Return to search form  

Session Title: What is Systems Thinking?

Panel Session 634 to be held in Mencken Room on Friday, November 9, 3:35 PM to 4:20 PM

Sponsored by the Systems in Evaluation TIG

Chair(s):

Cabrera payday loan  Derek A payday loan ,  Cornell University,  dac66@cornell.edu

Abstract: Evaluation is one of many fields where "systems thinking" is popular and is said to hold great promise. However, there is disagreement about what constitutes systems thinking. Its meaning is ambiguous, and systems scholars have made diverse and divergent attempts to describe it. Alternative origins include: von Bertalanffy, Aristotle, Lao Tsu or multiple aperiodic "waves." Some scholars describe it as synonymous with systems sciences (i.e., nonlinear dynamics, complexity, chaos). Others view it as a laundry list of systems approaches. Within so much noise, it is often difficult for evaluators to find the systems thinking signal. Recent work in systems thinking describes it as an emergent property of four simple conceptual patterns (rules). For an evaluator to become a "systems thinker," he or she need not spend years learning many methods or nonlinear sciences. Instead, with some practice, one can learn to apply these simple rules to existing evaluation knowledge with transformative results.

The Popularity and Promise of Systems Thinking Laura payday loan  Colosi payday loan ,  Cornell University,  lac19@cornell.edu There are many ways to think about systems thinking. Some scholars view it as a specific methodology, such as system dynamics, while others believe it is a -plurality of methods- (Williams & Imam, 2006). Others see systems thinking as systems science, while others see it as a general systems theory. Still others see systems thinking as a social movement. We propose that systems thinking is conceptual, because changing the way we think involves changing the way we conceptualize. That is, while systems thinking is informed by systems ideas, systems methods, systems theories, the systems sciences, and the systems movement, it is, in the end, differentiated from each of these.

Patterns not Taxonomies Derek A payday loan  Cabrera payday loan ,  Cornell University,  dac66@cornell.edu Systems thinking is often considered an unwieldy agglomeration of ideas from numerous intellectual traditions. To put some workable limits on this mass of systems theories, we have chosen to define the systems thinking universe as all of the concepts contained in three broad and inclusive sources (Midgley, Francois, Schwartz). By defining the systems universe, one can then begin to think about what features are essential for membership and therefore arrive at a less ambiguous description of systems thinking. Scholars who have made attempts to describe systems thinking have often taken a pluralistic approach and offered taxonomic lists of examples of systems thinking. We propose that the question what is systems thinking? cannot be answered by a litany of examples of systems thoughts (or methods, approaches, theories, ideas, etc.). Such a response is analogous to answering the biologist's question what is life? with a long list of kingdoms, phyla, classes, orders, families, genus and species. Taxonomy of the living does not provide an adequate theory for life. Likewise, taxonomy of systems ideas, even a pluralistic one, does not provide an adequate theory for systems thinking.