Search results

The purpose of this paper is to question the appropriateness of current lab types for addressing wicked problems. A new lab type, a Systemic Innovation Lab, is proposed which combines the features of existing labs that are suited to addressing wicked problems.

Characteristics of initiatives that are considered appropriate for addressing wicked problems and existing lab types that contain any of these characteristics are identified. These lab types are Social Innovation Labs, Living Labs, Urban Living Labs, Urban Transition Labs and Public Sector Innovation Labs. The proposed new lab type is reasoned by combining the features of existing labs that are suited to addressing wicked problems. How the new lab would work in practice is illustrated with a case study.

When addressing wicked problems, labs need to take a systemic design and not a service design approach. They also need to focus on addressing complex problems, take a place-based and transition approach, enable coherent action by diverse actors, involve users as co-creators, support a networked governance approach and recognize government as an enabler of change.

This paper provides a new lab type designed specifically for addressing wicked problems. This new lab supports practitioners that take a systemic design, solution ecosystem and systemic innovation approach. Systemic design is based on a core set of principles that are a crossover between design and complexity theory.

For the first time, this paper analyzes different lab types to determine their appropriateness for addressing wicked problems. It also proposes a new lab type whose sole purpose is addressing wicked problems.

Education is a key institution of modern society, long recognized for its central role in the reproduction of inequities and with the potential to challenge them. Schools behave as their systems are designed. Achieving equity and excellence is not possible through attempts to fix “the school” or educators. Principles of systemic design that incorporate equity and excellence are needed to increase the likelihood of desirable outcomes.

Using the social contract as a design principle, this paper systematically builds an empirical model of school provision aimed at equitable excellence.

Equitable excellence in school provision is possible if choice is available across geolocation and socio-educational (dis)advantage, schools have autonomy over fiscal, personnel and curricular matters, public accountability is linked to academic outcomes and social impact, all moderated by the quality of teaching.

Data-driven empirical modelling is particularly attractive to policy makers, systemic authorities and researchers when theory (of all varieties) does not yield the necessary insights to support the functionality and effectiveness of systems to deliver equitable outcomes at scale. Empirical examples can be used to test the explanatory power of the novel model – and refine it when necessary.

The empirical model and threshold question are the genesis of a common language for assessing relevant costs and benefits of initiatives for government and system designers. Significantly, establishing a threshold question and tests of legitimacy and strength to accompany the novel model provides a more principled way of prioritizing the competing demands on public investment in education.

Establishing a threshold question and tests for legitimacy and strength to accompany the novel model provides a more principled way of prioritizing the competing demands to accompany.

The governance of the relationship between humans and the biophysical world has been based on a paradigm characterized by dualistic thinking and scientism. This has led to the Anthropocene. The purpose of this paper is to reframe human-biosphere governance in terms of “cyber-systemics”, a neologism that is useful, the authors argue, not only for breaking out of this dualistic paradigm in human-environmental governance but also of the dualism associated with the use of systems and cybernetics.

In this paper the authors draw on their own research praxis to exemplify how the intellectual lineages of cybernetics and systems have been mutually influencing their doings, and how new forms of governance practices that explore different framing choices might contribute to building innovative governance approaches attuned to the problematique of the Anthropocene, for instance through institutional designs for cyber-systemic governance.

The growing popularity of the Anthropocene as a particular framing for the circumstances, if it is to transformative and thus relevant demands informed critique if it is to help change the trajectory of human-life on earth. The authors offer arguments and a rationale for adopting a cyber-systemic perspective as a means to avoid the dangers in pursuing the current trajectory of our relationship with the biophysical world as, for example, climate change. The essay frames an invitation for a systemic inquiry into forms of governance more suited to the contemporary circumstances of humans in their relationships with the biophysical world.

The research essay challenges many taken-for-granted epistemological assumptions within the cybernetics and systems intellectual communities. A case for radical change is mounted; the means to effect this change, other than through changes in discourse remain unclear though it is apparent that changes to praxis and institutional forms and arrangements will be central.

Cyber-systemic capabilities need to be developed; this requires investment and new institutions that are conducive to cyber-systemic understandings and praxis.

Understanding the global environmental crisis as an emergent outcome of current commitments to dualistic governance choices demands a reframing of much of what humans have done, re-investment in cyber-systemics offers a moral and practical response.

The near‐collapse of the world's financial system in 2008 brought into focus significant limitations in the data and analysis tools available to mitigate potential risks across the financial system. It has raised calls to provide comprehensive data and adequate tools to identify and relieve systemic risk. In this paper, an infrastructure is proposed to address the need for a new information system in systemic regulation.

The proposed infrastructure is developed using the Fed's Bank Holding Company Supervision Manual as a guideline. The model uses a data fusion approach that allows integration of inspection data, external data, and other regulatory data of different granularity. A proprietary application known as Decision Making Toolbox (DMT) is being developed with three‐tier architecture.

The integrated all‐in‐one approach will enhance the efficiency, scope, and quality of studies applied to systemic regulation and will facilitate easy decision making for effective regulation.

This concept integrates data and measures that are needed for systemic regulation. It facilitates easy decision making, by regulators with an integrated all‐in‐one information infrastructure, for effective regulation.

Financial crime costs the world economy more than $1tn. Yet policing responses continue to apply traditional law enforcement methods to detect, identify and disrupt criminal actors in financial systems. The purpose of this paper is to challenge existing thinking around law enforcement practices in financial crime within an Australian context, by presenting an alternative model grounded in management cybernetics and systemic design (SD), which the author terms “cyber-systemics”.

This study reflects on prior research work across cybernetics and SD to suggest an integrated approach as a conceptually useful basis for considering regulation of financial crime, and to demonstrate utility using a case study.

The Fintel Alliance between financial crime regulators and financial institutions in Australia demonstrates a strong connection with, and example of, this study’s cyber-systemic regulatory framework. It will be demonstrated that the form of co-design framework offered under cyber-systemics is both consistent with cybernetic and SD literature, but also a means of avoiding regulatory disconnection in times of change and disruption. This study also invites consideration of how future forms of governance might be structured using cyber-systemics as a conceptual backbone.

This work proposes a novel methodology at odds with traditional law enforcement ways of doing, inevitably requiring a change of regulatory mindset. In addition, this paper is purely conceptual and therefore more research on an empirical basis is required to prove the potential benefits in a real-world regulatory environment.

This is (to the author’s knowledge) the first conceptual exploration of blending SD and management cybernetics in the field of criminal law regulation.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary and recommendations on systemic approaches to designing and implementing change in organisations.

The paper is a viewpoint on successful change management techniques using action research based on experience in the use of systemic thinking and systems practices.

The use of a systems approach to change using relevant systems practices enables more successful change outcomes.

Change management practitioners should utilise systemic approaches to enable more successful change implementation.

The paper provides valuable advice for practitioners and researchers in change management through the author’s unique experience in systemic change processes.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new business model logic, highlighting value processes in and properties of platform business models to inform business model thinking from a systemic and dynamic perspective. It challenges the idea of firms managing, influencing and controlling entire activity systems.

The study traces the evolution of different approaches to business models and assesses theories that explain value cocreation and systemic value capture to develop a new business model logic.

Business model thinking has evolved away from Porter’s value chain to a new logic based on open networks and platforms. This study develops a framework for understanding platform business models from a systemic perspective. Derived from service-dominant logic, this new business model logic responds to phenomena in contemporary business environments characterized by increasing connectivity and sociality among actors.

The framework, developed from an extensive body of business model literature, has yet to be subjected to empirical investigation. Future research may involve the exploration of business model design processes and business model innovation from a systemic perspective.

Managers who aim to design their business models based on the logic of platform businesses require an understanding of their organization’s collaboration potential, technological interfaces and potential to leverage network relationships. This research guides start-ups and incumbents to evaluate their platform potential.

This study systematically emancipates the business model logic from a firm-centered, inside-out perspective, focuses on network relationships beyond the customer–firm dyad, explains value processes beyond organizational borders and rethinks value capture from a systemic perspective.

There is an emerging consensus that systemically important banks should face stricter regulations and systemic surcharges. To make this latter principle operational the regulator will need to quantify the systemic importance of individual banks. The purpose of this paper is to review the proposed measures of systemic importance from the research community and discuss their merits relative to how a regulator would ideally wish to calibrate surcharges on systemically important banks, and to evaluate how useful proposed measures of the systemic importance of financial institutions will be to regulators.

The author reviews the main contributions to the research literature and discusses their relevance for the problem faced by regulators.

There are five main caveats that make the proposed measures of systemic importance less useful for regulators.

The proposed measures may help identify relevant aspects of systemic importance, but the regulators will need to construct their own measures for practical use.

The paper provides a critical review of a research literature that could potentially have large practical implications.

The world needs more Eastern knowledge and, ergo, more consciousness. Humanity will unlikely experience a quantum leap in consciousness if we keep ignoring Eastern and other sources of perennial wisdom in the design and development of our socioeconomic and ecological systems. This chapter aims to bridge the consciousness gap by exploring the meaning and application of Buddhist and Taoist systems thinking to regenerative systemic leadership, design, development and sustainable transformation.