How to Solve Intractable Problems

I highly recommend this profound presentation by the late Dr. Russell L. Ackoff, the dean of the systems thinking community. In it, Dr. Ackoff dicusses the history, nature and application of systems thinking. A few of his observations will give you an idea of the force of the presentation:

-The properties of a system (e.g. a business organization, an automobile or the human body) depend on the way in which the parts of the system interact.

-When a system is taken apart, it loses all of its essential properties and so do each of its parts (e.g. Take the motor out of an auto and what's left is not an auto. Moreover, the motor no longer moves anything. It just sits there.)

-A system is not the sum of its parts. It is the product of the interactions of its parts.

-The performance of a system is not ordinarily improved by improving the performance of its parts individually (e.g. "fixing" the marketing department may not improve the performance of the business organization).

-To "dissolve" or eliminate a problem (as opposed to absolving, resolving or solving it), ideally redesign the system of which the problem is a part to eliminate the problem, and then see how close you can come to realizing the ideal redesign.

-The strength of the U.S. economic system is its tremendous ability to survive its inefficiencies.

-The U.S. educational system kills creativity.

-The righter you do the wrong things, the wronger you become. Better to do the right things wrong, than the wrong things better.

Dr. Ackoff cites specific instances where systems thinking was used to dissolve seemingly intractable problems. To eliminate an illiteracy problem in an inner city grade school, for example, a team of which Dr. Ackoff was a member, used a grant to set up a continuous showing of Charlie Chaplin silent films that students could watch at any time. Soon the illiteracy problem dissolved, as students became motivated to learn to read so that they could understand the subtitles.

Share

Expand the Pie Before Dividing It Up

"Many managers who view themselves as the heroic guardians of shareholder interests—the no-nonsense, tough-as-nails guys who run their businesses by the numbers, who pride themselves on their hypercompetitiveness, and who think that "organizational culture" and "shared values" are irrelevant fantasies concocted by out-of-touch academics—may be inadvertently running their companies into the ground and systematically destroying the wealth of their investors...

"The most successful organizations understand that the purpose of any business is to create value for customers, employees, and investors, and that the interests of these three groups are inextricably linked. Therefore, sustainable value cannot be created for one group unless it is created for all of them. The first focus should be on creating value for the customer, but this cannot be achieved unless the right employees are selected, developed, and rewarded, and unless investors receive consistently attractive returns...

"Why do managers so often choose not to focus on value creation and instead make decisions that systematically decrease the long-term value of their businesses? One reason may be that their training and education lead them to define their organizations' interests too narrowly... If management defines the organization's self-interest (and consequently its goals) too narrowly—for example, to maximize this year's or this quarter's reported earnings—it will view that interest as being at odds with the interests of customers and employees...

"This approach is based on 'win/lose' or 'zero-sum' thinking: The underlying assumption is that there is a fixed pie of value to be divided up among customers, employees, and investors, so the interests of the three groups must be traded off against one another...

"Companies that act on this myopic conception of self-interest may stumble into a downward spiral of poor decision-making that is difficult to reverse. For example, as reduced employee training and compensation lead to low employee morale and poor performance, and as underfunded R&D allows a product line to age, customers can become dissatisfied and begin to defect... When customer do defect, profits shrink, tempting management to cut back even further on training, compensation, and R&D, thus accelerating the spiral of customer dissatisfaction and defection...

"Alternatively, if managers define their company's interests broadly enough to include the interests of customers and employees, an equally powerful spiral of value creation can occur. Highly motivated, well-trained, properly rewarded employees deliver outstanding service, while effective R&D investments lead to products that enjoy a significant value-adding advantage and generate higher margins. Satisfied, loyal customers (and new customers responding to word-of-mouth referrals) drive revenue growth and profitability for investors...

"An 'expanding the pie' approach to management requires that a company alter its thinking along several dimensions...."

Read more in Value Creation and Business Success by Paul O'Malley from which the foregoing was quoted.

Share

Who's Winning in Your Workplace?

"Are competition and cooperation at play in your work environment? The Olympic Games are a great example of how dynamic forces balance and reinforce each other in large systems. At the same time that national pride pushes countries to compete aggressively from sport to sport, so too is a spirit of cooperation in evidence as individual athletes demonstrate sportsmanship and countries agree on standards regarding everything from scoring practices to drug testing.

"When you look around you at work, can you determine who's winning the medals? Can you identify who champions the importance of working together?

From Leverage Points newsletter.

Share

Systems Thinking in a Nutshell

This short, non-technical introduction to systems thinking by Daniel Aronson explains the difference between analysis (attempting to understand the whole by studying its parts) and systems thinking (trying to understand how the parts of a system interact). Aranson provides an excellent example that illustrates the difference by focusing on the unintended consequences that may arise from attempts to reduce crop damage by insects without understanding the system in which the insect problem occurs. Quoting:

Traditional analysis focuses on separating the individual pieces of what is being studied: in fact, the word “analysis” actually comes from the root meaning “to break into constituent parts.” Systems thinking, in contrast focuses on how the thing being studied interacts with the other constituents of the system – a set of elements that interact to produce behavior – of which it is a part.

This means that instead of isolating smaller and smaller parts of the system being studied, systems thinking works by expanding its view to take into account larger and larger numbers of interactions as an issue is being studied. This results in sometimes strikingly different conclusions than those by traditional forms of analysis, especially when what is being studied is dynamically complex or has a great deal of feedback from other sources, internal or external.

The character of systems thinking makes it extremely effective on the most difficult types of problems to solve: those involving complex issues, those that depend a great deal on the past or actions of others and those stemming from ineffective coordination among those involved. Examples of areas in which systems thinking has proven of value include:

--Complex problems that involve helping many actors see the “big picture” and not just their part of it

--Recurring problems or those that have been made worse by past attempts to fix them

-- Issues where an action affects (or is affected by) the environment surrounding the issue, either the natural environment or the competitive environment.

--Problems whose solutions are not obvious.

Share

the Neuro-Science Behind "the Secret"

Call it the power of positive thinking on steroids, call it the "law of attraction." No matter what you call it, "The Secret" has become a publishing and DVD success by pushing a simple premise -- love, money, health — you can have them all, simply by thinking it. And while critics have rightly questioned the breadth of the claims of the proponents of the Secret, at least one aspect of the process is squarely grounded in neuro-science - the positive power of affirmations to effect change.

As explained in this article by Hal Williamson and Sharon Eakes published in The Systems Thinker Newsletter, proper use of the affirmation-visualization process creates new neural circuits and conditions the brain to detect information in your environment that helps to turn the affirmation-visualization into reality.

Quoting from the article:

When our mind creates thoughts that are inconsistent with our experiences, habits, attitudes and beliefs, we experience mental pressure. The subconscious pushes back in an effort to maintain system equilibrium...

So how can we overcome these forces that work to maintain the status quo? One way is through affirmations...

An affirmation is a declaration that something is true...When tagged with emotions, affirmations create strong, new neural circuits. These new circuits have the capacity to alter old, unwanted behaviors in favor of new, desired behaviors...

By visualizing something repeatedly, we stimulate our subconscious to search for neural circuits that will evoke behaviors to bring about the very thing we have visualized. Positive results from practicing affirmations come from our natural urge to reduce the cognitive dissonance that is created when we compare current reality with the future state we want to achieve...

The three-step affirmation-visualization process that will drive new neural circuit development is:

1. Craft an affirmation that you will repeat mentally.
2. Visualize an image of the way the world will look as viewed from your own eyes when the affirmed fact is a reality.
3. Recall simultaneously an event that triggered positive emotions in order to chemically tag the new neural circuit formed by the affirmation and the visualized image.

To be highly effective, the words of affirmation need to follow six basic guidelines:

1. Be Personal
2. Be Positive
3. Use Present Tense
4. Express Positive Emotion
5. Be Realistic
6. Be Specific

The affirmation-visualization process has enormous power. Some of the results you can expect include:

*Secure the quality of life you want by activating existing neural circuits to change your behavior and relationships with others.
*Neutralize unwanted emotions, eliminate limiting attitudes and beliefs.
*Condition your brain to detect information in your environment that is of special importance to you.
*Solve problems by utilizing subconscious processes.

The article is derived from Hal's recently published book, Liberating Greatness: The Whole Brain Guide to an Extraordinary Life. The book uses the latest in neuroscience to illustrate how to rewire your brain to create the future you've always wanted. By understanding how the brain's neural pathways work, learning basic systems principles, and using simple mental tools, you can unlock your inner capacity and liberate your own greatness.

The book is available from Pegasus Communications, which graciously granted permission to use the Systems Thinker Newsletter article excerpts in this post.

Share

Visual Modeling Helps Solve Complex Problems

This cool visualization demonstrates the usefulness of visual models to address complex business problems that involve multible moving variables, the necessity for effective collaboration and the importance of clear communication in organizational settings.

Share