Search results

The purpose of this research is to assess the current level of systems literacy of air force logisticians in Nigeria.

This research undertook an assessment of the knowledge of air force logistics officers on systems thinking with the aid of a qualitative questionnaire. The questionnaire featured questions on the level of literacy and application of systems thinking by air force logisticians in Nigeria.

The research finds that the majority of the air force logistics officers have very low levels of knowledge and training in systems thinking.

The research is a unique effort to ascertain the level of systems thinking literacy and training in air force logistics in Nigeria. The study presents a baseline and justification for intervention through an improvement of the logistics curricula used in air force training institutions in Nigeria.

Accepting the assumption that our intelligence depends on the ability to construct models which may allow us to acquire, update and transmit our knowledge, this paper aims to highlight the role of Systems Thinking in developing the “intelligence” of managers for all types and sizes of organization.

Four relevant contributions for improving the “intelligence” of managers will be examined: the ability to understand and model dynamic systems, the structure of Control Systems, the rules of the decision-making process and the identification of systems archetypes.

The paper will show that Systems Thinking, through the logic of Control Systems, offers managers a comprehensive representation of the problem-solving and decision-making processes, teaching them how to distinguish problems from symptoms and to acquire a leverage effect. Additionally, Senge’s system archetypes will be presented and new archetypes will be added to Senge’s list.

The viability of every organization and its effective resilience and survival make it more than ever necessary for managers to adopt Systems Thinking, not only as a technique but also primarily as a discipline for efficient and effective thinking, learning, communication and explanation with regard to the dynamics of the world.

The message of the paper is that by continually applying the rules and language of Systems Thinking, managers develop the capability to continually adapt their models to the dynamics of the world, increase their learning capacity and better gauge their consequent judgments, decisions and behavior, thereby removing the mental impediments to intelligence (inappropriate mental models, defensive routines, judgmental biases, rules, etc.).

Present-day engineering education is in dire need to expose would-be engineers to a systemic view of the world. Society’s problems are getting increasingly complex “wicked” problems, and they require inter and transdisciplinary approaches to understand and “dissolve” them (that is to solve them systemically). In this context, the purpose of this paper is to invite engineering educators to reflect on the need to teach systems thinking and spark their interest on finding appropriate methods to do so. This paper aims to describe an actual intervention at Universidad de Ibagué (UNIBAGUE), Colombia, where the methodology of teaching systems thinking as a foreign language has been on trial for one year.

Starting with a simple model of teaching systems thinking, and using an action-research methodology, the teaching model is gradually evolved to a model for teaching systems thinking as a foreign language.

The authors only have preliminary qualitative results with this systems-thinking teaching model. Although these results are encouraging (the authors think basic systems concepts are better apprehended by the students), further research is needed. One objective of the present paper is precisely to invite engineering educators to experiment with this teaching model.

The authors think it is necessary to exploit further the teaching-a-foreign-language analogy. There is a vast experience on methods for teaching second and foreign languages. They could enrich the method and hint at possible directions for further research.

Teaching systems thinking is a field still open for wide research. The pedagogical model developed in this research to teach systems thinking could benefit other teachers of systems thinking to build upon.

As one of the referees pointed out: “The implications of the insides obtained in this research are very significant to society. The problem observed in the systems thinking researchers and practitioner's community about how to disseminate systems thinking knowledge and how to embed this way of thinking into the minds of young people (K-12, university, etc.) is addressed in this research. In it is shown an experience that provides very valuable insides about how this can be done.

The idea of teaching systems thinking as a foreign language has not been widely explored. Furthermore, we feel that inasmuch as systems thinking is more of a skill or competency, than a technique or theory, then the model of teaching which emerges from this case study might be more appropriate than models of teaching based in the old educational paradigm.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how leaders within a school district system understand their own and others' leadership positions from the perspectives of systems thinking and systems thinking skills.

The findings are based on interviews with superintendents, area managers (deputy superintendents), principals and first teachers in Sweden. Sets of systems thinking skills guide the analysis, specifically how various leadership positions are related (their structure and relationships), how leaders understand themselves in relation to the whole and the parts (mindset), what they think about how the organization is organized (content) and how they relate to the organization's history and future (behavior).

Leaders at all levels in the school organization have regular communications, but a wider systems thinking perspective is underdeveloped. The systems are hierarchical, with each level taking responsibility for its subsystem to such a high extent that it does not use or learn from other levels. We also found that change in the investigated schools is subtle, and in the schools, it did not seem important to understand change over time or the nature of important leverage points; the organizations' histories and futures were emphasized less than current issues and relations.

Increased knowledge on systems thinking skills can provide insights as to whether mindsets, content, structure and behavior are supporting each other or not. These perspectives can help actors on all levels to learn together.

In addition to the study outcomes, this paper offers a unique approach for studying the leadership positions of the governance chain and their impact on an organization's work and results. It obtains a broader picture of school districts' systems when various members of the governing chain express how they understand their organizations, in relation to systems thinking.

Outlines the emergence of critical systems thinking and practice and the reasons why such a development in the systems approach was necessary. Considers the limitations of traditional systems thinking and the strengths and weaknesses of three alternatives to the traditional systems approach — soft systems thinking, organizational cybernetics and emancipatory systems thinking. Reflection on the relationship between these different strands of the systems approach gave impetus to the birth of critical systems thinking. Details the nature of critical systems thinking, as resting on five commitments, and describes a new methodology (“total systems intervention”) to operationalize this approach.

Effective decision making and learning in a world of growing dynamic complexity requires leaders to become systems thinkers – to develop tools to understand the structures of complex systems. The paper aims to clarify the relationship between systems thinking and leadership performance. The relevance of systems thinking as a competence was disclosed in the context of leadership in the complex world.

The paper followed a quantitative research approach. First, exploratory factor analysis was employed to assess dimensionality of scales. Second, relationships between variables were explored using Spearman's correlation. Third, multiple linear regression was run to test the hypothesized model of relationships. The total sample of 201 consists of subsamples in two industries: retail trade (103 respondents) and manufacturing (98 respondents).

Based on the analysis and synthesis of the scientific literature, a conceptual model of relationship between intelligence competencies (such as systems thinking) and leadership performance is developed. The theoretical model is supported by empirical evidence from the two industries perspectives: the paper compares the impact of systems thinking on leadership performance in manufacturing and retail trade enterprises. Correlational and regression analyses revealed that systems thinking was associated with higher leadership performance.

Because of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability. First, the model was tested empirically only in two industries: in retail trade and in manufacturing. Second, the sample of this research was limited only to national level, therefore there is no possibility to compare results across different countries. In order to generalize the research findings, further research should include more companies from different industries.

The paper discloses the benefits of systems thinking in organization and includes implications for the development of systems thinking and other leadership competencies.

This paper establishes a link between systems thinking and leadership performance. Theoretical insights that systems thinking is most important dealing with conceptual strategic problems of an organization were confirmed empirically.

The paper aims to analyse new management practices for addressing complexity, uncertainty and changes of today's business landscape. In this context it is critical to understand the role of intellectual capital and particularly what are the key competencies to be developed in order to deal with the fluidity of business. Effective decision making and learning in a world of growing dynamic complexity requires leaders to become systems thinkers – to develop tools to understand the structures of complex systems. The paper aims to clarify the relationship between systems thinking and organization performance.

The methodology of systems thinking is inseparable from the philosophy of systems thinking, thus, the first part of the paper presents the common theory of systems and the systems approach to the organization. The paper follows a quantitative research approach. Firstly, exploratory factor analysis was employed to assess dimensionality of scales. Secondly, relationships between variables were explored using Spearman's correlation. Thirdly, multiple linear regression was run to test the hypothesized model of relationships. Finally, one‐way ANOVA was employed to test the influence of intelligence competence level on mean of organization performance.

Based on the analysis and synthesis of the scientific literature a conceptual model of the relationship between cognitive intelligence competencies (such as systems thinking) and organization performance was developed. The theoretical model was supported by empirical evidence. Correlational and regression analyses revealed that systems thinking was associated with higher organization performance.

Because of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability. The sample of this research was limited only to national level therefore it is not possible to compare results across different countries. In order to generalize the research findings, further research should include more companies from different industries. Secondly, the traditional self assessment method has been used for evaluation of competencies in this paper, but the results could be supplemented by adding 360‐degree feedback or multisource assessment results.

A systems thinking approach allows the realization of various interrelations and working schemes in the organization and helps to identify regularities of the organizational development. The application of systems thinking principles cannot guarantee success but may be a useful means or a permanent form of activity when solving conceptual problems.

Rich insight to the systems thinking approach was provided at the conceptual level and meaning of systems thinking was developed. The paper discloses the effects of systems thinking on organization performance and includes implications for the development of systems thinking and other leadership competencies.

Systems thinking calls for a shift of our mindset from seeing just parts to seeing the whole reality in its structured dynamic unity and interconnectedness. Systems thinking fosters a sensibility to see subtle connections between components and parts of reality, especially the free enterprise capitalist system (FECS). It enables us to see ourselves as active participants or partners of FECS and not mere induced factors of its production–distribution–consumption processes. Systems thinking seeks to identify the economic “structures” that underlie complex situations in FECS that bring about high versus low leveraged changes. A system is strengthened and reinforced by feedback of reciprocal exchanges that makes the system alive, transparent, human, and humanizing.

In Part I, we explore basic laws or patterns of behaviors as understood by systems thinking; in Part II we examine the basic archetypes or structured behaviors of systems thinking; in both parts we strive to see reality through the lens of critical thinking to help us understand patterns and structures of behavior among systems and their component parts. In conclusion, we argue for compatibility and complementarity of critical thinking and systems thinking to identify and resolve management problems created by our flawed thinking, and sedimented by our wanton assumptions, presumptions, suppositions and presuppositions, biases, and prejudices. Such thinking will also identify unnecessary economic and political structures of the self-serving policies we create, which imprison us.

This paper aims to offer a case study for teaching specific systems thinking competencies that promote leadership for systems change. It uses leadership as a novel way to identify and organize systems thinking competencies that are important for successful multistakeholder collaboration.

Qualitative and quantitative approaches were used to assess learning outcomes across four cohorts of graduate students – with approximately 30 students per cohort – from 2017 to 2020 in the USA. The study examined a one-month-long assignment, out of a year-long program, that focuses on systems leadership for climate change.

Our findings demonstrate that higher education programs can successfully build these competencies in sustainability students and professionals. Our pedagogical approach enhances students’ systems thinking and leadership competencies.

We advance the understanding and teaching of systems thinking by integrating it with the direction, alignment and commitment model of leadership. Reframing systems thinking through the lens of leadership offers an important innovation and focus to the theory of systems thinking, and the pedagogy of building competencies sustainability professionals need.

The purpose of this action research is to gain insight into how people learn to think systemically. An examination of the themes that emerged from this action research will be undertaken.

An action research approach was adopted which involved the collection and reading of 120 journals that were kept by graduate students in their systems thinking course.

A theory of practice identified and supported three significant areas in systems thinking: how the structure of the system influences the behavior of its members; the consequences of decisions on other parts of the system and a shift from blaming to seeing how one is contributing to the situation; and insights gleaned from actually learning to think systemically: meta‐learning of systems thinking.

The positive implications that emerged from this action research indicate that, once students are introduced to systems thinking theory, tools and application, they are able to link their decision‐making abilities to consequences; see the delays in a system; move away from blaming external “others” and look to see how they are contributing to an issue or problem. Limitations include other areas that could have been included: challenges, stories, and questions that emerged from the action research. Data from other groups would also be warranted.

The paper shows that systems thinking can be taught…that the benefits are being realized on different levels!

This action research presents one of the first attempts to actually gather data on how people learn to think systemically and to begin to categorize the themes and patterns that emerged from the data.