immersed in a field study analysis for A.36.3600, learning may be compounded by bringing that context in the dialectic group discussions.  Commonalities and contrasts between the mindsets, framework and references between the two courses should enrich learning.

[jump to top of page]

Tuesday, February 28

[jump to top of page]

Friday, March 2

[jump to top of page]

Between sessions

Either individually, or in cells:

• On Day Three of this course, you will be asked to make a short (10-minute) progress report on your future state design.
• Prepare a preliminary short list of speaking points that you can discuss within your cell on Day Three.
• To prepare a list of merits and demerits for your design, you may want to schedule some more time (e.g. one or two hours) together as a team, for discussion.

[jump to top of page]

Tuesday, March 6

[jump to top of page]

Reflection week 1 (March 12 - 18)

Review the materials from Reference Cluster 1 (including at least two of the articles) and summarize what you believe are the most important ideas in Learning Log 4.

Reflection week 2 (March 19 - 25)

Review the materials from Reference Cluster 2 (including at least two of the articles) and summarize what you believe are the most important ideas in Learning Log 5.

Reflection week 3 (March 26 - April 1)

Review the materials from Reference Cluster 3 (including at least two of the articles) and summarize what you believe are the most important ideas in Learning Log 6.

Reflection week 4 (April 2 - 8)

Review the materials from Reference Cluster 4 (including at least two of the articles) and summarize what you believe are the most important ideas in Learning Log 7.

Reflection week 5 (April 9 - 15)

Review the materials from Reference Cluster 5 (including at least two of the articles) and summarize what you believe are the most important ideas in Learning Log 8.

Reflection week 6 (April 16 - 22)

Review the materials from Reference Cluster 6 and Reference Cluster 7 (including at least two of the articles from each) and summarize what you believe are the most important ideas in Learning Log 9.

Final Project (due May 12)

Individually, submit a research paper (as an electronic document or a blog entry) a summary of experiences with the course:

• Questions that arose during your learning (and their resolution either with answers, directions for further research, or unknowns), as what you learned.
• Insights gained on the evolving knowledge/content on the (re-)design over the during of the course
• Experiences (and criticisms) of the processes of designing dialogue (including the debates and final convergence/divergence).
• The usefulness/applicability of references associated with the course.

It will probably be hard to write less than 5 pages (i.e. 2500 words) or more than 15 pages (i.e. 7500 words).

[jump to top of page]

Dialectics

Experiential activities in this course include the recognition of a variety of views on current state design (i.e. worldviews), as well as future state alternatives and options. Students should organize in multi-disciplinary teams (e.g. we want diversity, not all of the designers or all of the architects clumping together).

Students will cluster into cells of two or three people. Cells are twinned into two polar positions, so that there are dialectic groups of four to six people. One cell will take the position of local interests with a 3-year horizon, while the other will take the position of national interests with a 30-year horizon.

The course overview for A-36.3600 Sustainable Design describes two modules:

Course consists of two modules.

Module 1 is an analysis phase, which builds the base for justifying the arguments for a sustainable design concept. Discovered social and economical phenomena, such as lifestyles, mobility and housing typologies, are analyzed and discussed. Landscape analysis is applied to demonstrate spatiality, topography, hydrology and geology of a place. Analysis module sets the goals for the design of the case study. Small design tasks are carried out simultaneously to provide models and examples for the case study on latter part of the course.

Lectures are arranged under four themes:

• 1) Climatic manipulators
• 2) Urbanity: scenarios - visions - strategies
• 3) Smart City elements: buildings and landscape
• 4) Urban architecture: design phases and possibilities

Module 2 is a case study, which is carried out on specific site with real boundary conditions. The task is executed in small groups, and it continues the multidisciplinary approach in the analysis phase. The aim is to build a creative synthesis, which corresponds with the analysis phase and set design objectives. Energy efficiency, relation to landscape and city ecology are assessed by experts from the specific area of research with the latest tools and knowledge.

Course includes three workshops on specific themes. The preliminary topics for the workshops:

• 1. User approach: tracing changes in society, lifestyles and design process
• 2. Place - city and landscape
• 3. Urban concepts: assessing sustainability

The analyses and case study above can be approached from joint learning on systems thinking and sustainability.  Making the scale (local vs. national) and time horizons (3-year vs. 30-year) should span the variety of values and perspectives across a community of citizens.

In-class interactions will accelerate individual learning through engagement in a dialectic. Writings (e.g. blogs) from individual points of view can extend the conversations online.

[jump to top of page]

Grading

This course has been designed as intensive, with classroom sessions, between-class written reflections, and end-of-class research papers. Grades will be assigned in the following scheme:

• (1) Class attendance and participation: 60%
• (2) Learning logs: 15%
• (3) Research paper: 25%

(1) Class attendance and participation enables learning in interactions between the instructors and the students, and between the students in peer-to-peer collaborations. Active participation is encouraged and noticed by the instructors.

(2) Learning logs are personal reflections on (i) insights gained and (ii) questions provoked from the classroom sessions. The best method of communication will be to (a) create blog posts on an open web site of your choosing -- if you don't already have one, http://wordpress.com provides space for free; and (b) post a weblink to the on the Systems Community of Inquiry forum for Systemicists at http://syscoi.com/commons/groups/systemicists/forum/ .

When you create a post on a web site, it is date-stamped. so the instructors will notice your activity. Your learning logs can be brief, and they will be accessible to commentary by the public (including members of the systems community who are active on the Internet).

(3) The research paper may take a form as selected by the student, including:

• (a) a long-form essay, (in the range of 2500 to 7500 words);
• (b) a series of short-form essays (totalling in the range of 2500 to 7500 words); or
• (c) a series of visual maps (e.g. an argument map, a concept map, a mind map) supplemented with descriptions written as full text (i.e. complete sentences, proper punctuation).

The research paper can include (and should extend) the prior writing in the learning logs. Write in an academic style (i.e. use references, so that we appreciate those ideas that are originally yours, and other ideas that came from a cited source). You should not feel restricted to only the articles mentioned on the reference below, and may find alternative writings by these (and other) authors, journals and books. Wikipedia is not a citable source, although it may be helpful on introductory understanding.

A research paper is more than bullet points!

The medium for the research paper may be chosen by the student as:

• (a) a publically-accessible electronic composition, with a web link posted at the forum at http://syscoi.com ; or
• (b) a private communication to the instructor, sent via e-mail ( aija.staffans@tkk.fi ).

You may receive coaching on your writing over the Internet, if you post work-in-process and revise.

[jump to top of page]

Tools

Personal reflections and questions about content can be posted online at a blog of your choosing (e.g. on http://wordpress.com ). As an alternative to sending pointers to the blog post via e-mail, messages can be posted to the Systemicists forum on the Systems Community of Inquiry, which is visible not only to the instructors, but also other systems thinkers around the world. Threads have been set up for Day 1, Day 2 and Day 3.

Writing can be done online directly onto a blog, or offline and then copied online. You may want to avoid using Word as an offline editor, as the results format badly when transferred (i.e. DOC doesn't play well with HTML). Alternative editors that do play well include Wordpad (on Windows), TextEdit on Mac, Amaya (if you're really hardcore about writing correct HTML) and JEdit (if you want to write like a programmer)

Some free and easy offline mapping tools include (i) VUE (Visual Understanding Environment) that handles network diagrams well, and (ii) Freemind, that allows folding and unfolding tree structures. Common general purpose drawing tools include (i) OpenOffice Draw, and (ii) Inkscape . An alternative online drawing tool is Google Docs Draw, that should allow public viewing and/or exporting to a blog.

[jump to top of page]

References

The systems literature is broad and deep. Some representative articles are clustered below. Students should not feel constrained to just these references, and may find similar content written by a variety of authors in a variety of venues.

The list of references reflects the orientations towards communities. Book chapters may be more comprehensive and historic, whereas articles are more current and generally available electronically (depending on the privileges of your library)

Cluster 1. Method frameworks

As planners and designers, how should we go about designing a system of engagement?

Recommended book chapters:

1. IfM, and IBM. 2008. Succeeding through Service Innovation: A Service Perspective for Education, Research, Business and Government. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge Institute for Manufacturing. http://www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/ssme/.
   • In contrast to the product/industrial orientation towards the design of systems, the new focus on services recognizes the rise of human activity systems in advanced economies around the world.
2. Hipel, K. W, M. M Jamshidi, J. M Tien, and C. C. White. 2007. The future of systems, man, and cybernetics: Application domains and research methods. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews  37, no. 5: 726–743. doi:10.1109/TSMCC.2007.900671. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSMCC.2007.900671.
   • A systems engineering perspective on changing needs in the 21st century.
3. Government of Ontario Ministry of Government Services. 2010. Defining Programs and Services in the OPS, Appendix A. In Information Technology Standards. Architecture Standards GO-ITS 56.1, version 1.3. Queen's Printer for Ontario. http://www.mgs.gov.on.ca/en/IAndIT/STEL02_047303.html.
   • High-level overview of a Public Service Reference Model, including jurisdiction, programs, services, processes and resources.
4. Government of Ontario Ministry of Government Services. 2010. Defining Programs and Services in the Ontario Public Service. In Information Technology Standards. Architecture Standards GO-ITS 56.1 version 1.3 Appendix. Queen's Printer for Ontario. http://www.mgs.gov.on.ca/en/IAndIT/STEL02_047303.html.
   • Detailed handbook to define programs and services, with examples.
5. Eclipse Foundation. 2010. Open Unified Process -- Getting Started: Basic Process Concepts. http://epf.eclipse.org/wikis/openup/.
   • From systems design and delivery methods, some basic concepts:  work products, tasks, roles, processes, guidance.

Recommended articles:

1. Spohrer, Jim, Paul P. Maglio, John Bailey, and Daniel Gruhl. 2007. Steps Toward a Science of Service Systems. Computer 40, no. 1 (January): 71-77. doi:10.1109/MC.2007.33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2007.33.
   • The system to be designed is often a service system, that means that (i) the system should serve human beings, and (ii) the service system should include human beings coproducers.

2. Cameron, John. 2002. Configurable development processes. Communications of the ACM 45 (March): 72–77. doi:10.1145/504729.504731. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/504729.504731.

   • History of the work products based method at IBM, enabling tailoring of methods for the engagement at hand.
3. Haumer, Peter. 2005. IBM Rational Method Composer: Part 1: Key concepts. IBM developerWorks. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/dec05/haumer/.
   • Overview of separating method content from process, with tool support for defining and customizing methods.
4. Haumer, Peter. 2006. IBM Rational Method Composer: Part 2: Authoring method content and processes. IBM developerWorks. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/jan06/haumer/.
   • Details of cataloging and defining methods.
5. International Council on Systems Engineering, and Object Management Group Systems Engineering Domain Special Interest Group. 2011. Model-Based Systems Engineering Wiki. http://www.omgwiki.org/MBSE/doku.php.
   • Moving from document orientation to model orientation.

Recommended multimedia:

1. Spohrer, Jim. 2010. Smarter Planet: Region by Region, City by City, and University by University. Web Video. CITRIS: Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society. California, September 23. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9NNeWBc-ro.
   • Ties between service systems research, universities, cities, and a smarter planet.
2. Wiseman, Roy. 2010. Modeling the business of government. Web Video. IBM Rational Innovate 2010. http://www.livestream.com/ibmrational/video?clipId=flv_26334ca7-c08b-4375-a7e0-19818d19f0f7.  Also available at http://www.youtube.com/user/IBMRational#p/u/0/kY6dgRwOu9E
   • Cooperation across municipal jurisdictions in Canada.
3. MISA Canada. 2008. Providing a Context for the Municipal Reference Model. Web Video. Vol. 1. 3 vols. Municipal Reference Model v2. Indexed from http://www.golcommunications.ca/MRM2/webcast_references.html, July 8. http://my.adobe.acrobat.com/p31277957/.  Presentation slides at http://www.golcommunications.ca/MRM2/july8_webcast.pdf .
   • Participants include Roy Wiseman, Region of Peel; Alan Mitchell, Chartwell Inc.; and Skip Lumley, Chartwell Inc.
4. MISA Canada. 2008. Where We are Today? Where are We Moving To? Web Video. Vol. 2. 3 vols. Municipal Reference Model v2. Indexed from http://www.golcommunications.ca/MRM2/webcast_references.html, July 8. http://my.adobe.acrobat.com/p79758609/. Presentation slides at http://www.golcommunications.ca/MRM2/july10_webcast.pdf
   • Participants include Roy Wiseman, Region of Peel; Dave Metcalfe, City of Toronto; John Johnston, City of Toronto; Andrew Beckett, City of Saint John
5. MISA Canada. 2008. How to Take the First Step? Challenges, Strategies, Competencies. Web Video. Vol. 3. 3 vols. Municipal Reference Model v2. Indexed from http://www.golcommunications.ca/MRM2/webcast_references.html, July 15. http://my.adobe.acrobat.com/p48696364/.  Presentation slides at http://www.golcommunications.ca/MRM2/july15_webcast.pdf
   • Participants include Roy Wiseman, Region of Peel; Melinda Munro, City of Windsor
6. Kroll, Per. 2007. The Eclipse Process Framework. Web Video. Agile 2006. Indexed from http://live.eclipse.org/node/357, September 6. http://www.infoq.com/interviews/per-kroll-OpenUp-EFP.
   • This describes the use of the Eclipse Process Framework tool in software development.  The application in other service systems is no less general.
7. Friedenthal, Sanford. 2010. Model-Based Systems Engineering using SysML. Web Video. The Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland. Indexed from http://www.isr.umd.edu/events/index.php?mode=4&id=5401: College Park, MD, November 1. http://vimeo.com/16618093.
   • This systems engineering approach and language is oriented towards hard systems orientation.  Could it be extended to a soft systems orientation?

Extended articles:

1. Spohrer, James C. 2010. Service Science: Progress and Directions. Presentation slides June 18. http://www.slideshare.net/spohrer/service-science-progress-and-directions-20100620.
   • No audio or video, but slides for a 2010 update on progress on service science.
2. Wiseman, Roy. 2010. The Municipal Reference Model: Smarter Government by Design. Municipal Interface, January. http://www.misa.on.ca/en/municipalinterface/municipalinterface.asp.
   • In Canada, the Municipal Reference Model (MRM) is being developed in cooperation with the Province of Ontario, as well as other jurisdictions.
3. Government of Canada, Treasury Board of Canada. 2004. Business Transformation Enablement Program (BTEP). Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/webarchives/20071125180244/http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/btep-pto/index_e.asp.
   • The Governments of Canada Strategic Reference Model (GSRM) was used in the plans for enabling transformation.
4. Chartwell Group. 2005. Public Sector Business Design: The Alignment of Government to Citizen Outcomes. Presentation slides September 12. http://www.chartwell-group.com/resources/pdfs/presentations/Business Design - Better Outcomes - JB .pdf.
   • Reference models in government, across federal, provincial and municipal jurisdictions.
5. Henderson-Sellers, Brian. 2003. Method engineering for OO systems development. Communications of the ACM 46 (October): 73–78. doi:10.1145/944217.944242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/944217.944242.
   • A related but alternative view on methods, particularly towards an open source framework.
6. Eclipse Foundation. 2010. Eclipse Process Framework (EPF) Downloads. http://www.eclipse.org/epf/downloads/downloads.php.
   • Software tools with which to compose methods for systems design and delivery
7. SysML Partners. 2010. SysML: Open Source Specification Project. http://www.sysml.org/.
   • Rigourous definition of a language for systems (engineering) design, derived from the Unified Modeling Language in information systems.
8. Object Management Group. 2010. OMG Systems Modeling Language. http://www.omgsysml.org/.
   • The standards body overseeing ongoing specification and revisions of the System Modeling Language.

[jump to top of page]

Cluster 2. Appreciating the current state

Before we suggest changing the world, we should first attempt to understand how it currently operates.

Recommended book chapters:

1. Checkland, Peter, and Jim Scholes. 1990. Soft systems methodology in action. Chichester: Wiley. [preview at Google Books].
   • As compared to the 1981 Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, the 1990 book has the aim" to give a mature account of SSM as it is in the 1990s" [pp. xiii-xiv].

Recommended articles:

1. Checkland, Peter, and John Poulter. 2010. Soft Systems Methodology. In Systems Approaches to Managing Change: A Practical Guide, ed. Martin Reynolds and Sue Holwell. London: Springer London. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-809-4_5.
   • Uses excerpts from Checkland, P. and Poulter, J. (2006), Learning for Action: A Short Definitive Account of Soft Systems Methodology and its use for Practitioners.
2. Yan, Zexian, and Xuhui Yan. 2010. A revolution in the field of systems thinking—a review of Checkland's system thinking. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27, no. 2: 140-155. doi:10.1002/sres.1021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.1021.
   • A summarization of Checkland's approach, and criticisms (sometimes at philosophical levels).

Recommended multimedia:

1. Mackness, John. 2007. Soft Systems Methodology. Web Video. Martin Wells Video. UK, August 16. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZn8QrZI7OI.
   • A brief clip from the former director of programmes at Lancaster University, where SSM was nurtured.
2. Shankaran, Shankar, and Chris Stevens. 2010. How Do Project Managers Benefit from Systems Thinking? Web Video. Vol. 8965054. Soft Systems Thinking, Business 21C. Indexed from http://www.business21c.com.au/2010/01/soft-systems-thinking-a-more-holistic-approach-to-project-management: University of Technology Sydney, January 25. http://vimeo.com/8965054.
   • The context of soft systems thinking in project management that has traditionally be oriented towards hard systems.

Extended articles:

1. Checkland, Peter. 2010. Researching real-life: Reflections on 30 years of action research. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27, no. 2: 129-132. doi:10.1002/sres.1019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.1019.
   • The way the originator of Soft Systems Methodology sees its development.
2. Zhang, Huaxia. 2010. Soft systems methodology and ‘soft’ philosophy of science. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27, no. 2 (March 1): 156-170. doi:10.1002/sres.1022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.1022.
   • Philosophical foundations for SSM.
3. Checkland, Peter. 2010. Comments on the conference and special issue. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27, no. 2: 240. doi:10.1002/sres.1032. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.1032.
   • The context as conversation, and acknowledgement that more dialogue and practice is needed.
4. Jackson, Michael C. 2010. Response and comments on the special issue: ‘Systems methodology and social development: a global conversation in China’. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27, no. 2: 241-244. doi:10.1002/sres.1028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.1028.
   • Includes some commentary on SSM.
5. Barton, John. 2009. Action Research: Its Foundations in Open Systems Thinking and Relationship to the Scientific Method. Systemic Practice and Action Research 22, no. 6: 475-488. doi:10.1007/s11213-009-9148-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11213-009-9148-6.
   • Social ecology and action research.

In practice:

a. Triple bottom line

1. Elkington, John. 1998. Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st‐century business. Environmental Quality Management 8, no. 1: 37-51. doi:10.1002/tqem.3310080106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tqem.3310080106.
   • The original for triple bottom line.
2. Norman, Wayne, and Chris MacDonald. 2004. Getting to the Bottom of "Triple Bottom Line". Business Ethics Quarterly 14, no. 2 (April): 243-262. http://jstor.org/stable/3857909.
   • The triple bottom line as not helpful?
3. Hacking, Theo, and Peter Guthrie. 2007. A framework for clarifying the meaning of Triple Bottom-Line, Integrated, and Sustainability Assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 28, no. 2: 73-89. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2007.03.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2007.03.002.
   • Working through terminology.
4. Hubbard, Graham. 2009. Measuring organizational performance: beyond the triple bottom line. Business Strategy and the Environment 18, no. 3: 177-191. doi:10.1002/bse.564. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bse.564.
   • Proposes sustainable balanced scorecard.

[jump to top of page]

Cluster 3. Futures

Since human beings can plan, an alternative way of moving towards desirable futures is to start from more idealized positions to which we can aspire.

Recommended book chapters:

1. Ackoff, Russell L. 1969. The Nature and Content of Planning. In A concept of corporate planning, 1-22. Wiley-Interscience.
   • Defines tactical and strategic planning
   • Excerpted as "The Nature of Planning", Chapter 6, pp. 100-103 in Ackoff, Russell L. 1999. Ackoff's best: his classic writings on management. Wiley. [preview at Google Books]
2. Ackoff, Russell L. 1981. Our Changing Concept of Planning. In Creating the Corporate Future: Plan or Be Planned For, 51-76. New York: John Wiley and Sons [preview at Google Books].
   • A description of interactive planning, with goals, objectives and ideals
   • Excerpted as "Ends Planning" in Chapter 10, pp. 119-124 in Ackoff, Russell L. 1999. Ackoff's best: his classic writings on management. Wiley. [preview at Google Books]
3. Ackoff, Russell L. 1981. Creating the Corporate Future: Plan or Be Planned For. New York: John Wiley and Sons. [preview at Google Books]
   • The interactive planning approach is described in various publications to vary depths.
   • Chapter 4 pp. 79-103 "Formulating the Mess"
   • Chapter 5 pp. 104-125 "Ends Planning I: Idealized Design"
   • Chapter 6 pp. 126-148 "Ends Planning II: Design of Management Systems"
   • Chapter 7 pp. 149-168 "Ends Planning III: Organizational Design"
   • Chapter 8 pp. 169-194 "Means Planning I: Formulating Alternatives"
   • Chapter 9 pp. 195-210 "Means Planning II: Evaluating Alternatives"
   • Chapter 10 pp. 211-232 "Resource Planning"
   • Chapter 11 pp. 233-250 "Implementation and Control of Plans and Planing"
4. Ackoff, R. L. 1997. Systems, messes and interactive planning. In The Social Engagement of Social Science: The socio-ecological perspective, ed. Eric L. Trist, Hugh Murray, and Frederick Edmund Emery. Vol. 3. University of Pennsylvania Press. http://www.moderntimesworkplace.com/archives/ericsess/sessvol3/Ackoffp417.opd.pdf.  Accessed via  http://www.moderntimesworkplace.com/archives/ericsess/sessvol3/sessvol3.html
   • An accessible softcopy version of many of Ackoff's key ideas.
5. Haeckel, Stephan H. 1999. Adaptive Enterprise: Creating and Leading Sense-and-Respond Organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.  [preview at Google Books]
   • Design of organizations in an new era when the pace of change is too rapid.
   • Some of the content is available on the Sense and Respond web site.

Recommended articles:

1. Ackoff, Russell L. 2001. A brief guide to interactive planning and idealized design. May 31. http://www.ida.liu.se/~steho/und/htdd01/AckoffGuidetoIdealizedRedesign.pdf.  Accessed via Jerry Michalski at http://ackoffcenter.blogs.com/ackoff_center_weblog/2003/10/a_brief_guide_t.html .
   • An unpublished manuscript endorsed for release by Russell Ackoff.
2. Haeckel, Stephan H. 2004. Peripheral Vision: Sensing and Acting on Weak Signals: Making Meaning out of Apparent Noise: The Need for a New Managerial Framework. Long Range Planning 37, no. 2 (April): 181-189. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2004.01.006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2004.01.006.
   • Instead of designing a system with learning as secondary, shorter and shorter planning periods have driven the need for adaptive enterprises.
3. Haeckel, S. H. 2003. Leading on demand businesses—Executives as architects. IBM Systems Journal 42, no. 3: 405–413. doi:10.1147/sj.423.0405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1147/sj.423.0405.
   • Organizational design can follow the style of an architectural approach to business.
4. Ozbekhan, H. 1977. The Future of Paris: A Systems Study in Strategic Urban Planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 287, no. 1346: 523 -544. doi:10.1098/rsta.1977.0158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.1977.0158.
   • Creating a reference projection

Extended articles:

1. Britton, G. A., and H. McCallion. 1994. An overview of the Singer/Churchman/Ackoff school of thought. Systemic Practice and Action Research 7, no. 5: 487–521. doi:10.1007/BF02173378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02173378.
   • Commonalities between Churchman (e.g. design of inquiring systems) and Ackoff (e.g. interactive planning) sharing common philosophical foundations.
2. Leemann, J. E. 2002. Applying Interactive Planning at DuPont: The Case of Transforming a Safety, Health, and Environmental Function to Deliver Business Value. Systemic Practice and Action Research 15, no. 2: 85–109. doi:10.1023/A:1015236423688. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1015236423688.
   • Application of the interactive planning approach.
3. Sinn, J. S. 1998. A comparison of interactive planning and soft systems methodology: enhancing the complementarist position. Systemic Practice and Action Research 11, no. 4: 435–453. doi:10.1023/A:1023098025076. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023098025076.
   • Checkland and Ackoff are contemporaries, on either side of the Atlantic.
4. Linstone, Harold A. 1981. The multiple perspective concept : With applications to technology assessment and other decision areas. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 20, no. 4 (December): 275-325. doi:10.1016/0040-1625(81)90062-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0040-1625(81)90062-7.
   • Technical, organizational and personal perspectives.
5. Espejo, Raul. 2000. Giving Requisite Variety to Strategic and Implementation Processes: Theory and Practice. In JAIST Conference. Ishikawa, Japan. http://www.syncho.com/pages/pdf/Giving Requisite Variety.pdf.
   • Maintaining requisite variety is a design principle.
6. Schwaninger, Markus. 2006. Design for viable organizations. Kybernetes 35, no. 7 (January 1): 955-966. doi:10.1108/03684920610675012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03684920610675012.
   • A clear example applying the VSM.
7. Schwaninger, Markus. 2001. System theory and cybernetics. Kybernetes 30, no. 9 (January 1): 1209-1222. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000006551. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006551.
   • Describes the St. Gallen Management Model
8. x
9. Poli, Roberto. 2010. An introduction to the ontology of anticipation. Futures 42, no. 7 (September): 769-776. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2010.04.028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2010.04.028.
   • An easy reading version of Robert Rosen's work.
10. Linstone, Harold A. 2010. Multiple perspectives redux. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 77, no. 4 (May): 696-698. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2010.02.009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.02.009.
    • Multiple perspectives, as compared to diversity.
11. Schwaninger, Markus. 2004. City planning. Kybernetes 33, no. 3 (January 1): 557-576. doi:10.1108/03684920410523571. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03684920410523571.
    • A case study demonstrating the use of the VSM and the St. Gallen Management Model.
12. Jackson, M. C. 1998. An Appreciation of Stafford Beer's 'Viable System' Viewpoint on Managerial Practice. Journal of Management Studies 25, no. 6: 557-573. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1988.tb00047.x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1988.tb00047.x.
    • An overview of the VSM, and blindspots in the application that should be watched.

Extended book list:

1. Brand, Stewart. 1999. The clock of the long now: time and responsibility. Basic Books.
   • Lots of material at http://longnow.org .

In practice:

a. Singapore

1. Lee, Kuan Yew. 2000. From Third World to first: the Singapore story, 1965-2000. HarperCollins Publishers. [preview at Google Books]
   • Describes what planning can do.
2. Singapore Economic Development Board "What We Do" at http://www.sedb.com/edb/sg/en_uk/index/about_edb/what_we_do.html
3. Singapore Land Tranport Authority on Environmental Initiatives at http://www.lta.gov.sg/projects/index_proj_environ.htm , and engaging the community at http://www.lta.gov.sg/projects/index_proj_engaging.htm
4. Singapore PUB (national water agency) on Water for All at http://www.pub.gov.sg/water/Pages/default.aspx
5. Singapore Intelligent Nation Masterplan "Digital Future for Everyone" at http://www.ida.gov.sg/insg/post/iN2015-Masterplan-Offers-a-Digital-Future-for-Everyone.aspx
6. Singapore CleanTech Park (eco-business park) at http://www.sedb.com/edb/sg/en_uk/index/news/articles/jtc_and_edb_unveil.html

b. Masdar, UAD

1. Nader, Sam. 2009. Paths to a low-carbon economy--The Masdar example. Energy Procedia 1, no. 1 (February): 3951-3958. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2009.02.199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2009.02.199.
   • Is the idea feasible? http://www.masdar.ae/en/home/index.aspx
   • Laylin, Tafline. 2010. Masdar City: Small Hiccups, Or Total System Failure? Green Prophet. August 1. http://www.greenprophet.com/2010/08/masdar-total-system-failure/.

c. Songdo City, Korea

1. Whitman, Christine Todd, Charles Reid, James von Klemperer, Josh Radoff, and Anthony Roy. 2008. New Songdo City -- The Making of a New Green City. In 8th World Congress, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat. Dubai. http://www.ctbuh.org/Portals/0/Repository/T11_WhitmanVonKlemperer.cf720bde-f92c-4231-94ad-c44207ee53e6.pdf.
   • 1500 acre mixed public and private redevelopment of Incheon's waterfront.

d. Babcock Ranch, Florida

1. Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2005. Babcock Ranch, Preliminary Fact Sheet. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/secretary/news/2005/babcock/.
   • Describes the purchase of 74,000 acres of land by the State of Florida.
2. Audubon of Florida. 2006. Ranches as Habitat. Florida Naturalist. http://fl.audubon.org/PDFs/Audubon_Naturalist_Spring06.pdf.
   • Ranches are private lands, yet can have large impacts on public ecosystems.

[jump to top of page]

Cluster 4. Ecological complexity and gain

Can we design our futures?

Recommended book chapters:

1. Allen, Timothy F. H., Joseph A Tainter, and Thomas W. Hoekstra. 2003. Supply-side sustainability. New York: Columbia Univ Press. [preview at Google Books]
   • Provides 5 principles of supply-side sustainability, as well as a blending of Tainter's work on collapse with research directly from ecology.
   • Unfortunately, this book doesn't have a preview in Google Books, and isn't currently listed in any libraries in Finland (that I can find), so it may have to be a book that you'll have to buy!

Recommended articles:

1. Allen, Timothy F. H., Joseph A. Tainter, and Thomas W. Hoekstra. 1999. Supply-side sustainability. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 16, no. 5: 403-427. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1743(199909/10)16:5<403::AID-SRES335>3.0.CO;2-R. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1743(199909/10)16:5<403::AID-SRES335>3.0.CO;2-R.
   • A complete exposition of the theoretical work underlying supply-side sustainability.  The differentiation between complicatedness and complexity is fundamental to the understanding.
2. Tainter, Joseph A. 1995. Sustainability of complex societies. Futures 27, no. 4 (May): 397-407. doi:10.1016/0016-3287(95)00016-P. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(95)00016-P.
   • Some of the foundational work on collapse, leading up to development of the concepts of supply-side sustainability.
3. Tainter, Joseph A. 2006. Social complexity and sustainability. Ecological Complexity 3, no. 2 (June): 91-103. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2005.07.004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2005.07.004.
   • A variant of the perspective on ecological complexity, with an explicit focus on socio-political complexity.
4. Allen, Timothy F. H., Peter C. Allen, Amy Malek, John Flynn, and Michael Flynn. 2009. Confronting economic profit with hierarchy theory: The concept of gain in ecology. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 26, no. 5: 583-599. doi:10.1002/sres.998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.998.
   • Extends the work on supply-side sustainability with a deeper understanding of low gain and high gain resources (with biological examples)
5. Allen, Timothy F. H., Joseph A. Tainter, John Flynn, Rachael Steller, Elizabeth Blenner, Megan Pease, and Kristina Nielsen. 2010. Integrating economic gain in biosocial systems. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27, no. 5: 537-552. doi:10.1002/sres.1060. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.1060.
   • The idea of low gain and high gain is applied more directly to biosocial domains.

Extended articles:

In practice:

a. Smarter planet

1. IBM. 2010. The World's 4 Trillion Dollar Challenge: Using a system-of-systems approach to build a smarter planet. Institute for Business Value. http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/gbs/bus/html/ibv-smarter-planet-system-of-systems.html.

[jump to top of page]

5. Social-ecological systems

Coming from the perspectives of ecologists (in social-ecological systems), there's a 2006 special issue of Ecology and Society focused on Social-Ecological Systems.

Recommended books:

• Gallopín, Gilberto. 2003. A systems approach to sustainability and sustainable development. Economic Commision for Latin America and the Caribbean 64. United Nations Publications. http://www.eclac.org/publicaciones/xml/8/12288/lcl1864i.pdf.  Accessed from http://www.eclac.org/cgi-bin/getProd.asp?xml=/publicaciones/xml/8/12288/P12288.xml .
  • A simple 48-page descriptive work providing some useful definitions.

Recommended articles:

1. Folke, Carl. 2006. Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change 16, no. 3 (August): 253-267. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002.
   • A history of the developing ideas that led to establishing the resilience perspective, and the current focus on social-ecological systems.  This presumes some of a background appreciation of resilience already exists, from ....
     • Holling, C. S. 2001. Understanding the Complexity of Economic, Ecological, and Social Systems. Ecosystems 4, no. 5: 390-405. doi:10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5.
2. Gunderson, L., E. Universitry, A. Kinzig, C. Folke, S. Carpenter, and L. Schultz. 2006. A Handful of Heuristics and Some Propositions for Understanding Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society 11, no. 1: 13. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art13/.
   • Beginning the research program into socio-ecological systems, a scientific approach with five preliminary heuristics and 14 propositions leading to questions.

Recommended multimedia:  The Resilience video school at the Stockholm Resilience Centre has experts providing definitions.

1. Carpenter, Stephen. 2008. What is a social-ecological system? Web Video. Resilience video school. Stockholm Resilience Centre. http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/whatisresilience/resiliencevideoschool/whatisasocialecologicalsystem.4.aeea46911a31274279800012606.html.
   • An 18-second sound bite, from a leading ecologist.
2. Peterson, Garry. 2008. What are the pros and cons of economic evaluation of ecosystems? Web Video. Resilience video school. Stockholm Resilience Centre. http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/researchvideos/whataretheprosandconsofeconomicevaluationofecosystems.5.2b8975271278f4c2de580001974.html.
   • A short (2:40) description on issues associated with measures.

Extended articles:

1. Cumming, G. S, D. H.M Cumming, and C. L Redman. 2006. Scale mismatches in social-ecological systems: causes, consequences, and solutions. Ecology and Society 11, no. 1: 14. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art14/.
   • Since socio-ecological systems span a variety of scales, mismatches between the scale(s) of management and scale(s) of ecosystem processes may be at the foundation of problems.
2. Janssen, M. A, Ö Bodin, J. M Anderies, T. Elmqvist, H. Ernstson, R. R.J McAllister, P. Olsson, and P. Ryan. 2006. Toward a network perspective of the study of resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 11, no. 1: 15. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/.
   • Human beings can interact in social networks beyond physical ecosystems, leading to unusual behaviours in social-ecological systems.
3. Gattie, D. K, N. N Kellam, and H. J Turk. 2007. Informing ecological engineering through ecological network analysis, ecological modelling, and concepts of systems and engineering ecology. Ecological Modelling 208, no. 1: 25–40. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.04.027. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.04.027.
   • An overview with an impressive list of references (Odum, Allen, Rosen).
4. Ochoa Arias, Alejandro. 2008. An interpretive systemic appraisal of corporate social responsibility and learning. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 25, no. 3: 361-370. doi:10.1002/sres.897. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.897.
   • What does CSR mean?
5. Maclagan, Patrick. 2008. Organizations and responsibility: A critical overview. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 25, no. 3: 371-381. doi:10.1002/sres.903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.903.
   • Stakeholders and ethics
6. Jensen, Hanne Birgitte. 2007. From economic to sustainable development: unfolding the concept of law. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 24, no. 5: 505-513. doi:10.1002/sres.851. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.851.
   • Does globalization change our perspective on sustainability?

[jump to top of page]

6. Coevolution and turbulence

In world of systems of systems, changes at multiple scales means coevolution. There's a 2010 special issue of Ecological Economics focused on coevolutionary ecological economics.

Recommended books:

1. Ramírez, Rafael, John W Selsky, and Kess van der Heijden. 2008. Conceptual and Historical Overview. In Business Planning for Turbulent Times: New Methods for Applying Scenarios, ed. Rafael Ramírez, John W. Selsky, and Kees van der Heijden, 17-30. Earthscan. [preview at Google Books]
   • Extends causal textures and turbulence (from Emery and Trist) with scenarios.

Recommended articles:

1. Emery, Fred E., and Eric L. Trist. 1965. The Causal Texture of Organizational Environments. Human Relations 18, no. 1 (2): 21-32. doi:10.1177/001872676501800103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872676501800103.
   • One of the foundational articles in organizational theory, directly influenced by systems theory at the Tavistock Institute.
2. Kallis, Giorgos, and Richard B. Norgaard. 2010. Coevolutionary ecological economics. Ecological Economics 69, no. 4: 690-699. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.09.017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.09.017.
   • Bringing together the environmental and the social.

Extended articles:

1. Jiménez, Jaime. 2008. How Do Scenario Practices and Search Conferences Complement Each Other?. In Business Planning for Turbulent Times: New Methods for Applying Scenarios, ed. Rafael Ramírez and Kees van der Heijden, 31-46. Earthscan. [preview at Google Books]
   • Lists comparisons of scenario planning with search conferences in a table, and suggests how they could be complementary
2. Lang, Trudy, and Lynn Allen. 2008. Reflecting on Scenario Practice: The Contribution of a Soft Systems Perspective. In Business Planning for Turbulent Times: New Methods for Applying Scenarios, ed. Rafael Ramírez, John W. Selsky, and Kees van der Heijden, 47-64. Earthscan. [preview at Google Books]
   • Sees parallel emergence and development of SSM and scenarios practice.
3. Hawk, David L. 1999. Innovation versus environmental protection presumptions. Systemic Practice and Action Research 12, no. 4: 355–366. doi:10.1023/A:1022444229252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022444229252.
   • Can we create self-reinforcing systems?
4. Gual, Miguel A, and Richard B. Norgaard. 2010. Bridging ecological and social systems coevolution: A review and proposal. Ecological Economics 69, no. 4: 707–717. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.07.020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.07.020.
   • Biotic and cultural
5. Burkhard, Benjamin, Irene Petrosillo, and Robert Costanza. 2010. Ecosystem services - Bridging ecology, economy and social sciences. Ecological Complexity 7, no. 3 (September): 257-259. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.07.001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.07.001 .
   • Introduction to a special issue on "Ecosystem Services – Bridging Ecology, Economy and Social Sciences".
6. Costanza, Robert, Ralph d'Arge, Rudolf de Groot, Stephen Farber, Monica Grasso, Bruce Hannon, Karin Limburg, et al. 1997. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, no. 6630 (May 15): 253-260. doi:10.1038/387253a0. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/387253a0.
   • What is natural capital worth?
7. Swanson, G. A. 2009. The relationship of entropy-related measures to money information. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 26, no. 3 (May 1): 331-341. doi:10.1002/sres.945. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.945.
   • If the world doesn't move towards equilibrium, then we need to consider the entropy law.
8. Lane, David C. 2008. The emergence and use of diagramming in system dynamics: a critical account. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 25, no. 1: 3-23. doi:10.1002/sres.826. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sres.826.
   • Systems dynamics basics.
9. Leonard, Allenna. 2007. Symbiosis and the viable system model. Kybernetes 36, no. 5: 571-582. doi:10.1108/03684920710749677. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03684920710749677.
   • A management cybernetics-oriented view of symbiosis.

In practice:

Interface Inc.

1. Anderson, Ray C. 2010. Editorial: Earth Day, Then and Now. Sustainability: The Journal of Record 3, no. 2: 73-74. doi:10.1089/SUS.2010.9795. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/SUS.2010.9795.
   • Reflections on progress.
2. Anderson, Ray. 2009. Confessions of a Radical Industrialist: Profits, People, Purpose - Doing Business by Respecting the Earth. McClelland & Stewart. [preview at Google Books]
   • I haven't read this book!  I saw Anderson speak in 1998, see http://www.isss.org/98transc/jl231110.htm .

[jump to top of page]

7. Discourses (addenda from CS0004)

Appreciating how people communicate can be fundamental to system redesigns.

Recommended books

• Winograd, Terry, and Fernando Flores. 1986. Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Isaacs, William. 1999. Dialogue and the art of thinking together: a pioneering approach to communicating in business and in life. Currency. [preview at Google Books].
• Banathy, Bela H. 1996. Designing social systems in a changing world. Springer.  [preview at Google Books]
• Block, Peter. 2009. Community. ReadHowYouWant.com.  [preview at Google Books]
• Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. 1991. Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.  [preview at Google Books]

Recommended articles:

• Winograd, Terry. 1986. A language/action perspective on the design of cooperative work. In Proceedings of the 1986 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, 203-220. Austin, Texas: ACM. doi:10.1145/637069.637096. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/637069.637096.
• Denning, Peter J. 2003. Accomplishment. Communications of the ACM 46, no. 7: 19–23. doi:10.1145/792704.792722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/792704.792722.

[jump to top of page]