II. Standard Systems Dynamics

,

This chapter presents 12 tools that will help you apply the principles of standard systems dynamics and other key concepts to systems-related change efforts. The tools focus on the questions that good systems thinkers know and regularly use, and offer guidelines for working productively with the answers.

TOOL NO.	THE APPLICATIONS
1.	Systems Preconditions —What entity (system or “collision of systems”) are we dealing with, and what are its boundaries? —What levels of the overall entity do we want to change?
2.	Desired Outcomes —What are the desired outcomes?
3.	The Need for Feedback —How will we know we have achieved the desired outcomes?
4.	Environmental Impact —What is changing in the environment that we need to consider?
5.	Looking at Relationships —What is the relationship of x to y and z?
6.	The What and the How —Are we dealing with ends (the what) or with means (the how)?
7.	The Iceberg Theory of Change —What new processes and structures are we using to ensure succesful change?
8.	Buy-In and Stay-In —What must we do to ensure buy-in and stay-in (perseverance) over time, and thus avoid the problem of entropy?
9.	Centralize and Decentralize —What should we centralize and what should we decentralize?
10.	Multiple Causes: Root Causes —What multiple causes lie at the root of our problem or concern? (That is, what are the root causes of our problem or concern?)
11.	KISS: From Complexity to Simplicity —How can we move from complexity to simplicity, and from strict consistency to flexibility, in the solutions we devise?
12.	The Ultimate Question: Superordinate Goals —What is our common higher-level (superordinate) goal?
These Tools Will Get You Started on Systems Thinking!

Application of
• Seven Levels of Living Systems
• Standard Systems Dynamics
  — 3. Boundaries

A. THE OBJECT OF CHANGE

To begin with, you must be clear on what overall system you are trying to change. You must also be clear on its boundaries, both physical and mental. Where does it all start and end? Your preliminary question is therefore:

What entity (system or “collision of systems”) are we dealing with, and what are its boundaries?

This question may seem obvious, but many people fail to ask it at all. They launch into change efforts with only a vague idea of what they want to change, and so quickly run into problems. Consider this question a precondition to any intelligent, effective action and change.

Challenge the obvious—look for the seven levels of living systems and define which ones you are dealing with. Know the entity you want to change, and its limits.

  Example

Are you trying to change yourself, your department, a business process, a partnership, or the entire organization? Is it relatively open or closed in its environmental interactions?

Set realistic goals, focusing on what is actually achievable, even if with a stretch. “Think globally, act locally” is an apt phrase here.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Be clear on the entity you are discussing, especially its boundaries with the environment. 2. Be aware that solutions to issues of change and leadership will be different for each system level you deal with (see tool below). For instance, personal change and learning solutions are different from team or organizational change solutions. 3. Troubleshoot all solutions to predict their effects as best as possible. Will they help you achieve the desired changes in your entity of choice?

B. LEVELS OF CHANGE

To direct your change efforts accurately, you need to look closely at the entity’s internal levels or “rings” and answer this question:

What levels of the overall entity do we want to change?

In this section of Tool 1, we will focus on change that creates a high-performance organization. Such a goal requires that you pay attention to all the systems levels within the organization, and to the interactions of those systems—their “collision” with one another. Each level has unique purposes and solutions, and each is important to success.

Figure 3, on the next page, presents the “tree rings” of an overall organizational system. Note the recognition of the relationship between the rings (or levels). This kind of framing device can be used to depict the levels of any overall system.

FIGURE 3. STRATEGIC CHANGE

The Six Rings of Focus and Readiness

 

The General Objectives of Working at Each Level/Ring

Each system level corresponds to certain general improvement issues. For instance, if you goal is to improve personal competency, you will need to work primarily at the Self level/ring and take into consideration any other rings that have a bearing on competency matters.

The rings and their related issues are as follows:

Organizational Change by Levels/Rings

The managers of the organization’s levels/rings must get involved in the change. Each one should be given time to understand, accept, and integrate the change; consequently, the manager will own the vision and change and lead them at his or her level. Specific levels would include (in descending order of hierarchy):

It is important to sell and resell the change throughout many organizational levels. Themes from the Rollercoaster of Change are useful in helping people come to terms with change. Notable among those themes are the following:

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Engineer success up front by determining which rings of the organization you are trying to change. Also, determine what other rings will need changing first in order for you to achieve your desired outcome. 2. Always be sure to look at the purposes of the rings you are trying to change. Begin by using the list of purposes presented in this tool; then think of purposes unique to your situation. 3. Get people involved in the change effort, particularly managers. Remember: you don’t just want buy-in from managers; you also want stay-in from them. Also, be sure to look at all the rings of your organization. As you have seen in this tool, that means board members and CEOs too!

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 6. Multiple Outcomes

Success

The great successful men (and women) of the world have used their imagination…. They think ahead and create their mental picture, and then go to work materializing that picture in all its details, filling in here, adding a little there, altering this a bit and that a bit, but steadily building—steadily building.

—Robert Collier

This is where Phase A of the A-B-C-D Systems Model actually begins, and so we ask the Number One system’s thinking question:

What are the desired outcomes? (That is, Where do we want to be?)

Since systems usually have multiple outcomes, this is a more complex question than it appears at first glance.

Develop clarity and agreement on this before starting to act. Keep in mind there are usually multiple outcomes (we’re not dealing with either/or questions as reductionist thinkers do). Other words for outcomes (the “what”) include vision, ends, goals, objectives, mission, purpose.

Without agreement on ends, our actions will never have a chance of succeeding. Once the “what” is clear, there are many ways to try to attain it, such as by empowerment.

  For Example

Organizational outcomes often include the needs of customers, employees, and stockholders, as well as the community, suppliers, and so forth. Asking this question sends us into “backwards thinking,” which keeps us from focusing on only isolated events.

Further, these desired outcomes are all about setting goals. Goal setting and careful goal selection (that is, the establishment of a vision or purpose and meaning) are primary criteria for success.

  For Example

In simple, meetings-management terms, it means making daily “to do” lists like the one below, so you focus on actions and results, not just quick talk and a few good ideas.

Meetings “To Do” List

What to Do/Achieve	By Whom	By When

GUIDELINES FOR USE
1. Make this tool’s question your Number One question too. Ask it before you do anything in life, whether what you do is work-related or not. Remember, this is synonymous with Phase A’s question: Where do we want to be?

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 5. Feedback

Once we have identified our desired outcomes, we need to address the all-important question:

How will we know we have achieved the desired outcomes?

This corresponds to the A-B-C-D System Model’s Phase B question, How will we know we have reached it (the place we want to be)?

The concept of feedback is important to our understanding of how a system maintains a steady state or changes successfully. In practical terms, information concerning the system’s outputs is fed back into the system as an input— that is, the results of past performance are reinserted into the system—and if need be, the system’s behavior is modified. Positive feedback tells us the system is “on course” to achieving the desired outcomes; negative feedback indicates the system is “off course” and must change. Negative feedback is actually good in the sense that it stimulates learning. In fact, the ability to manage such feedback well is a survival skill today.

Because our world is so changeable, solutions that work today may simply not work tomorrow; therefore, despite the importance of finding initial solutions to problems, our primary concern is to ensure we receive constant feedback and know how to work with it. The ability to be flexible and adaptable is crucial here; fortunately, the more we receive and work with feedback, the better our ability becomes. Feedback teaches us to learn, grow, adapt, and change as our goals and environment require. It is a vital input of learning organizations, helping people at all system levels (individual, team, and organization) deal with change personally and professionally.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Look at feedback as a gift—be open and receptive to it; even encourage it. Ask for feedback from all your customers, your employees, your direct reports and peers, and anyone who can help you learn and grow as a person, as a professional, as a leader of your organization. 2. Work on developing self-mastery—the interpersonal style needed to genuinely encourage others to provide feedback, and the mental attitude needed to stay receptive even when feedback is negative. Don’t be defensive, and always thank the feedback giver. Remember, you’re the one who decides, after some reflection, whether the feedback merits action and, if so, what action to take. 3. Ensure that feedback in your organization is received and applied in the context of the entire system. Limiting feedback to select levels is like limiting team-performance results to select team members: it makes no sense at all, especially if changes are needed. 4. Bring to your organization all that you personally learn about feedback, receptivity, flexibility, and adaptability. The more senior your level in the organization, the more important this is.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 2. Open Systems
— 3. Boundaries

Organizations and individuals who do not constantly scan their environment to see what is changing are unlikely to be successful in today’s world. Therefore, we must continually ask:

What is changing in the environment that we we need to consider?

In organizational terms, this means we must keep scanning the environment for changes in anything from our competition to the political scene. At minimum there are seven areas we need to keep an eye on. They can be remembered by the acronym SKEPTIC.

In terms of the individual, it means paying attention to environmental changes that may have an impact on our roles in life. We should consider at least four areas, which we can remember by the acronym PITO.

Remember to employ “backwards thinking.” Start with the environment—the wants and needs of the customer, for example—and the desired outcomes; then work backwards into the organization to determine how to meet the demands of the environment, and the outcomes, while still meeting the multiple needs of other key stakeholders in the environment.

Align all employees, suppliers, the entire organization, and business processes across departments to meet those demands and produce the desired outcomes. This is the conceptual basis for business process reengineering in today’s organizations. However, it is often fragmented into departmental elements or internal cost-cutting activities, and it neglects to consider customer impact.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Set up an environmental scanning system in your organization, and assign a senior person or team the responsibility of collecting data on each SKEPTIC area. 2. Conduct quarterly environmental scanning sessions in which everyone shares information they have gathered. From this, deduce trends and impacts on your organization. 3. Annually revise your strategic plan, with the above as key input. 4. Keep yourself open to what is changing in the environment. Find out what is going on not just through the typical media, such as television and newspapers, but through other means as well, such newsletters.

Application of
• Seven Levels of Living Systems
• Standard Systems Dynamics
— 9. Hierarchy
—10. Interrelated Parts

A. THE QUESTION OF RELATIONSHIP

In systems thinking, we are always looking at the relationship of the part or event to both (1) the overall system outcomes, and (2) all other parts and events within the system. We ask the question:

What is the relationship of x to y and z?

To fully address the question, we must keep in mind:

•  In systems, the whole is primary and the parts/events are secondary. The parts are only important within their relationship to other parts/events.

•  Balance and optimization is the key, not dominance and maximization of a single part.

•  In systems, relationships and processes are what’s important; not departments/units and events.

•  We need to think from events and parts to relationships and processes.

It is essential for us to continually assess how the parts fit or link together in an integrated process in support of the whole outcome. Moreover, each part’s effectiveness cannot be analyzed in a void, but only in relationship to the other parts and the processes that lead to the whole. Always remember, a system cannot be subdivided into independent parts. Change in one part affects the whole and the other interdependent parts or processes. This is true whether we are talking about teams, departments, and organizations, or society as a whole—something we all still need to learn and understand.

  For Example

In organizations, the question is not, How can I maximize my job or department’s impact?; it is, How can we all work and fit together in support of the overall objectives of the organization? To that end, each year all major departments need to share their annual plans with senior executives and middle managers and other professionals to ensure everyone knows what everyone else is doing, and to give others a chance to critique those plans. This is actually a large group teambuilding process.

In personal terms, systems thinking is about finding patterns and relationships in your work and your life, and learning to reinforce or change these patterns to achieve personal fulfillment. This can actually help simplify your life, as you see interconnections between what initially seem like disperate parts.

  For Example

What is the relationship between your fitness and energy level, your overall feeling of health, and the stamina needed to do your job and run your life each day? In looking at a question like this, you begin to apply system thinking to your life.

Create synergy in your life. Synergy is the working together of two or more parts of any system, to produce an effect greater than the sum of the parts’ individual effects. It is increasing your outcomes by working with others in a particularly effective way.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. In using this tool, remember the principle of interdependence. We have only to look at photographs of Earth to know that all of us are parts of the same global fabric, with patterns of interdependency linking us. Apply this kind of vision to your life and to your organization. 2. Focus on your interrelatedness with others in your life, and think about how your visions (intents and desired outcomes) affect others. Share these visions, asking for feedback on them on a regular basis. Pay attention to your impact on others, and think about their impact on you. Keep asking the question What is the relationship of x to y and z? 3. On a professional level, get others thinking about interdependencies and interrelationships between systems levels and parts. Propose this tool’s question as a basis for thought when problem solving.

B. COROLLARY: SOLVING THE EITHER/OR PUZZLE

A puzzle is a problem that we usually cannot solve because we make an incorrect assumption or self-imposed constraint that precludes solution.

—Russ Ackoff (1991)

The analytic tyranny of either/or questions dictates that we must select one of two options (x or y), and only one; thus it sets up an immediate opposition between two things (x versus y), often at the expense of our seeing connections and interrelationships that could lead to better problem solving.

Furthermore, many issues have multiple causes and multiple outcomes, and by looking at them in an either/or fashion, we fail to see the entire picture. If we want to avoid this pitfall, and similar pitfalls related to this-versus-that thinking, then we need to defy the analytic tyranny by answering either/or questions with an emphatic “Yes, both.”

The one “best” answer must evolve into the answers we need to truly solve the problems that confront us. That requires us to stress the “and” of things—to develop the ability to embrace, at any one time, two or more different opinions, extremes, or seemingly contradictory statements. This is the genius of systems thinking. Instead of turning problems into puzzles, it looks at them head-on.

  For Example

The question “Is it x or y?” is usually based on an incorrect assumption: that there is only one answer in all cases. This mistaken assumption occurs in organizations, in families, in all interpersonal relationships, and often results in needless conflict, differences of opinions, and hard feelings.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Don’t get caught up in either/or debates. State areas of agreement first, rather than debating; then state your area of disagreement if there actually is one. When someone asks you an either/or question, answer “Yes, both” to surface artificial disagreement. 2. Learn to distinguish between the tyranny of either/or questions and the more open process of making distinctions between things. (If someone held up a pencil and asked, “Is this a pencil or a pen,” you would not say “Yes, both.”) 3. Get others in your organization thinking in less oppositional ways. A close look at either/or questions is a good way to start people thinking about assumptions in general and the danger of unexamined ones.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 4. Input-Output

A. ENDS AND MEANS

To work effectively toward the desired outcomes, and to communicate clearly about them, we must distinguish between the ends (the what) and the means (the how) at our system level. We should ask:

Are we dealing with the ends (the what) or with the means (the how)?

Here are our definitions of these terms:

Their relation to the A-B-C-D Systems Model is shown below, along with inputs and specific examples.

Phase C = Inputs Phase D = Means/How Phase A = Ends/What
(Input Phase)	(Throughput Phase)	(Output Phase)
•  Strategies •  Resources •  Information, data •  People, money facilities	•  Tasks, activities, actions •  Processes, operations, departments •  Elements, parts, components	•  Goals, results, objectives •  Vision, mission, values •  Outcomes, purposes

It is important to realize that what constitutes an outcome to you and your systems level is a means to an end for the larger system. The what of one person (or department or team) is therefore a how of the larger organization—and the systems hierarchy within the overall system is the how (along with input from the organization’s environment). All levels need to understand what the ends of the overall system are, or confusion can set in.

  For Example

Large-company divisions often do not know the multiple outcomes of the overall system. This is why such divisions tend to be perplexed by “higher-up” decisions.

No system is independent of any other; we are all linked together in hierarchies of systems. Pay attention to the sets of linkages within the organization system and between the organization and other systems (an example of the latter would be supplier, organization, customer).

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. When meetings get difficult, ask “Are we dealing with ends or means?” And pursue the answer. 2. Whenever giving project assignments, be careful to separate the ends from the means. Also, when you receive a project assignment, pay close attention to ends and means. 3. If you want to measure success, then measure ends, not means. 4. If you aren’t clear on a task, ask why you are doing the task. It will move you toward the ends. Ask again, two or three times, to get to the real ends. 5. In interpersonal matters, if conflict threatens to break out, call a truce and see whether the argument is over whats or hows; then get agreement on the what. Agreement there often mitigates fights over hows.

B. TEACHING AND LEARNING—MEANS AND ENDS

What is the difference between teaching and learning? Teaching is the way to accomplish learning; it is the means. Learning is the outcome; it is the end-goal of teaching. Schools focus on teachers and teaching, but they need to keep in mind the desired outcome—the student’s actual learning. Teachers and trainers of all types should ask themselves:

Facilitators and Platform Presenters are Different!

There are a number of other key distinctions between teaching and learning, as the following table illustrates. (Note that teaching is not solely responsible for all of these outcomes.)

Always remember to ask the question introduced by this tool: Are we dealing with the ends (the what) or the means (the how)? It can serve you well in both your professional and private life.

GUIDELINES FOR USE
1. Recognize this crucial distinction between means and ends, and focus on ends—the learning. 2. Use this tool with later ones to assist with real learning; through active learning processes facilitated by an expert on process. 3. Be careful of “content experts” who have no learning skills beyond “platform presentations.” People rarely learn this way.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
The Natural Cycles of Life and Change

When we are changing a system, three elements come into play in all interpersonal and system interactions.

1. The content of the change; the change-related tasks and goals

2. The process of change; how we carry out the tasks and meet the goals

3. The structures or framework within which the content and process operate; the arrangements we must set up to manage change

The first element (content) is obvious: it’s what we focus on the most. However, the other two are often difficult to “see,” for change is like an iceberg where 87 percent of the issues and solutions are below the surface. The second element (process) lies just below the surface, and the third (structures) lies deep below. As both are essential to success, we must bring them to light by asking:

What new processes and structures are we using to ensure successful change?

Our natural inclination is to maintain the status quo, with its comfort, familiarity, and stability, rather than pursue change, with its awkwardness, uncertainty, and ambiguity.

Change requires us to face the difficult issues of (1) admitting we need to change and being willing to do so, and (2) acquiring new skills and abilities to function more effectvely. But if we have a clear structure for change—a framework and arrangements that help us manage change before it manages us—then both content and process will be easier for us to understand, accept, and work with. Structure operates like a fulcrum:

Also, knowledge and information are just inputs, and neither is enough of an input to be effective by itself; thus we must develop skills in working with systems if we are to learn and grow as we undergo change. We must consider, too, that short-term creative destruction can at times be the key to long-term advances, and that today’s “steady state” is really one of constant change.

  For Example

Designing, building, and sustaining a customer-focused high-performance learning organization for the 21^st century requires a balance in how organizations spend their time and energy between content, processes, and structure.

Above all, what we need to avoid is content myopia.

FIGURE 4. THE WAY TO ACHIEVE THE COMPETITIVE EDGE

The Iceberg Theory of Change

Systems change requires a major focus on structure and process in order to achieve the desired content.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. If you want effective change, then building a changemanagement game plan and a yearly map/project plan of the implementation is a must. This is especially true if you want to implement a strategic plan. Present the latter on the game plan’s final page to ensure implementation. Also, include key processes and structures in the game plan. 2. For help with the process of change, see the Rollercoaster of Change in Chapter I; also check out Tool 28. 3. For help with some structures of change, see the menu on the next page. 4. Keep track of the changes in your life. Hold a “summit” with yourself now and then. Consider holding such summits with your family.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 6. Entropy

We must regularly focus on using feedback to reverse systems entropy—the normal tendency of a system to run down and deteriorate over time. Lack of buy-in isn’t the killer here: it’s lack of stay-in over time. Therefore we need to ask:

What must we do to ensure buy-in and stay-in over time (perseverance), and thus avoid entropy?

All business problems conform to the laws of inertia—the longer you wait to look at a problem, the harder it is to correct.

•  Entropy is the tendency for any system to run down and eventually become inert.

•  Incremental degradation is the “inroad” of entropy— and the main barrier to achieving the “fit” of all organization processes and actions with the organization’s espoused values and vision.

Thus for any system to be effective and maintain stay-in, it must receive attention, booster shots, stop checks, and so forth on a regular basis.

Systems can continuously increase in complexity until they become bureaucratic and ossified, ultimately resulting in the death of the system. All living systems require the constant inputs of energy and feedback if they are to reverse such entropy. Sometimes the chaos and disorder of a system presents a discouraging picture, but as Meg Wheatley discusses in her recent book, these are often precursors to renewal and growth at a higher level.

  For Example

While human beings obviously have a finite life cycle, it doesn’t have to be this way for neighborhoods, communities, and organizations. For them, the renewal process that reverses the entropy is key to long-term success.

The role of feedback here is the good news, for in our world of instantly accessible information networks, we have an almost limitless supply of constant feedback to provide us with new inputs toward change. However, there is a downside to this situation, as we often hit information overload, which leads to more complexity in our lives.

The Telltale Signs of Organizational Entropy

How do you know if your organization is experiencing entropy? The following list, from DePree and Miller (1987), presents the telltale signs.

Building a Critical Mass for Change

Normally change leaders focus on buy-in to create a critical mass for change. It can up to two years to build the critical mass for large-scale change. Here are some ways to do it.

“Skeptics Are My Best Friends”

Remember that skeptics can be your best friends here. If you encounter skeptics at any level, be sure to ask them why they believe the changes will not work out. Get them to identify what they see as the roadblocks to the change, and listen to what they have to say—don’t argue or try to force them to agree with you. It may turn out that those roadblocks are the key items you will need to overcome to ensure the successful achievement of your vision and then most skeptics will buy and and stay in.

The following shows a two-year profile for building the support needed to create the critical mass.

Year 1. Involves …

•  Core Strategic Planning/Major Change Team

•  Plus 20 to 40 key “others”

•  The collective management team

Year 2. Involves …

•  The rest of the organization

•  Other key external stakeholders

Institutionalizing the Desired Changes

Getting long-term stay-in on change projects requires institutionalizing the desired changes. Ways to do this include the following:

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Turn to this tool whenever you need help with the practical necessities of getting buy-in and long-term stay-in. Use it to help others understand the often-overlooked value of stay-in. 2. Ensure that others in your organization understand the concept of entropy and its effects on an organization. Take a good look at your organization. Do you see entropy at work? Also, make sure that others understand that entropy can be reversed and lead to renewal and growth at a higher level. 3. Remember to make “skeptics your best friends” as detailed here. 4. Expect entropy to occur in every new change you introduce. Thus, build in specific points to provide booster shots/check points.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 10. Interrelated Parts

Build strategic consistency and operational flexibility into your organization. Focus on what is strategic (the “what” or ends) and what is operational (the “how” or means); avoid thinking in terms of centralize versus decentralize—it’s too simplistic. One size no longer fits all; consistency is not always key, especially in the “how.” Being strategically consistent in your vision or mission, and operationally flexible through empowerment, are the successors to the traditional centralized versus decentralized dilemma.

This leads us to the systems question:

What should we centralize and what should we decentralize?

Usually centralization will focus mostly on whats and decentralization on the hows.

We need to put this systems principle into action by encouraging those who will be affected by the change to contribute input to the planning process prior to implementing the change. We also need decision makers who are willing to accept such input and work with it—leaders who understand that people naturally want to be involved in decisions that will have an impact on them, and who see the advantage in receiving people’s input. The input increases buy-in and stay-in (tool #8) and also often provides better answers from these closest to the issues. Such leaders know that thinking in terms of “one best way” simply doesn’t work, and that participatory management skills are required.

  Example

Today’s leadership paradigm calls for a new way of looking at organizations. It requires a much higher level of maturity and wisdom—a middle ground between abdicating responsibility and being all controlling—with a focus on interdependence.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Leaders need to define the few things they must have to ensure consistency in their organizations; for example, organizational values and beliefs, shared vision and/or mission, and key strategies everyone should help carry out. 2. Most organizations need consistency in the following few areas: financial arrangements, senior executives/succession planning, organization identity and visibility, and positioning in the marketplace vs. the competition with your customers. Beyond these few strategic consistencies, operational flexibility and empowerment should reign. 3. In our personal lives, we need tolerance for others, such as family members, allowing them the flexibility to live their lives as they want as long as they stay true to agreed-upon values.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 2. Open Systems
—11. Dynamic Equilibrium
—12. Internal Elaboration

It is important to use free-flowing and participativemanagement and active-learning techniques to find the linkages and multiple causality factors that are the root causes of problems and other concerns. The question we begin with is simple:

What multiple causes lie at the root of our problem or concern? (That is, what are the root causes?)

Answering it is seldom easy, though, for it’s difficult to detect root causes, and we are often unaware of their long-term impact on our lives. If you, as a manager, were to illustrate some factors that have a long-term impact on what you do each day, the result might look like this:

Long-Term Impact on What You Do Each Day

A cause rarely makes a direct, immediate impact on every effect it is linked to. Furthermore, there is rarely a single cause behind anything in this world, whether it be a problem, a human being, or a rainstorm. Most of us know this in the abstract (or at least sense it); yet in practice, we still think in terms of immediate, singular causes and effects—which is an outmoded, mechanization-oriented way of thinking.

  Example

On the organizational problem-solving front, such thinking leads to the search for fast, convenient solutions—quick fixes—as if we were dealing with simple mechanical objects, not unwanted outcomes in a system within systems.

Our simplistic cause-effect analyses, especially when coupled with the desire for quick fixes, usually lead to far more problems than they solve—impatience and knee-jerk reactions included. If we stop for a moment and take a good look our world and its seven levels of complex and interdependent systems, we begin to understand that multiple causes with multiple effects are the true reality, as are circles of causality-effects.

  Example

Consider how our weather and crops are affected by multiple causes such as these:

•  The oceans—moderators of climate

•  Atmospheric forces—for instance, the jet streams

•  Various combinations of the above—such as El Niño

•  Rain forests—high generators of weather

•  Geological activity—such as volcanic eruptions (even very distant ones)

Delay time, the time between causes and their impacts, can highly influence systems. Yet the concept of delayed effect is often missed in our impatient society, and when it is recognized, it’s almost always underestimated. Such oversight and devaluation can lead to poor decision making as well as poor problem solving, for decisions often have consequences that don’t show up until years later. Fortunately, mind mapping, fishbone diagrams, and creativity/brainstorming tools can be quite useful here.

Keep in mind, though, that the complexity encountered in this area is often far beyond our human ability to fully assess and comprehend. Thus it is crucial to flag or anticipate delays, understand and appreciate them, and learn to work with them rather than against them.

  Example

Most of us actually work with such delays all the time, and base decisions on them. Investments, pensions, savings, and the like all have delayed effects—ones we bet our futures on. However, we seldom see that delayed effect plays a crucial role in other decisionmaking and problem-solving areas of our lives.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. The training and development function has many active learning techniques that will help you find root causes. Involve people affected by a change in the search for these causes and for solutions. 2. Use these techniques to search for root causes, not superficial symptoms. Some root causes are very hard to find. Continually ask, “What else might be a root cause?” and ask “why” over and over again. 3. Keep an open-systems view of the environment, as it often contributes to the root causes as well.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 7. Equifinality
— 9. Hierarchy
—12. Internal Elaboration

A. REDUCING BUREAUCRACY

Flexibility, adaptability, speed, and simplicity are far preferable to rigid plans, tight controls, one-size-fits-all consistency, and economies of scale. We need to eliminate the waste of complexity and bureaucracy and try to flatten system hierarchies. This requires us to ask:

How can we move from complexity to simplicity, and from consistency to flexibility, in the solutions we devise?

  Example

To get an idea of how bureaucracy (and analytic thinking) has run amuck in our lives, see Chapter I, section “Systems Thinking Versus ‘Machine Age’ Thinking.”

Privatization and free-market economies generally work because those closest to the action of a business are allowed to make decisions for the business. We need to carry this principle over into big business (and big government as well), realizing that it is the thousands of little decisions we all make daily in our businesses that shape and meet market needs, not “higher-up” dictates or regulations. Clearly, “corporate central” has a role to play in the success of businesses, but it should not be an all-encompassing one. Corporate bureacracies should be shaped into smaller units, so that the people who work in the units—the ones that best understand the units’ operations and needs—have enough freedom to act on that understanding. In fact, we may find in the future that virtual corporations work more effectively than traditional, vertically integrated and complex ones.

The KISS (“Keep it simple, stupid”) method is more powerful than many economies of scale. This method begins with us and the questions we bring to our organizations.

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. To reduce bureaucracy and create simplicity and flexibility, answer these 10 questions in terms of your own job or life. 1. What made me angry today? 2. What took too long? 3. What caused complaints? 4. What was misunderstood? 5. What cost too much? 6. What was wanted? 7. What was too complicated? 8. What was just plain silly? 9. What job took too many people? 10. What job took too many actions? 2. Ask yourself these three questions to build in simplicity. 1. What is going well in my organization or personal life, and so should not be changed? 2. What are the abrasive or problem areas that should be examined? 3. If I could change my organization/my life with a “stroke of the pen,” what would I change?

B. THE RULE OF THREES

In viewing the world, we usually organize things into threes—for instance: sun, moon, stars; land, air, water. This a natural human tendency, perhaps because thirds offer us the simplest conceptual balance in seeing a whole. When dealing with human constructs, we thus find threes used everywhere as a principle of order and comprehension (many of us even see ourselves as comprising three parts— body, mind, and spirit). The KISS method adopts this tendency, the Rule of Threes, as a primary way to “keep it simple.”

  Example

Here are some applications of the Rule of Threes:

•  Individual: Body, mind, spirit

•  Learning: Skills, knowledge, feeling/attitude

•  Human Interaction: Structure, content, process

GUIDELINES FOR USE

1. Whenever you are trying to influence someone, order your views into three main points. Most people will find them easier to remember. (This is a good technique for talks or presentations, too.) 2. In all you do, ask yourself, “What are my three main points?” Build frameworks people can remember. 3. When someone is being complex or rambling on, ask the person for his or her three main points or, if appropriate, for three “pro” points and three “con” points. 4. As Steve Covey asks in his 7 Habits book (1989), “What is the third Alternative?” This often helps to stop artificial and competitive win-lose options and conflicts.

Application of Standard Systems Dynamics
— 6. Multiple Outcomes
— 9. Hierarchy

To paraphrase Albert Einstein, problems can’t be solved at the level they were created; so we need to go to the nexthigher systems level and its desired outcome in order to succeed. By using higher-systems-order outcomes, we focus on abundance (win-win activities), rather than scarcity (win-lose). To initiate that focus, we ask:

What is our common higher-level (superordinate) goal?

To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative imagination and marks real advance in science.

—Albert Einstein

This is the ultimate systems principle. It requires that we advance beyond analytical thinking to genuine systems thinking in order to resolve our issues. Climb into a mental helicopter and rise to a higher level to gain a broader perspective and a high purpose and a wider range of solutions.

  Example

Union-management fights and strikes over pay tend to amount to a win-lose game. By moving to the higher-level goal of competing and producing more profitably, both sides can make more money (increase the size of the pie).

It is also important to apply the ultimate systems principle to our personal lives.

  Example

In your day-to-day life, do you think about your future vision and your higher-level goals?

If you do not think about the future, you cannot have one.

—John Galsworthy

GUIDELINES FOR USE
1. Whenever it feels like a discussion is going nowhere, ask “What is the common superordinate goal that everyone can support?” 2. Ask the above question when you are planning daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly schedules. Get everyone involved in the planning to work on the answer. Sometimes this is seen as a “shared vision or core strategies.”