source:

Systems thinking at the Tavistock Institute – past, present and future – The Tavistock Institute

Systems thinking at the Tavistock Institute – past, present and future

Presented by Dione Hills, Richard Allen and David Drabble.

Systems Thinking has been an important feature in the Tavistock Institute’s research and consultancy work from the beginning in 1947. Central to our action research work with major industries in the 1950-70’s, it formed the core of theory and practice related to ‘sociotechnical systems’ work. This tradition continued within our evaluation activities from the 1980’s onward, and features in several of our current projects. These have received added impetus from the growing interest in complexity theory and its application to evaluation practice, encouraged by our involvement in activities such as the Centre for Complexity in Evaluation across the Nexus (CECAN) and the writing of an annex to the revised Magenta book (Cross-Government Evaluation Group) published on 27 March this year.

This talk on Systems Thinking offered the opportunity to consider what we have learnt from the past, how we are currently applying this – and where systems thinking will be taking us next.

Recording of the talk
https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/837607735&color=%23ff5500&inverse=false&auto_play=false&show_user=true

Click arrow to play

Powerpointhttps://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/jocVidhoQsUaKu

Dione Hills has been involved in evaluation and consultancy activities at the Tavistock Institute for over 30 years. For the last 3 years she has taken a lead in the Institute’s partnership with CECAN, contributing to guidance documents such as the Magenta book complexity evaluation guidance, to training activities and workshops and several blogs.

Richard Allen is a Principal Researcher and Consultant at the Tavistock Institute who has more than 30 years working in the ‘not for profit’ and public sectors in a variety of project and senior management roles largely concerned with generating change and improving organisational performance. At the Tavistock Institute, he works across a range of consultancy and evaluation projects.

David Drabble is a senior researcher at the Tavistock Institute with over ten years of experience and a keen interest in organisational systems. He often works in the health field and on evaluating innovative and disruptive interventions. He has a specialised role in data presentation, analysis, and project management.

‘Systems thinking at the Tavistock Institute – past, present and future’ was presented as part of the Tavistock Institute’s Food For Thought series.

Systems thinking at the Tavistock Institute – past, present and future Presented by Dione Hills, Richard Allen and David Drabble.

Systems thinking at the Tavistock Institute – past, present and future – The Tavistock Institute

source:

Mapping the Ripple Effect — Gloucester Community Building Collective

Mapping the Ripple Effect

Aug 26

Measuring the impact of community led change is a constant challenge for those of us working in organisations that are seeking to grow community capacity rather than ‘do to’ communities.

Within more traditional project-based approaches, its often easier to predefine the outcomes at the start of the project and deliver on those. However, in taking a community building approach, our role is to enable the capacity of others, so they own the change they want to see. In doing so citizens will also often inspire other friends and neighbours to get involved, which leads to many unintended outcomes. This results in a ripple effect.

To capture this process and the outcomes that emerge from community driven development, the Gloucester Community Building Collective is working with Dr James Noble from the University of Bristol and the team at We Can Move to assess the impact of community building.

James explained why its critical that organisations engaged in community building need different ways of evaluating impact. Put simply ‘Ripple Effect Mapping’ offers a way of understanding the wider, intended and unintended, impacts of a project or programme over time. This is important as is demonstrates the catalytic role that organisations play in enabling citizens and achieving social change https://www.youtube.com/embed/tq3A-ETnZFU?wmode=opaque&enablejsapi=1

The process works by initially mapping your intended course of action, but over time also mapping what actually happened and what unintended outcomes occurred.

The mapping process often starts off with something like this…

But it ends up like this

Obviously, our hand written versions are somewhat messier! But the information can be transferred using software called Vensim https://vensim.com/vensim-software/

From this mapping process, you can identify the critical catalytic actions that led to the outcomes achieved, irrespective of whether you instigated them or not. It also allows you to identify key themes that could be a focus for systems change.

Gloucester Community Building Collective will be using this approach understand the impact of community building across Gloucester. We hope to share more about the process and the outcomes as we engage in this approach.  

Credit: Dr James Noble, NIHR, university of Bristol

We Can Move, Active Gloucestershire

source:

Mapping the Ripple Effect — Gloucester Community Building Collective

The concept of system is central to any discussion of organisation; few managers, perhaps, would think of that concept exactly as a tool. It is, they might consider, a term to be defined, and then to be properly used. In Chapter One, however, we begin to probe the connotation of the word ‘system’. The target definition turns out to be elusive. It seems more important to recognise that we are handling a conceptual tool, because a tool has to be understood in terms of its capability to facilitate the work undertaken, and also in terms of the limitations that its own shortcomings (in this case of reliable definition) impose on that work. In an effort to elucidate all this, the chapter engages in some mental exercises intended to loosen-up rigid attitudes to whatever is systemic about enterprises, and to promote an enquiry rather than a didactic ethos for the whole book. The examples are exclusively managerial, and deal with both economic and human affairs.

source:

Kybernetes: Vol. 49 Iss. 8 | Emerald Insight

Kybernetes: Volume 49 Issue 8

Strapline:

The international journal of cybernetics, systems and management sciences

Category:

 Electrical and Electronic EngineeringSubscribe to Table of Content Alerts

Table Of Contents – Special Issue: Cybernetic frameworks for a shared world

Guest editorial

Jocelyn Chapman, Christiane M. Herr, Ben SweetingPDF (80 KB)

Owning one’s epistemology in religious studies research methodology

Philip Baron

There is a lack of epistemological considerations in religious studies methodologies, which have resulted in an on-going critique in this field. In addressing this…PDF (434 KB)

Learning the Ashby Box: an experiment in second order cybernetic modeling

Andrei Cretu

W. Ross Ashby’s elementary non-trivial machine, known in the cybernetic literature as the “Ashby Box,” has been described as the prototypical example of a black box…PDF (2.8 MB)

Narratives of exploration: from “Failure is not an Option” to “Try again. Fail again. Fail better.”

Thomas Fischer

To trace a shift in attitudes towards control since the mid-twentieth century, as reflected in a shift in rhetoric that accompanied the extension from first- to…PDF (1 MB)

Design cybernetics in support of cross-disciplinary collaboration: educating the next generation of Chinese architects and structural engineers

Christiane M. Herr

This paper offers design cybernetics as a theoretical common ground to bridge diverging approaches to design as they frequently occur in collaborative design projects…PDF (921 KB)

Traces left by Herbert Brün that orient my cybernetics (Maybe)

Judith Lombardi

Herbert Brün was a composer of many things including electronic and computer music. His compositions were, by design, nested in his passions for designing a new society �…PDF (156 KB)

Understanding the contributions of some Russian scientists to developing systems thinking and the theory of evolution

Tatiana A. Medvedeva

This study aims to explain and illustrate the character of Russian systems thinking and to show how it is different and similar to traditions in the West. This study’s…PDF (153 KB)

A proposal for the role of the arts in a new phase of second-order cybernetics

Tom Scholte

The purpose of this paper is to suggest a more central role for reflexive artistic practices in a clarified research agenda for second-order cybernetics (SOC). This is…PDF (213 KB)

The art of conversation: design cybernetics and its ethics

Claudia Westermann

The purpose of this paper to discuss ethical principles that are implicit in second-order cybernetics, with the aim of arriving at a better understanding of how…

source:

Kybernetes: Vol. 49 Iss. 8 | Emerald Insight

Systems Thinking and Systems Modelling An Online Course for Understanding and Creating Systems Mo

Systems Thinking and Systems Modelling, by The Sustainability Laboratory with Loops Consulting

Complexity Digest http://comdig.unam.mx/2019/03/16/computational-complexity-as-an-ultimate-constraint-on-evolution/

Experiments show that evolutionary fitness landscapes can have a rich combinatorial structure due to epistasis. For some landscapes, this structure can produce a computational constraint that prevents evolution from finding local fitness optima — thus overturning the traditional assumption that local fitness peaks can always be reached quickly if no other evolutionary forces challenge natural selection. Here, I introduce a distinction between easy landscapes of traditional theory where local fitness peaks can be found in a moderate number of steps and hard landscapes where finding local optima requires an infeasible amount of time. Hard examples exist even among landscapes with no reciprocal sign epistasis; on these semi-smooth fitness landscapes, strong selection weak mutation dynamics cannot find the unique peak in polynomial time. More generally, on hard rugged fitness landscapes that include reciprocal sign epistasis, no evolutionary dynamics — even ones that do not follow adaptive paths — can find a…

source: http://comdig.unam.mx/2019/03/16/computational-complexity-as-an-ultimate-constraint-on-evolution/

Complexity Digest
To Adapt or Not to Adapt: A Quantification Technique for Measuring an Expected Degree of Self-Adaptation

Sven Tomforde and Martin Goller
Computers 2020, 9(1), 21

Self-adaptation and self-organization (SASO) have been introduced to the management of technical systems as an attempt to improve robustness and administrability. In particular, both mechanisms adapt the system’s structure and behavior in response to dynamics of the environment and internal or external disturbances. By now, adaptivity has been considered to be fully desirable. This position paper argues that too much adaptation conflicts with goals such as stability and user acceptance. Consequently, a kind of situation-dependent degree of adaptation is desired, which defines the amount and severity of tolerated adaptations in certain situations. As a first step into this direction, this position paper presents a quantification approach for measuring the current adaptation behavior based on generative, probabilistic models. The behavior of this method is analyzed in terms of three application scenarios: urban traffic control, the swidden farming model, and data communication…

View original post http://comdig.unam.mx/2020/03/25/to-adapt-or-not-to-adapt-a-quantification-technique-for-measuring-an-expected-degree-of-self-adaptation/

source:

https://chosenpath.wordpress.com/2020/08/28/the-force-in-organisational-life-the-story-so-far/

I don’t know why my editorialising is so often triggered by ‘complexity pieces’. But I think it’s a good illustration of the problem of focusing on ‘ontological complexity’ (complexity ‘in the world’) that the two main examples here are Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle (wrong scale for most of reality), and Poincare’s three body problem, which was conceptually solved in 1912, and “It is now possible to get most results just by direct numerical computation using for example NDSolve.” (https://wolframscience.com/reference/notes/972d…).

Certain valuable approaches separate ontological and epistemological complexity (or let’s say, to be clearer, ‘inherent complexity in the world and the complexity of multiple perspectives and views’), but, for me, the real point is that ‘complexity’ is dependent on framing, context, perspective, knowledge, and purpose. And this applies across multiple actors.

(The second of the three points is that ‘the world is getting more uncertain’ – in the context of the above, that’s of course debatable, since we know more and can understand more – but anyway it’s just a bunch of assertions from big names).

Love Jennifer Garvey-Berger’s framing in the final bit, though.

(Also, I’m sure I’ve seen these three points in roughly this form before?)

source:

Three fundamental truths about uncertainty

Three fundamental truths about uncertainty

We like to think that our lives are ordered, predictable and subject to a great deal of control. The past is finite; we see only one outcome. We attach causality and narrative to it so that it makes sense. We roll our ability to make sense of the past over into the future, which is infinite; there are many outcomes, as yet unknown and unknowable. Randomness, chance, and luck influence us far more than we realize. Uncertainty is everywhere.

This article explores three of its fundamental truths:

1. The world is inherently uncertain
2. The world is getting more uncertain
3. Humans are hardwired to hate uncertainty

continues in source:

Three fundamental truths about uncertainty

source:

Our events | Forum for the Future

Stories of Change 1: Multi-level Perspective – The Birth of Rock N Roll

Join us on 29 September 2020 for the first in a new three-part webinar series called ‘Stories of Change’. This session discusses the Multi-Level Perspective framework to understand transitions, such as the birth of Rock ‘n’ Roll in the 1950s.READ MORE

Stories of Change 2: Iceberg Model – The Rise of the Civil Rights Movement

Join us on 13 October 2020 for the second in a new three-part webinar series called ‘Stories of Change’. This session discusses the Iceberg Model to explore blindspots and challenge mental models underneath the rise of the Civil Rights Movement.READ MORE

Stories of Change 3: Regenerative Model – Water Resilience in Mexico City

Join us on 27 October 2020 for the last in a new three-part webinar series called ‘Stories of Change’. This session explains the Regenerative Model through the story of water management in Mexico City and shifting from away from extraction.READ MORE

Stories of Change NZ 1: Multi-level Perspective – The Birth of Rock N Roll

For our colleagues and partners in New Zealand. Join us on 17 September 2020 for the first in a new three-part webinar series called ‘Stories of Change’. This session discusses the Multi-Level Perspective framework to understand transitions, such as the birth of Rock ‘n’ Roll in the 1950s.READ MORE

Stories of Change NZ 2: Iceberg Model – Rise of the Civil Rights Movement

For our colleagues and partners in New Zealand. Join us on 1 October 2020 for the second in a new three-part webinar series called ‘Stories of Change’. This session discusses the Iceberg Model to explore blindspots and challenge mental models underneath the rise of the Civil Rights Movement.READ MORE

Stories of Change NZ 3: Regenerative Model -Water Resilience in Mexico City

For our colleagues and partners in New Zealand. Join us on 15 October 2020 for the last in a new three-part webinar series called ‘Stories of Change’. This session explains the Regenerative Model through the story of water management in Mexico City and shifting from away from extraction.READ MORE

source:

Our events | Forum for the Future

Evaluating System Change: A Planning Guide (2010)

Publisher:Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy ResearchApr 30, 2010AuthorsMargaret B. HargreavesProvides guidance on planning effective evaluation of system change interventions.

souce:

Evaluating System Change: A Planning Guide

“Want cross-functional work so you get value streams and initiatives happening?

“Tired of ‘silo’ being the first word crossed off when you play work word bingo?

“Here’s what’s happening, and what to do.”

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/adamgthompson_designyourorgtowork-nosilos-crossfunctional-ugcPost-6704137919021543424-sx0p/

source:

Driving systems change on the African continent – Ventures Africa

BUSINESS

DRIVING SYSTEMS CHANGE ON THE AFRICAN CONTINENT

In recognition of the need to address systemic problems that have hindered the potential growth of Africa for decades and accelerate systems change initiatives across the continent, African Philanthropy Forum (APF) launched the APF Systems Change Program to build an African network of systems change leaders and philanthropists who can help cultivate conditions to make their transformative visions a reality. 

The Systems Change Program, which began with a rigorous selection process managed by Dalberg, is a pilot with six initiatives led by system entrepreneurs who are solving problems in multiple SDG areas, including quality education, decent work, and economic growth, good health and wellbeing, clean water and sanitation and reduced inequality. It is a direct response to the need to think differently and accelerate when considering Africa’s problems and solutions. 

The Program commenced in May 2020 and was publicly launched at a virtual event on August 20, where panelists and the system entrepreneurs took part in a stimulating conversation about Driving Systems Change in Africa towards achieving sustainable and inclusive development. The speakers included Randy Newcomb, Senior Advisor at The Omidyar Group; Dr. Angela Gichaga, CEO of Financing Alliance for Health; Mosun Layode, Executive Director, African Philanthropy Forum; Elena Bonometti, CEO, Tostan International; as well as Jeff Walker, Chairman New Profit/APF Board Member who served as the moderator.

“There is a need to work and change the whole system rather than focus on smaller group activities.” – Jeff Walker.

continues in source:

Driving systems change on the African continent – Ventures Africa