Systems Thinking: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Sigal Kordova
,
Anat Nissel miller
,
Tal Grinshpoun
,
Shraga Shoval

Systems thinking is an evolving field, and there is growing demand to integrate systems thinking into many fields. As this demand increases, so does the need for and importance of identifying systems thinkers.

  • systems thinking
  • systems thinking characteristics
  • systems thinker

1. Introduction

Frank [1] found that systems thinking has four distinct components: knowledge, personality traits, cognitive characteristics, and capability for engineering systems thinking [1]. He then developed the Capacity for Engineering Systems Thinking (CEST) questionnaire [2] as a tool for identifying systems thinking. Following the questionnaire’s analysis, conducted previously by Kordova [3], researchers present here a new way of analyzing and categorizing the questions included in the questionnaire. According to the proposed division, each group of questions represents one component of systems thinking.
Analyzing the answers to the questionnaire makes it possible to identify which characteristics of systems thinking the respondent has and which he/she lacks. This facilitates assigning candidates to positions that require certain aspects of systems thinking or knowing which aspects of systems thinking must be learned.
The outcomes of the study will be of great benefit to different kinds of organizations from both low-tech and high-tech industries. Specifically, this research will benefit organizations in matching a candidate’s systems thinking abilities with the right job. The significance of the study is reflected in the process of hiring employees, as well as in employee training processes.

2. Systems Thinking Characteristics and Abilities

Systems thinking is the ability to see a system as a whole and at the same time to identify that it is composed of interrelated components. The ability to identify the interrelationships and understand their impact on each other and on the entire system are essential qualities for a systems thinker. Systems thinking traits and the abilities needed to be a systems thinker can be divided to several categories. Senge [4] presented five areas in a learning organization: first, personal skills and a vision that defines the future portrait of the organization and how it can be achieved; second, mental models, including assumptions, generalizations, images, and embedded images that affect how people understand the world and the way they operate in it; third, the shared values, vision, and goals the organization wants to achieve; fourth, group learning that creates dialogue in the organization; and fifth, seeing the whole picture rather than focusing on details. Each of these areas has an impact on the systems thinking ability.
Frank [5] defined CEST as a concept. His various studies [5][6] outline the understandings and abilities required to be a systems thinker. The main cognitive abilities of CEST are seeing the big picture, knowing the internal relationships between the parts of the system, not going into detail, and having multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge. The ability to “see the forest and not the trees” is an important characteristic of systems thinking [7]. People who have an elevated vantage point, in terms of their perspective on the system and the ability to define which aspects should be considered and which can be ignored, are able to see both the trees and the forest. Frank [2] compared the previous studies that examined the traits required by a systems engineer and found that the ability to understand the system as a whole and see the big picture is a key factor in successful systems thinking. Von Bertalanffy [8] found that the same laws apply to different systems. Increased knowledge helps people to expand their ability for systems thinking. Checkland [9] proposed combining systems studies and using systems thinking in scenarios in which there is a conflict between the methods of natural science and highly complex phenomena, such as social problems that are not purely scientific. Zulauf [10] suggested that learning more about certain fields, including sociology, physics, and chemistry, would contribute to acquiring skills for systems thinking. Additionally, cooperative creation and design between countries are important for dealing with complex situations such as COVID-19 [11].
The internal connections between the components must be understood. The capabilities needed for systems thinking presented by Assaraf and Orion [12] include the need to identify the relationships between components. Yaffe [13] refers to the difficulty caused by not seeing the interrelationships. In many cases, only some parts are identified, while in other instances, they are identified incorrectly; as a consequence, the nature of the overall relationship between the parts and the whole system remains unclear. At times, insufficient attention is paid to the role played by each part of the system and to its contribution to the overall functioning of the system.

3. Developing Systems Thinking Abilities

The need for systems thinking is common to many disciplines, but the characteristics required for systems thinking in different areas or situations vary. It is important to identify the need for the specific characteristics in each situation and the relevant factors that influence systems thinking abilities in a specific context. Nagahi et al. [14] found that factors such as managerial level, the need for involvement in the environment, type of employer, and level of education have an impact on systems thinking abilities. However, Koral Kordova, Frank, and Nissel Miller [15] did not find a direct correlation between engineers’ scores on systems thinking and the number of years of professional experience they had. Kordova and Frank [16] found that an engineering background does not have an impact on systems thinking, although Hung [17] did find that the combination of knowledge and practical experience helps people use systems thinking. Furthermore, practical experience and diversity of practice areas can contribute to acquiring systems thinking abilities [16][18][19]. Experience and a wide range of work issues, changes in positions, and familiarity with diverse technological systems can also improve engineers’ capabilities for systems thinking [20].
According to Kim and Senge [21], systems thinking can be used when groups need to work, experience, and learn together. Valerdi and Zonnenshain [22] found that experience in engineering-based teamwork in a real work environment provides an opportunity to apply materials learned in a classroom. Assaraf and Orion [12] suggest that an outdoor learning environment can facilitate the learning process.
Richmond [23] noted that the ability to recognize familiarity in situations that initially appear different requires thinking that is operational and grounded in reality. In a study conducted by Kordova and Frank [24], experience gained in project implementation supported a significant improvement in CEST. Knowledge of the organization also helps develop systems thinking [25], as does thinking in closed loops that define circular and continuous processes with dependencies between them [23].
People’s mental models influence their ability to correctly comprehend situations and make appropriate decisions when dealing with systems [26]. To reduce the effect of mental models, it is necessary to recognize them and then to find tools to avoid their impact. Lamb and Rhodes [27] explored the role of process and culture regulation in enabling or blocking systems thinking at the team and organizational levels. Documenting and correcting processes can help a group share mental models and overcome barriers that personal mental models pose in solving problems.

4. The Different needs of Systems Thinking

A hierarchical organizational structure makes it difficult to learn new things [28], and managers should already be skilled in systems thinking before reaching a managerial role. Managers in a system may implement team-building initiatives, such as cross-functional teams, cross-designation teams, and self-management teams, to overcome problems arising from the organizational hierarchy [29]. The systems engineering model of Kasser and Hitchins [30] stresses that each level in an organization should connect to and influence the levels above and below it. Levy [31] proposes a three-stage approach for managers acquiring systems vision: vertically, for team management that includes management and upward influence; horizontally, for lateral management across the organization; and outward to colleagues, partners, and systems leadership outside of the organization’s boundaries. This way, managers can have “upward” influence and affect their agendas.
Market behavior is complex and prone to changes. Examining the market with systems thinking tools can help cope with both complexity and dynamism. Understanding how the market behaves as a system and creating collaborative value involves multiple players and resources [32]. People involved in private and public partnership projects need to think in new ways that reflect the timeline, complexity, and interdependence of the project [33]. Haas et al. [34] found that even fifth-grade students can be taught systems thinking practices if the right pedagogical model is found. Monat, Amissah, and Gannon [35] suggest creating the philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline to help use systems thinking in a business environment.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/asi5020038

References

  1. Frank, M. Assessing interest for systems engineers job positions—Results of a recent study. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual Conf. on Systems Engineering Research (CSER 2007), Hoboken, NJ, USA, 14–16 March 2007.
  2. Frank, M. Assessing the interest for systems engineering positions and other engineering positions’ required capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST). Syst. Eng. 2010, 13, 161–174.
  3. Kordova, S. Developing systems thinking in a Project-Based Learning environment. Education 2020, 2, 63–81.
  4. Senge, P.M. The Fifth Discipline, the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization; Doubleday: New York, NY, USA, 1991.
  5. Frank, M. Knowledge, abilities, cognitive characteristics and behavioral competences of engineers with high capacity for engineering systems thinking (CEST). Syst. Eng. 2006, 9, 91–103.
  6. Frank, M. What is “engineering systems thinking”? Kybernetes 2002, 31, 1350–1360.
  7. Richmond, B. System Dynamics/Systems Thinking: Let’s just get on with it. Int. Syst. Dyn. Conf. Sterl. Scotl. 1994, 10, 135–157.
  8. Von Bertalanffy, L. The meaning of general system theory. In General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications; George Braziller Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1973; pp. 30–53.
  9. Wheeler, F.P.; Checkland, P. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice: Includes a 30-Year Retrospective. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 2000, 51, 647.
  10. Zulauf, C.A. Learning to think systemically: What does it take? Learn. Organ. 2007, 14, 489–498.
  11. Haley, D.; Paucar-Caceres, A.; Schlindwein, S. A Critical Inquiry into the Value of Systems Thinking in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. Systems 2021, 9, 13.
  12. Assaraf, O.B.-Z.; Orion, N. Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2005, 42, 518–560.
  13. Yaffa, R. Tahalich hacheker hamadoee kemaarechet. The scientific research process as a system. Aurika 2012, 33. (In Hebrew)
  14. Nagahi, M.; Hossain, N.U.I.; Jaradat, R.; Goerger, S.R.; Abutabenjeh, S.; Kerr, C. Do the practitioners’ level of systems-thinking skills differ across Sector Types? In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon), Montreal, QC, Canada, 24 August–20 September 2020; pp. 1–5.
  15. Koral Kordova, S.; Frank, M.; Nissel Miller, A. Systems thinking education—Seeing the forest through the trees. Systems 2018, 6, 29.
  16. Kordova, S.; Frank, M. Systems Thinking as an Engineering Language. Am. J. Syst. Sci. 2018, 6, 16–28.
  17. Hung, W. Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modelling. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2008, 39, 1099–1120.
  18. Beasley, R. The Barriers to Systems Thinking. INCOSE Int. Symp. 2012, 22, 517–531.
  19. Padhi, D.R.; Chavan, P.; Mitra, R. Understanding systems thinking from the perspectives of experience and diversity. In Proceedings of the IEEE Tenth International Conference on Technology for Education (T4E), Chennai, India, 10–13 December 2018; pp. 122–125.
  20. Koral Kordova, S.K.; Frank, M. Systems Thinking—innate or learned? Recent study findings. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), Singapore, 6–9 December 2015; pp. 1490–1493.
  21. Kim, D.H.; Senge, P.M. Putting systems thinking into practice. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 1994, 10, 277–290.
  22. Valerdi, R.; Zonnenshain, A. Teaching them how to fish: Industry-Focused student projects in systems engineering. INCOSE Int. Symp. 2012, 22, 2188–2195.
  23. Richmond, B. Systems thinking: Critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 1993, 9, 113–133.
  24. Frank, M.; Koral-Kordova, S. Four layers approach for developing a tool for assessing systems thinking. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the ISSS-2015, Berlin, Germany, 2–7 August 2015.
  25. Deep, A.; Deep, R.; Mitra, R. Comparing Experts’ Systems Thinking Skill Across Contexts. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Technology for Education (T4E), Chennai, India, 10–13 December 2018; pp. 154–157.
  26. Soderquist, C.; Overakker, S. Education for sustainable development: A systems thinking approach. Glob. Environ. Res. 2010, 14, 193–202.
  27. Lamb, C.T.; Rhodes, D.H. Standardized Process as a Tool for Higher Level Systems Thinking. INCOSE Int. Symp. 2007, 17, 1492–1502.
  28. Raj, R.; Srivastava, K.B. The mediating role of organizational learning on the relationship among organizational culture, HRM practices and innovativeness. Manag. Labor Stud. 2013, 38, 201–223.
  29. Suppiah, V.; Sandhu, M.S. Organizational culture’s influence on tacit knowledge-sharing behavior. J. Knowl. Manag. 2011, 15, 462–477.
  30. Kasser, J.E.; Hitchins, D.K. A framework for a systems engineering body of knowledge, 0.6, Report to the Fellows Committee. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering 2009 (INCOSE 2009), Singapore, 20–23 July 2009.
  31. Levy, A. Mahi Maarehet Vekeizad Havanata Toremet Lashore Hatahtona . Retrieved October 2017. Available online: http://www.lotem.co.il (accessed on 20 March 2022).
  32. Vargo, S.L.; Koskela-Huotari, K.; Baron, S.; Edvardsson, B.; Reynoso, J.; Colurcio, M. A systems perspective on markets–Toward a research agenda. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 79, 260–268.
  33. Loosemore, M.; Cheung, E. Implementing systems thinking to manage risk in public private partnership projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2015, 33, 1325–1334.
  34. Haas, A.; Grapin, S.E.; Wendel, D.; Llosa, L.; Lee, O. How Fifth-Grade English Learners Engage in Systems Thinking Using Computational Models. Systems 2020, 8, 47.
  35. Monat, J.; Amissah, M.; Gannon, T. Practical Applications of Systems Thinking to Business. Systems 2020, 8, 14.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback