Loading…
#ISSS2016 Boulder has ended

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

Paper Presentation [clear filter]
Thursday, July 21
 

9:00am

Prospects for a New Systemic Synthesis (Discussion)
2880 In a plenary session before lunch, five experts in different aspects of Systems Science (philosophy, engineering, science, theoretical exploration, methodology) reported on their current work and presented their views on the prospects of a new synthesis that could establish Systemology as a mainstream academic presence. In this break-out session they will answer audience questions about their work and their views, and discuss opportunities and challenges for the maturation and establishment of Systemology is a discipline. All conference attendees are invited to join in this wide-ranging discussion about the prospects and future of Systems Science.

Thursday July 21, 2016 9:00am - 10:00am
Benson 180

2:00pm

Anticipation and Systems Thinking: A Key to Resilient Systems
Disasters often endanger the foundations of our society. Due to many factors (larger popula- tion, more dependency on more complex technology, more and greater interference in natural systems and the environment, dramatic changes in the environment, ...) the number and the severity of disasters seem to grow, additionally exaggerated by the media coverage.The ultimate aim in the case of disaster is to save as many lives as possible and also safeguard the survival of the society in total and to protect as much of the societal structure, infrastructure and environment as possible. This requires the social system to show an amount of resistance and stability with respect to an incident that can cause endangering disasters.An incident of this kind can be attributed to the interaction of three overall factors: an external or internal hazard, a vulnerability of the system and an insufficient reactive capacity of the system to shield or resist the incident.With respect to the system’s capacity two countermeasures are essential to overcome an incident of that kind: * Anticipation of the incident and as a consequence the provision of adequate preparation and * Systemic Thinking in order to understand the relationship of and cybernetic loops within the components of the affected system and the incident.Anticipation and as a consequence a timely preparation of responses to future disasters will help to avoid the worst possible consequences and improve the chances for survival. Additionally we need a better understanding of the complex relationships causing the hazard and the long-term effects of our interventions on nature, human society, and environment: Systems Thinking.In this paper we analyze the key factors potentially leading to a system disturbance: Hazard, vulnerability of the affected system and capacity of the affected system. We classify these disturbances (incident, emergency, crisis, disaster, and catastrophe) and analyze the different reactions a system can show (fragile, fault tolerant, elastic, resilient, robust, antifragile). By discussing the phases of disaster management we can identify the information required for effective Anticipation and for the identification of critical systemic relationships. Finally we analyze the phases of Disaster Management, emphasizing the need for and the application of Anticipation. We identify the source of information needed for a successful anticipatory view. As a conclusion we identify systemic problems encountered during disaster management, especially in view of anticipatory actions.

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Thursday July 21, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 1B51

2:30pm

On the Information Processing Aspect of the Evolutionary Process
A premise of this paper is that the dynamics of any system, by which we mean here the collection of processes that perform its functions and thus achieve its purpose, needs information for the execution, control, and coordination of such processes. The information processing aspect of a dynamics is precisely what provides the information that it needs in order to proceed. The dynamics of the Earth ecosystem, for example, includes the processes that encompass the origin and evolution of life and the development of human society. In this paper I refer to the part of this all-encompassing process that includes the behavior and evolution of biological systems and human organizations as the evolutionary process. The main focus of the paper is the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process. More specifically, I focus on the evolution of the information processing capabilities of biological organisms and systems, including human individuals and organizations. Especially important is the emergence through this evolutionary process of increasingly complex structures that have made possible more complex behaviors and, consequently, more complex ways of processing information. Superimposed on this evolution is the creation and development of artificial means of information processing and the integration of their use into the information processing aspect of human individuals and organizations. The idea is to contribute to the understanding of the potential that the development and use of artificial information processing devices and systems offers for the effective support of the functions of modern organizations and their adaptability. However, the tremendous potential of computer-based information systems and information technology cannot be fully realized if they do not appropriately extend the information processing capabilities that exist at all levels of the dynamics of the organizations that they support. A sufficient understanding of the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process is in my opinion necessary for the appropriate, synergistic extension, with computer and information technology, of the information processing capabilities that already exist in modern organizations. 

Chairs
avatar for Anand Kumar

Anand Kumar

Systems Achitecture and Engineering
Anand Kumar has more than 20 years of Industrial experience in Systems architecture and engineering. He has been a researcher in Architecture and Business systems for more than a decade. His interests are in Business Systems, Architecture and Digital Product-Service Systems. He has... Read More →

Thursday July 21, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 265
 
Monday, July 25
 

1:30pm

Developing an Understanding of Violence using the DSRP Theory as a Framework
2754 Cabrera and Cabrera’s DSRP model outlines the cognitive foundations for anything that arises. It proposes four mutually arising fundamentals: distinctions, systems, relationships and perspectives that are evident in any system. All living systems are complex adaptive systems that maintain their state through a flow of energy, resources and information across the system boundaries. Violence can be defined as the invasion of a boundary or the disruption of a flow across a boundary. When a boundary is set by a distinction, inside and outside is created. That which is excluded becomes the other and is often disowned, demonised and marginalised and thus becomes an easy target for violence. The parts of a system created by the boundary interact. Sometimes parts invade other parts so they are controlled by that part, thus impacting on the functioning of the whole system and reducing the requisite variety. The relationships between the parts can likewise be distorted, so that one part of the relationship uses power and control over the other. The parts have perspectives. A point of view makes one particular way of meaning making possible, but excludes others from being revealed. If people can be coerced into accepting one particular perspective, they can be deceived and thus have their behaviour controlled. Violence is thus a fundamental quality potentially inherent in all complex systems. Since complex adaptive systems are fractal, so is violence. We can thus gain an understanding of the patterns of violence at all fractal levels, from bacteria interacting to individual humans to whole societies. Violence springs from the same underlying systems dynamics, but is expressed in different ways depending on the level at which the system is operating. Galtung has identified three types of violence: direct, cultural and structural. Each of these will be discussed in relation to the DSRP model. Dutton’s Nested Ecological Model is used as a framework to explore factors behind the choice to use violence and makes the links to factors that tend to perpetuate violence from one generation to the next. Through being a victim of violence a person becomes vulnerable to factors that predispose them to perpetuating violence themselves. Having determined the way CAS are disrupted through violence, we can recognise the actions that will be needed to rebuild resilience and help restore the effective functions of the CAS and can thus formulate actions that may help reduce the likelihood of violence being passed on from generation to generation.

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Speakers
avatar for Victor MacGill

Victor MacGill

Facilitator, SIG Co-Chair: Critical Systems Thinking and Practice, Get Change Right
Completed my PhD through the University of theSunshine Coast. I am researching organisations that operate without a structured leadership. I have a growing interest in understanding violence from a systems perspective and the various ways it manifests in humans.


Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 1B51

1:30pm

From Systemystery to Systemastery - A Toolbox for Developing Systemry
2814 As systemists we need to be able to communicate using a common reference for the science of systems. Such a reference should provide a simple compelling framework for understanding systemist attitudes and systems concepts. It should be compelling for scientists, engineers and for people, even children, who are just starting out in their journey to understand systems. A candidate framework explored during the INCOSE international workshop in 2016 was used as a basis for developing a game at the IFSR conversation in 2016. The game is intended as a candidate contributor to Systems Literacy. The intended experience of the game is to help people to act in a systemic way when presented with a new situation. By playing the SysteMystery game the learners will be able to reflect on a situation and make improved decisions or judgements. Through playing the game learners will be able to grasp and expand their knowledge of core systems concepts. Through practice the learners will begin to naturally use concepts effectively when converting information into knowledge and forming their mental model of a bigger picture. Playing the game has three phases: a phase of experience which could be a story, game, poem, song or explanation of problem or situation; a phase of reflection and analysis of the experience using the SysteMystery cards and a post analysis phase where improvements to the SysteMystery framework are considered and fed-back to the repository.

Chairs
avatar for Professor Ockie Bosch

Professor Ockie Bosch

President, International Society for the Systems Sciences
Professor Ockie Bosch was born in Pretoria, South Africa. He first came to Australia in 1979 where he was an invited senior visiting scientist with the CSIRO in Alice Springs. After one year in Longreach (1989) he emigrated to New Zealand where he was offered a position with Landcare... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 245

1:30pm

Industrial Ecology in Motion: A Theoretical Proposal for Innovation on SME's
2776 Since 80s and 90s industrial engineering research has been looking for new ways to handle and manage natural resources on the planet. Water sources contamination, waste generation, industrial treatments of these wastes and greenhouse gases produce consequences on communities’ quality of life, startling authorities and societies in general. As a result, there is an interest in the agenda of policy-makers and academics to generate innovative process and products around better ways to put closer production models and socio-ecological systems. Several initiatives has been proposed to accomplish this in the last years (e.g. cleaner production and pollution reduction) but only one seeks a holistic way to approach to problematic situations, Industrial Ecology (IE). IE has a relevant importance for systems sciences because this discipline understand natural and industrial process in a systemic way. IE try to perceive companies not only like productive isolated entities, but living components that change across time, take decisions and works on an ecological system. Also, IE see processes as complex systems where humans, material flows and technology are taking into account, evolving from unsustainable production forms to resilient and innovative structures. As such, small and middle enterprises (SME’s) are a research challenge to industrial engineering and IE. The differences between big industries and small production lie on usage of appropriate technologies for environmental management, intensive use of manpower and low control by policy-makers. Moreover, SME’s play a key role as part of the economy and source of innovation. This paper contribution is to understand the relationship between innovation process on strategies of environmental care and rules or routines at the organizational level on SME’s. The results of the interaction on each one of the firms on an economic environment or social system is to exchange goods and services using several incentives and rules. These rules are created, adopted, retained and abandoned by SME’s according to environmental, social and legal conditions, but also by selective pressures that modifies the system. Creating synergies for companies and their rules would lead to a stable and resilient behavior on a global scale. Therefore, using systemic thinking into an evolutionary way, where every heterogeneous and autonomous firm take environmental and economic decisions, self-organization processes will arise. As a result, innovative processes’ creation could be replicated and adapted by other SME’s. In this paper I will show a theoretical proposal for innovation on industrial ecology based on the evolutionary ontology proposed by Kurt Dopfer. I will also present the mechanisms of variation and selection at micro, meso and macro level and their relation with ecologically responsible and systemic viable decision-making process. Finally, the author will present several recommendations that will help to apply these strategies on the industry, from eco-industrial parks for SME’s to evolutionary models with agent-based simulations.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Speakers

Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 151

1:30pm

On the Information Processing Aspect of the Evolutionary Process
2818 A premise of this paper is that the dynamics of any system, by which we mean here the collection of processes that perform its functions and thus achieve its purpose, needs information for the execution, control, and coordination of such processes. The information processing aspect of a dynamics is precisely what provides the information that it needs in order to proceed. The dynamics of the Earth ecosystem, for example, includes the processes that encompass the origin and evolution of life and the development of human society. In this paper I refer to the part of this all-encompassing process that includes the behavior and evolution of biological systems and human organizations as the evolutionary process. The main focus of the paper is the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process. More specifically, I focus on the evolution of the information processing capabilities of biological organisms and systems, including human individuals and organizations. Especially important is the emergence through this evolutionary process of increasingly complex structures that have made possible more complex behaviors and, consequently, more complex ways of processing information. Superimposed on this evolution is the creation and development of artificial means of information processing and the integration of their use into the information processing aspect of human individuals and organizations. The idea is to contribute to the understanding of the potential that the development and use of artificial information processing devices and systems offers for the effective support of the functions of modern organizations and their adaptability. However, the tremendous potential of computer-based information systems and information technology cannot be fully realized if they do not appropriately extend the information processing capabilities that exist at all levels of the dynamics of the organizations that they support. A sufficient understanding of the information processing aspect of this evolutionary process is in my opinion necessary for the appropriate, synergistic extension, with computer and information technology, of the information processing capabilities that already exist in modern organizations.

Chairs
avatar for Anand Kumar

Anand Kumar

Systems Achitecture and Engineering
Anand Kumar has more than 20 years of Industrial experience in Systems architecture and engineering. He has been a researcher in Architecture and Business systems for more than a decade. His interests are in Business Systems, Architecture and Digital Product-Service Systems. He has... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 265

1:30pm

Systems Thinking and Wildland Fire Management
2724 A changing climate, expanding ex-urban residential development, and increasing pressures on ecosystem services raise global concerns over growing losses associated with wildland fires. New management paradigms acknowledge that fire is inevitable and often uncontrollable, and focus on living with fire rather than attempting to eliminate it from the landscape. A notable example from the U.S. is the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, which aims to bring multiple landowners and stakeholders together to achieve three broadly defined goals: resilient landscapes, fire-adapted human communities, and safe and effective response to fire. Implicit in the structure of these three goals is the nexus of three systems: the ecological system, the social system, and the fire management system, respectively. This systems-based structure reflects a perspective that contextualizes fire as a disturbance agent that influences and is in turn influenced by other agents and processes within a broader socio-ecological system. While the need for transformative system change is well-recognized, at least three central challenges remain: (1) the need to accept that how fires are managed is in many instances the limiting factor of system behaviour; (2) the need to improve our understanding of the characteristics and complexities of the fire management system itself; and (3) perhaps most fundamentally, the need to coherently apply systems analysis principles in order to improve system performance. In this presentation I will attempt to bridge these gaps by applying systems thinking to contemporary wildfire management issues in the U.S. One thread of the presentation will focus on synthesizing findings from various lines of fire-related research and identifying how collectively they reflect systemic flaws stemming from feedbacks, delays, bounded rationality, misaligned incentives, and other factors. Particular attention will be devoted to the “fire paradox,” whereby a legacy of fire exclusion in fire-prone forests has led to hazardous accumulations of flammable vegetation such that future fires burn with higher intensity and are more resistant to control; today’s “success” begets tomorrows failure. The second thread will outline a roadmap for redesigning the fire management system so that behaviour better aligns with purpose. This discussion will focus on recommended actions including breaking down institutional silos, investing in pre-fire assessment and planning, improving monitoring and performance evaluation, and adopting core risk management principles. Ideally this line of research will yield insights that can lead to meaningful systemic change and improved fire management outcomes.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Speakers

Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 200

1:30pm

The Thinking Space: the Enactment of a Platform for Critical Systems Practice
2799 This paper focuses on describing the process of enactment of a ‘platform’, namely, The Thinking Space (TS), as a device for Critical Systems Practice CSP. This is part of a research project that generated a series of findings contributing to the study of the process whereby different systems methodologies, methods, tools and techniques are used in combination. This process is known as Critical Systems Practice (CSP). The study yielded ‘defensible generalisations’ from a series of research themes explored. These defensible generalisations or contributions relate to three research issues relevant to CSP, namely, (a) pluralism, (b) improvement, and (c) the role of the agent. The learning derived from these research themes led the researcher to formulate the ‘transferable problem solving capability’ of the study: the enactment of ‘platforms’ as devices for operationalising CSP. Platforms are defined as ‘organisational and intellectual spaces’ enacted by actors and evolving with the changing nature of actors’ moment-to-moment interactions, by means of engaging in a continuous mutual research endeavour and of engaging in enhancing collective competence, in order to pursue an informed practice (to pursue CSP). The study is the result of reflection and debate, which was reciprocally enriched by theory and practice. It presents the findings of an organisation-based action research project, where the researcher entered into a real-world situation and aimed both at improving it and acquiring knowledge about the experience. He became, for a period of three years, involved in the flux of ‘real-world problems’ within an engineering company that invited him to do research by using systems ideas in practice. This paper thus recapitulates on the contributions that this research endeavour had on the three research themes focusing on the emergence of a particular ‘platform’, the Thinking Space (TS), as a device for operationalising CSP; the fourth ‘emergent’ research theme. Concerning the ‘transferable problem solving capability’ of the study, the TS is one particular device considered to provide evidence for proposing the research theme of ‘platforms’. Keywords: platforms; Critical Systems Practice; transferable problem solving capability, pluralism; improvement; role of the agent This paper focuses on describing the process of enactment of a ‘platform’, namely, The Thinking Space (TS), as a device for Critical Systems Practice CSP. This is part of a research project that generated a series of findings contributing to the study of the process whereby different systems methodologies, methods, tools and techniques are used in combination. This process is known as Critical Systems Practice (CSP). The study yielded ‘defensible generalisations’ from a series of research themes explored. These defensible generalisations or contributions relate to three research issues relevant to CSP, namely, (a) pluralism, (b) improvement, and (c) the role of the agent. The learning derived from these research themes led the researcher to formulate the ‘transferable problem solving capability’ of the study: the enactment of ‘platforms’ as devices for operationalising CSP. Platforms are defined as ‘organisational and intellectual spaces’ enacted by actors and evolving with the changing nature of actors’ moment-to-moment interactions, by means of engaging in a continuous mutual research endeavour and of engaging in enhancing collective competence, in order to pursue an informed practice (to pursue CSP). The study is the result of reflection and debate, which was reciprocally enriched by theory and practice. It presents the findings of an organisation-based action research project, where the researcher entered into a real-world situation and aimed both at improving it and acquiring knowledge about the experience. He became, for a period of three years, involved in the flux of ‘real-world problems’ within an engineering company that invited him to do research by using systems ideas in practice. This paper thus recapitulates on the contributions that this research endeavour had on the three research themes focusing on the emergence of a particular ‘platform’, the Thinking Space (TS), as a device for operationalising CSP; the fourth ‘emergent’ research theme. Concerning the ‘transferable problem solving capability’ of the study, the TS is one particular device considered to provide evidence for proposing the research theme of ‘platforms’. Keywords: platforms; Critical Systems Practice; transferable problem solving capability, pluralism; improvement; role of the agent

Chairs
avatar for Jennifer Wilby

Jennifer Wilby

Vice President Admin, ISSS
From 1978 Jennifer started working in urban planning, followed by database programming and textbook publishing until 1993. In 1989, moving to San Jose, Jennifer graduated in 1992 from the MSc in Cybernetic Systems at San Jose State University. Moving back to the UK in 1993, she worked... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 1B55

2:00pm

Anticipation and Systems Thinking: A Key to Resilient Systems
2787  Disasters often endanger the foundations of our society. Due to many factors (larger popula- tion, more dependency on more complex technology, more and greater interference in natural systems and the environment, dramatic changes in the environment, ...) the number and the severity of disasters seem to grow, additionally exaggerated by the media coverage.The ultimate aim in the case of disaster is to save as many lives as possible and also safeguard the survival of the society in total and to protect as much of the societal structure, infrastructure and environment as possible. This requires the social system to show an amount of resistance and stability with respect to an incident that can cause endangering disasters.An incident of this kind can be attributed to the interaction of three overall factors: an external or internal hazard, a vulnerability of the system and an insufficient reactive capacity of the system to shield or resist the incident.With respect to the system’s capacity two countermeasures are essential to overcome an incident of that kind: * Anticipation of the incident and as a consequence the provision of adequate preparation and * Systemic Thinking in order to understand the relationship of and cybernetic loops within the components of the affected system and the incident.Anticipation and as a consequence a timely preparation of responses to future disasters will help to avoid the worst possible consequences and improve the chances for survival. Additionally we need a better understanding of the complex relationships causing the hazard and the long-term effects of our interventions on nature, human society, and environment: Systems Thinking.In this paper we analyze the key factors potentially leading to a system disturbance: Hazard, vulnerability of the affected system and capacity of the affected system. We classify these disturbances (incident, emergency, crisis, disaster, and catastrophe) and analyze the different reactions a system can show (fragile, fault tolerant, elastic, resilient, robust, antifragile). By discussing the phases of disaster management we can identify the information required for effective Anticipation and for the identification of critical systemic relationships. Finally we analyze the phases of Disaster Management, emphasizing the need for and the application of Anticipation. We identify the source of information needed for a successful anticipatory view. As a conclusion we identify systemic problems encountered during disaster management, especially in view of anticipatory actions.

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 1B51

2:00pm

Architecture of a Systems Modelling Platform
2845 Systems are multi-dimensional, complex and have multiple ideals. One of the biggest problems with systems is the uncertainty on where do they begin and where do they end; what is inside and what is outside. This is because what is perceived to be the system is an approximation of the real system. It is possible to learn about the real system incrementally and improve the approximate system or system-in-focus; as the gap between the approximate and the real system is the source of the feedback and the basis for the incremental understanding. One iteration of understanding the real system could be identifying interesting properties, cognizing interesting insights based on these properties and creating models that capture this information. In the world of systems, an iterative approach to incrementally obtain understanding involves successively spanning many dimensions of the system and adopting a holistic attitude with regard to it. Holism spans multiple dimensions and is based on independence. Traditionally, system thinkers adopt an array of modelling approaches (influence diagrams, system dynamics models, viable system models, living systems models and so on) to develop an understanding of the system. In order to create a holistic view of the system, multiple models are collated, with each model defining a set of properties corresponding to the respective concerns. The different models allow system thinkers to look at the system at different levels of detail. They can be used to structure, identify, analyse and synthesize systems wherein each model commutes with the systems and relates to it. Each model is understood, worked upon and then composed keeping in mind the constraints of the system and the conditions in which the system exists. They can be either independent or dependant and dynamic. Each model is a different perspective in representing the system and if semantically motivated explains how the system is understood, analysed and synthesized. In this paper, the architecture of a modelling platform that provides the ability to model different aspects of the system is discussed. The objective of this platform is to support modelling as a capability so that a holistic understanding of the system can be developed. The focus is on those models and modelling approaches that can be supported by information systems in the form of tools. The discussion in this paper also stems around a unified model of the system which is constructed by taking into account the different perspectives obtained by modelling the system using different approaches. The instantiation of the architecture to realize a platform for modelling systems is presented. Keywords – Systems, Models, Multi-Models, Holism, Modelling Platform, Modelling Approaches.

Chairs
avatar for Anand Kumar

Anand Kumar

Systems Achitecture and Engineering
Anand Kumar has more than 20 years of Industrial experience in Systems architecture and engineering. He has been a researcher in Architecture and Business systems for more than a decade. His interests are in Business Systems, Architecture and Digital Product-Service Systems. He has... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 265

2:00pm

New Strategies for the Mexican Petrochemical Industry
2808 It is necessary to define new strategies for achieving a proper growing and development of the Mexican Petrochemical Industry. As each product can be used as a final product or as raw material the influence of its production is remarkable all over the national production chains. Petrochemicals in Mexico have been classified as basic and secondary ones, by political reasons. These two groups allowed governmental institutions to regulate private activity versus public activity in this sector. At the beginning, the first group was devoted to the first chemical transformation and the secondary one to subsequent transformations. For last 30 years, petrochemical industry has not been developed as the Mexican people wanted. The trends showed that total production has remained at the same level, many installations were left out of service and imports grow very fast. The official explanations to justify the present situation of Mexican Petrochemical industry are diverse : low investments, reduced scale sizes of plants and uncertainty in government rules for new investors and for gas price as a raw material. These are the main reasons which explain the lack of competitiveness in the global market That is why this paper focuses the strategic problem of how to rescue this industry and how to promote a new outline for achieving the desired development. Key words petrochemical chains, strategies , regulation, industry.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 151

2:00pm

Taking Advantage of Systems Thinking to Improve a STEM Project to Promote Regional Development
2748 Taking Advantage of Systems Thinking to Improve a Stem Project to Promote Regional Development Luis Arturo Pinzon-Salcedo, Erika Van den Bergue Patiño & Angélica María Castaño-Herrera Email address: lpinzon@uniandes.edu.co, e.van10@uniandes.edu.co, am.castano263@uniandes.edu.co Between 2014 and 2016, a group of researchers from three different universities and a social innovation park, developed a STEM Project to promote regional development in three areas from the province of Cundinamarca, Colombia. The project was financed with public funds and supported the official regional plans. The intervention was carried out by a group of almost thirty researchers using several systemic and non-systemic approaches. The involvement of researchers from diverse disciplines who believed in very different paradigms, as well as the participation of communities with dissimilar interests and problems, posed serious challenges to the project. During the research inquiry the participants experienced the difficulty of integrating elements from apparently incommensurable paradigms from the social sciences, the natural sciences, and several engineering disciplines. This experience, as well as others that involved the promotion of regional development by taking advantage of the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines, served to propose a systemic model of intervention that we consider might be helpful in developing future STEM projects to promote regional development. The aforementioned intervention drew upon several systems thinking principles, methodologies and techniques, such as boundary critique, soft systems methodologies, critical systems heuristics, Midgley’s creative design of methods, and system dynamics. The model proposed for new regional STEM interventions takes advantage of several systemic methodologies, principles and techniques, and proposes a new multi-paradigm multimethodolgy that aims an improving the efficacy and effectiveness of regional interventions. The model includes several key elements that we consider particularly relevant: the promotion of community capacity to guarantee a sustainable future, community development at different levels (cultural, social, economic, etc.), training that involves both individual and social learning, and continuous evaluation. This paper also illustrates the important role that computer supported collaborative learning and other information and communication technologies can play in these interventions, as well as the relevance of the communities of practice theories to address diverse issues but particularly identity, power and learning issues.

Chairs
avatar for Jennifer Wilby

Jennifer Wilby

Vice President Admin, ISSS
From 1978 Jennifer started working in urban planning, followed by database programming and textbook publishing until 1993. In 1989, moving to San Jose, Jennifer graduated in 1992 from the MSc in Cybernetic Systems at San Jose State University. Moving back to the UK in 1993, she worked... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 1B55

2:00pm

The Holistic Values of Socio-Ecological Systems and the Practice of Green Development InChina
2758 The continuous intensify of ecological crisis has aroused a strong sense of ecological protection. Since the 80s of the 20th century, a serious of movement aimed at environmental protection, ecological movement, and feminism appeared in the developed countries in Western Europe. The movement which is called the Green Movement treated intellectuals and middle class as the main participants. The serious environmental problems also emerged in the process of realizing the rapid development of economy in China. Therefore, the Chinese government focus on the ideas of Green Development. The green development requires the whole society to establish a reasonable value of natural capital, to form new social and moral norms, to promote green lifestyles, and so forth. The way of China's green development has get the world's attention. From the green movement to the green development, it has formed a systems holistic values of socio-ecological system gradually. Firstly, we support the intrinsic value of natural system and oppose the traditional philosophy values which considered the tool value of nature as primary only when it is related to the subjective purpose of human beings or meets the needs of humans. Secondly, we propose that the values of natural system is holistic. The intrinsic value of natural system and the tool value can be converted to each other. As Rolston III said, the intrinsic value and the tool value would be converted among lives, species, systems and surroundings by the transformation of systems, so as to maintain the stability and integrality of systems. In socio-ecological system, the interaction between the natural values and human values and the function of each other formed the value chain of system dynamics and integrity. Thirdly, the order parameter of socio-ecological system is bearing threshold of systems, the order parameter emerged by the synergistic reaction of social system, economic system and natural system will constraint and control the collaboration optimization of each subsystem of the socio-ecological systems in turn. Modern systems science and complexity research has provided a new perspective and theoretical basis to the intrinsic value of natural systems and the holistic values of socio-ecological systems when it refers to the holistic property and emergence, adaptation and evolution, purpose and values of systems. The holistic values of socio-ecological systems pay more attention to the holistic interests of human social system, economic system and natural system. It has great significance to solve serious ecological crisis and realize sustainable futures in socio-ecological systems.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Speakers
MD

Mrs. Dongping Fan

systems2016@126.com
MQ

Mr Qiang Fu

vongss@163.com


Monday July 25, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 200

2:30pm

Developing a Systemic Framework for Evaluation Models and their Applications
2755 The following paper presents the development of a systemic framework for the classification of evaluation models, based on the reflective process that takes place when selecting an evaluation model and the study of processes of marginalization. For such purposes, several classifications proposed by various authors for systemic methodologies are taken into account. We should begin by stressing the importance of the concept of assessment or evaluation as it allows us to make judgments about the performance of organizations, projects, programs, staff and activities at different levels enabling the implementation of activities or actions to reduce the gap between the current state of a system and its desired state. These activities not only seek a gap reduction but are also oriented to process and human group sustainability through the achievement of best practices that will bring benefits in the long term. When selecting an evaluation model, the evaluator is usually based on the best-known features, such as the methods used, the research questions that it follows, and the kind of problems that could be targeted. However, as evaluation is entirely based on judgments, each assessment model necessarily has a set of underlying values that are rarely taken into account and should be aligned not only with the purpose for which the evaluation is done but also with the moral characterization of the problems it tackles. Such judgmental nature, implies that any judgment must be based on a set of guiding principles, standards or ideals that determine the position of the object evaluated with respect to such values. An individual, which in this case is the evaluator, must carry out a reflective process to establish this set of elements. For this reason, this paper describes the development of a systemic framework that seeks to classify the various models of evaluation of projects, policies and programs according to the values underlying each of them considering their deontological and methodological bases. In this paper deontology comprises the ethics and principles underlying the evaluation profession and specifically in the conducted evaluation process, while methodology is seen as the basis that validates a set of procedures and tools. For the development of this framework we took into account the framework for the classification of systemic methodologies proposed by authors such as Banathy and Burrell & Morgan, as well as the theory of “knowledge-constitutive interests” proposed by Jurgen Habermas and the context classification of a problem. The development of such a classification allows the individual that is conducting the evaluation to be able to select an appropriate and accurate methodology in accordance with the purpose for which the assessment will be carried out.

Chairs
avatar for Jennifer Wilby

Jennifer Wilby

Vice President Admin, ISSS
From 1978 Jennifer started working in urban planning, followed by database programming and textbook publishing until 1993. In 1989, moving to San Jose, Jennifer graduated in 1992 from the MSc in Cybernetic Systems at San Jose State University. Moving back to the UK in 1993, she worked... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 1B55

2:30pm

Framing a System
2862 Boundaries of a system are largely determined by human perception. As a result, the boundaries are to an extent arbitrary but to an extent created in response to changing environmental conditions. Given this dynamic, the way a system is framed in terms of its boundaries affects human action on a global scale. Understanding this framing can empower the human agent and enable a recontextualization of human potential such that our planetary system is approached and maintained in an ecologically equitable and sustainable fashion. This paper outlines how such framing relates to different scales of human civilization and what some of the important practical distinctions are related to such an act of framing.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Speakers

Monday July 25, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 200

2:30pm

On the Information Processing Aspect of the Evolutionary Process
2853   On the Information Processing Aspect of the Evolutionary Process 

Chairs
avatar for Anand Kumar

Anand Kumar

Systems Achitecture and Engineering
Anand Kumar has more than 20 years of Industrial experience in Systems architecture and engineering. He has been a researcher in Architecture and Business systems for more than a decade. His interests are in Business Systems, Architecture and Digital Product-Service Systems. He has... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 265

2:30pm

Sustainability Challenged – Comparing Two Competing Value Systems – What We Found “Shang Jun Shu (The Book By Shang)” From Chin’ Dynasty 2000 Years Ago and the Islamist Ideology Today in Common
2790 Sustainability of this civilization is only a wishful thinking without frank analysis of, followed by strategic plans to deal with, the competing value systems currently playing on the stage of the international politics. High profile keywords here are refuges, terrorism, China Threat, globalization, and “conflict of civilization” (even we do not quite agree with the term in Huntington’s original sense). Among the major competitors with our current mainstream value system are Chinmunism (Hu, 2010), i.e. the so-called Chinese way of order (including social order, state order and world order, with cultural genes traceable back to Chin’ Dynasty 2000 years ago and to Communist movement from 1917 to 1990), and the Islamist Ideology or Islam fundamentalism (e.g. Goldberg, 2015) that becomes a high profile issue in media and our lives for obvious reasons. A guestimated of 50%+ of Chinese-speaking people (700 million) might support a Chinmunistic world view, and in at least 25 countries that 50%+ of Muslims prefer the Sharia Law to be the law of their land (PEW Research, 2013). The authors have noted, among many differences of the text and the context of the two sets of ideas and values, i.e. one sets up of the ruling paradigm for China in 2000 years, and another defines a desirable world of “Umma”, there is an interesting commonality between them: They all aimed at reducing the diversity, complexity, and the degree of freedom of the society they take control, an interesting case for Ashby’s Law of Requisite Variety. This paper compares the similarities and differences of these two value systems to facilitate the readers to draw their own conclusions and decide for their own actions.

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 1B51

2:30pm

Using Viable System Model for Chinese Outbound Tourist Market Sustainability
2832 Tourism industry benefited worldwide economy providing services to Chinese Tourists who traveled to foreign in 2014 generating income by 165 billion dollars and accounting for 13% of international tourism. Realizing this market’s acquisition means growth opportunities for destinations; as well as the added difficulty in services nature of being unsteady, improvable and involving many factors. This article reaches the assembling of chinese outbound tourism market sustainability through the premise of a different perspective for conceptualizing, designing and delivering tourism services as part of a whole socio-ecological system; and sets out a reflection on sustainable responses to some emergencies derived from the increasing tourist activity of the chinese outbound market system. As examples of a problematic situation are augmenting infrastructure demand, transport and public services in peak season that exceeding load capacity generates negative results for residents and tourists; repercussions on wildlife by large tourist flows during critical moments of migration, breeding or rearing; impacts on local cultures due to the encounter between contrasting lifestyles. Therefore, the opportunity to expand choices grounded on the convenience of systemic approach for sustainable tourism study and decision-making. The outcome is the Chinese Outbound Market System diagnosis and teleology, the determination of recursive levels, interrelations and conflicts; as well as the systemic integration between it’s elements using Viable System Model to configure a holistic construct composed of relevant subsystems oriented to viability and sustainability. It is concluded that tourism planning that omits sustainable character, reduces social benefits severely with consequences not only ecologically harmful, but also economically self-destructive. In that way it could be possible to confront currently systemic socio-ecological issues. Keywords: Sustainability System, Emergence, VSM, Chinese Outbound Tourism Market

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 151

3:30pm

A Systemic Approach on Human Resource Management in Tourism Small and Medium Enterprises Considering Socio-Ecological Systems
2834 The context in which Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) of lodging carry out their operations is turbulent. This Human Activity Systems (HAS) develop certain practices that threaten aspects such as internal equilibrium, resilience, their relation with natural environment and hence its permanence in the sector. The purpose of this paper is to present the basis for an autopoietic management system of human resources within mexican tourist SMEs in order to generate self-organization and adaptation considering social and natural dimensions. The methodological approach is carried out using the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) looking to reduce problematic situations generated for whom manage the systems as well as those related to the human resource management. With respect to the findings, a conceptual model was designed consisting of subsystems that consider heterogenity in tourist SMEs and human resource management problems, in that sense is intended to regulate its complexity and maintain an equilibrium with the environment. It is considered that actors with managerial functions may benefit from a holistic approach that looks for the transcendence of the whole system in its current context. Keywords: Soft Systems Methodology, Tourism, SMEs, Human Resources Management.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 151

3:30pm

Emerging Possibilities: Adapting Carol Sanford’s Stakeholder Pentad for the Nonprofit and Public Sectors
2767 The nonprofit and public sectors are constantly challenged to create greater impact with fewer and fewer resources. The recession of 2008 has resulted in less funding for both sectors and increased demand for their programs and services, pushing many organizations to the brink. With the likelihood of change in the current state slim, nonprofits and public agencies are eager for new approaches that will enable them to create greater value from existing resources in a socially responsible manner. This paper introduces one possible tool, which was adapted from Carol Sanford’s stakeholder pentad introduced in her book, The Responsible Business: Reimagining Sustainability and Success. Sanford’s pentad is intended to shift a business’s focus away from measuring success based purely on financial returns to one of a quintuple bottom line centered on developing relationships with the following five sets of stakeholders: customers, co-creators, earth, community, and investors. The pentad for the nonprofit and public sectors includes a slightly different set of stakeholders: beneficiaries, co-creators, earth/humanity, community, and investors/funders. Beneficiaries are those for whom programs and services are provided. Co-creators are those with whom non-profits and agencies partner and may include volunteers, staff, partnering organizations, and other stakeholders. Earth/humanity is the pentad point of the global, long-term perspective and is based in relationship to earth and to humanity. The community point in the pentad refers to how an organization’s actions impact the community, and the local perspective and social context in which they operate. The investors and funders for nonprofits and public agencies are local, state, and federal funders, taxpayers, donors, foundations, and board members, without whom these organizations could not realize their visions. Attention to these five stakeholder groups creates a strong sense of resilience in the organization’s community. A case example of how to apply the nonprofit and public sectors pentad to an existing organization is outlined in this paper. It is described through Sanford’s four phases for reconstructing an organization already steeped in its processes and culture. These four phases are (1) cultural evolution, (2) strategic direction, (3) capacity building, and (4) work redesign. This approach will enable nonprofits and public agencies to thrive in the face of scarcity and high demand. Keywords: Carol Sanford; stakeholders; stakeholder engagement; nonprofit sector; public sector; living systems; sustainability; resilience; cultural evolution; strategic direction; capacity building; work redesign; critical systemic thinking; human service organizations  

Chairs
DF

Dennis Finlayson

SIG Chair: Living Systems Science, Derbyshire, UK
SIG Chair: Living Systems ScienceThe principle purpose of the living systems (LSA) group is to investigate all things that live from the very small, such as cell, to and including societies to discover universal phenomena applicable to living things and to develop a living science... Read More →

Speakers
avatar for Marty Jacobs

Marty Jacobs

PhD Student, Saybrook University
I am currently a doctoral candidate in Organizational Systems at Saybrook University in Oakland, CA. My research interests are in dialogue, meaning making, and transformative and organizational learning in multi-sector transformational change, as well as complex adaptive systems and... Read More →


Monday July 25, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 265

3:30pm

Exploring the Phenomenon of Technological Integration in K-12 Classrooms for Education Leaders
2796 Throughout the years, there has been a concern about how the school systems in the United States can be improved. As population growth continues and existing issues remain due to a insufficient funding, it becomes more complex to address the specific areas where training is needed, students with special needs are forgotten, growing classroom sizes, parent involvement student health and more. The current issue we can see now is the lack of resources schools have to spend on research and development. By utilizing technology to conduct the research and collect data, it may be possible to optimize resources of faculty and improve student learning. Similar to any change in organizations, there will be resistance among not only the faculty, but also the parents and students whose cooperation and belief in the technology is needed. The presentation will build upon the ideas that success in implementing technology into classrooms relies heavily on collaborative teamwork from educators and education leaders, an established digital platform as a tool to keep all team members in constant communication and in sync, and well as trust in the relationships between the technology, the user, and the leaders advocating for this transition into the 21st century. Leaders who are successful should likely have less feelings of frustration, doubt, or impatience with the process. On the contrary, leaders THE PHENOMENON OF TECHNOLOGY IN K-12 CLASSROOMS 3 who have achieve levels of technology integration in their schools should feel hopeful, eager, enthusiastic, and inquisitive with their responsibilities. The analysis will be strictly K-12 focused considering that Higher Education operates significantly different than K-12 (Ensminger, 2005). The demonstration will attempt to provide insight not only on the success of what leaders have experienced through integrating technology in K-12 schools, but also some of the challenges they had encountered when working with students and parents to accept and believe in the technology they want to use. This investigation will help shed light on some of the likely obstacles and the solutions decided by these leaders in order to prepare future education leaders for the transition as more and more school board members and leaders begin to embrace technology as a positive and efficient change for their organizations

Chairs
avatar for Professor Ockie Bosch

Professor Ockie Bosch

President, International Society for the Systems Sciences
Professor Ockie Bosch was born in Pretoria, South Africa. He first came to Australia in 1979 where he was an invited senior visiting scientist with the CSIRO in Alice Springs. After one year in Longreach (1989) he emigrated to New Zealand where he was offered a position with Landcare... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 245

3:30pm

The System of Accounts for Global Entropy Production, (Sage-P): Nonlinear Accounting of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) In the Domain of the Ecosphere, Sociosphere and Econosphere
2763 GDP is a linear measure at market prices of the annual production of the (final) goods and services produced in the National Economy. It is gross insofar as it excludes the degradation of the capital stock. The accounts are divided into four categories: (i) P = production/income (i.e., payments for work and/or rent from property), (ii) C = consumption/expenditure (i.e., payments for goods and services), (iii) T = trade with the-rest-of-the-word, (i,e,, payments to/from nonresident consumers/producers), and (iv) K = capital/surplus, (i.e., investment with an expected flow of future income). We shall redefine the categories of GDP as product of the Second Law of thermodynamics: (i) Production = Pe = negentropy. (ii) Ce = consumption = entropy, (iii) Te = international trade in net-valued export/import of entropy production Te = (Pe - Ce), (iv) Ke = Low Entropy Fund (LEF) available for human consumption = Ke = Pe/Ce. The three states of LEF: (a) surplus-state = Pe/Ce > 1, (b) deficit-state = Pe/Ce < 1, and (c) steady-state = Pe/Ce = 1. We shall apply the System of Accounts for Global Entropy Production (SAGE-P) in order to construct Gross Domestic Entropy Production accounts, GDPe. The first step is to calculate to LEF for the Nation x. The second step is a correspondence mapping of LEF on the four categories of GDP. The third step is to introduce the valuation method unique to the domains: (A) Ecosphere, (i.e., values conserved-in-themselves, or intrinsic, (B) Sociosphere, (i.e., values conserved-in-use, or participation) and (C) Econosphere, (i.e., values conserved-in-exchange, or market prices. A, B and C are nested sets in the form: A [B,(C)]. The fourth step is a GDP correspondence mapping of the rate of change of entropy production ∂ Pe/Ce on the value-added to the economy of primary production, (i.e., natural renewable and non-renewable resources), secondary production, (i.e., manufactured goods) and tertiary production (services). The policy objective is to minimise the rate of entropy production per unit of consumption that is: (a) feasible, (b) socio-culturally acceptable and (c) maximise the per capita human welfare.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Speakers


Monday July 25, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 200

3:30pm

Wholeness in Complex Socio-Technical Systems
2835 Highly complex social and technological systems are ubiquitous in the modern world. Many of these systems are associated with high levels of energy; potential, kinetic, and human. The consequences of system failure can be extreme. Observation of catastrophic technological failures such as two space shuttle disasters, the nuclear power plants at Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima, and many others, show clearly that creators and managers of these systems must take great care with system design and operations. Human system failures such as those seen in espionage or mass killing cases also highlight the need for both responsible and humane organizational management and sustained attention to defensive measures. Lack of attention to any of vast systemic issue both social and technical can result in organizational or defence system defects. These defects can be described as holes or shadow aspects and these pertain to the technical systems, the human systems and the socio-technical system interplay. Responsible technology and social system design requires addressing these holes and shadow aspects to eliminate them and therefore make the system complete or whole. Organizational wholeness is a continuous process of attention to and mitigation of these types of defects. Sustainability in this context is the continued focus on safe and secure operations and life affirming human dimensions to respond to environmental changes and adjust defences accordingly. This paper will describe propose a model that may be useful for hole and shadow aspect identification and issues related to their management or mitigation.

Chairs
avatar for Anand Kumar

Anand Kumar

Systems Achitecture and Engineering
Anand Kumar has more than 20 years of Industrial experience in Systems architecture and engineering. He has been a researcher in Architecture and Business systems for more than a decade. His interests are in Business Systems, Architecture and Digital Product-Service Systems. He has... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 1B51

4:00pm

A Systems Approach to the Development of Research Capacity: A Case Study of a Systems Practice Masters Programme
2879 This paper brings together a systems approach and an academic literacies perspective to offer a response to the problem of how to support professionals enrolled for postgraduate study in the transition to scholarly research practice. While such study presents exciting opportunities for practice-led research, there are a number of challenges for the academic staff member who supervises the research. For becoming a researcher and scholar is more than a process of bridging a gap between the world of work and academia, as these students seek to maintain their professional identities while navigating what is valued in the academy and the power relations in and between contexts. Recent approaches to research capacity development have shifted away from viewing the transition to scholarly research practice as simply a matter of transferring skills across contexts or as socialization into the valued research conventions. Rather, from an academic literacies perspective, becoming a research scholar means coming to participate in a practice characterized by particular knowledge, tools, values, behaviours, ways of using language, and power relations, some of which is tacit and some of which is explicit. From this perspective, language use such as reading and writing is central to the process of thinking, producing data, and generating new knowledge. Supporting students in this process can present a challenge to academic staff for whom, as experts, the process of doing scholarly research has become tacit. Pressure to increase graduation rates and to reduce time to completion in postgraduate programmes, has placed the role, practice and responsibility of the supervisor in facilitating the development of research practice under increased scrutiny. Many universities have intensified their efforts at supervisor and research training by creating human activity systems with purposes aligned with this goal. At the University of Cape Town where the research reported in this article is located, discipline experts have also taken the initiative to draw on language and literacy experts to support students in research writing development for the research report or dissertation. This contribution of the literacy expert has often been in the form of a course or series of lectures as a service to a programme or group of students. This paper reports on an example of the systemic collaboration, at the level of a programme, between literacy and discipline experts in the design of a dissertation process. This programme attracts students who are working full time, usually in engineering disciplines and is offered as a block release Systems Practice Masters Programme. The purpose of supervisory practice in this programme is to develop practice-led research drawing on systems theory and practice. The specific aim of the collaboration between discipline and literacy expert is to facilitate the holistic development of the reading and writing practices valued in scholarly research practice. This design incorporates the integration of activities, modelling and feedback that facilitates interaction between the conventions of the research practice, what the student brings to the practice, and the agency of the student. The systemic approach involves working together at programme level with a clear conceptual framework of academic literacies. In this paper we present the integrative design as an activity system. We present preliminary findings of our investigation of the development of students’ research writing practices and their perceptions of the dissertation preparation process. These findings are based on the analysis of student texts, focus group interviews and reflections on the impact of supervisory practice. Key words: Academic literacies; dissertation preparation; postgraduate research capacity development; practice-led research; systemic design for learning; systemic collaboration

Chairs
avatar for Professor Ockie Bosch

Professor Ockie Bosch

President, International Society for the Systems Sciences
Professor Ockie Bosch was born in Pretoria, South Africa. He first came to Australia in 1979 where he was an invited senior visiting scientist with the CSIRO in Alice Springs. After one year in Longreach (1989) he emigrated to New Zealand where he was offered a position with Landcare... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 245

4:00pm

An Aggregated Qualitative Accounting Method for Developing Justified Policies
2764 “Qualitative accounting” is almost an oxymoron. The word ‘accounting’ includes the word ‘count’, and we cannot count qualities. More precisely, we cannot meaningfully add qualities to each other, a quality cannot be measured by a standard unit. Therefore, aggregating qualities for the purposes of accounting might sound like sleight of hand, or deceptive advertising. Fear not. The result will turn out to be quite robust, given a modicum of intelligence and sensitivity. The method is original and useful. The structure of the paper is given by the following sections: (1) an introduction to the topic, by looking at each word in the title, (2) we look at the UN mandate which will be used as an example to illustrate the method, (3) an explanation of the first part of method: working with the UN mandate, (4) the second part of the method: two orders of sensitivity used for reflection, and why this adds to the robustness of the method (5) broadening the conceptions underlying the method and lastly (6) uses of the method for policy. The following is the virtual address for some computer software that does the calculations for you, so that you can experiment with the parameters and indicators. The software was developed by Dolsy Smith http://gwdev-dsmith.wrlc.org:8083/gunas_test.html. The site is free to the public and is offered as an intellectual service.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Monday July 25, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 200

4:00pm

Leadership Practices for Thrivability of Complex Social Systems: Three Stories
2792 The authors compare three collaborative action research projects aimed at generative systems change. The goal of the article is to reflect on the dialogic methodologies they employed, the impacts and outcomes experienced by the participants as leaders and innovators of systemic change, and the evolution of the authors’ own practices as facilitators and catalysts of change. Wilson reflects on a three-year action research project in peri-urban Mexico on sustainable community development. Focusing on the emergent edge of the evolving system of local-state relationships, she recounts the changing attitudes, emotions, and behaviors of the public sector professionals and local community leaders engaged in the project. Wilson reflects on the sense of vulnerability and insecurity raised by the dialogic methodology she used, and the impact on her own practice and sense of self in the presence of these tensions. Bush explores a year of engagement within two urban systems within Asheville NC: public housing and community schools. Using distributed ethnography, he follows public housing's resident leadership’s efforts at self-organizing governance and an Ashoka Change-Maker School’s experience in spreading its educational approach. Offering propositions about leadership for resilience in urban systems, he reflects on the challenges to and evolution of self-awareness for individuals, organizations, systems, and himself as a practitioner-researcher. Walsh reflects on her praxis in regenerative development from 2006 to 2015 in the context of environmental gentrification in a neighborhood in Austin, Texas. To become an instrument of critical, creative, and collaborative change, she developed and fostered regenerative dialogue for green home repair and a community food forest. Walsh reflects on the ways this approach supported her and the residents in harnessing the generative potential of social conflict and vulnerability. The comparative analysis of the three stories concludes with propositions for leadership practices that foster thrivability in complex social systems. 1. Banzhaf, H. S., & McCormick, E. (2006). Moving Beyond Cleanup: Identifying the Crucibles of Environmental Gentrification. SSRN eLibrary. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=990074 2. Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. New Left Review, (53), 23–40. 3. Hazy, J. & Uhl-Bien, M. (2015). Towards operationalizing complexity leadership: How generative, administrative and community-building leadership practices enact organizational outcomes. Leadership Vol. 11(1) 79–104 DOI: 10.1177/1742715013511483 4. Snowden, David (2002). Complex Acts of Knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Journal of Knowledge Management. Volume 6 . Number 2. 2002 . pp. 100±111 DOI: 10.1108/13673270210424639 Keywords: social systems design, leadership, thrivability, urban systems, generative dialogue

Chairs
DF

Dennis Finlayson

SIG Chair: Living Systems Science, Derbyshire, UK
SIG Chair: Living Systems ScienceThe principle purpose of the living systems (LSA) group is to investigate all things that live from the very small, such as cell, to and including societies to discover universal phenomena applicable to living things and to develop a living science... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 265

4:00pm

Systemic Complementarity In Micro, Small and Medium Tourist Enterprises Considering the Socio-Ecological System
2837 In Mexican context, the tourism sector has prioritized the income generation, without consider social and ecological dimensions and the impact on ecosystems and social inequality. Characterizing tourist Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), some aspects are identified such as heterogeneity, absence of international standards as well as the inability to cope the disruption of the environment. This paper proposes to implement the systemic complementarity concept as an alternative to bring closer the tourist MSMEs to the exelixis considering the socio-ecological system, in which it operates. The methodological approach is carried out through the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), given that this methodology allows considering the subjectivity and complexity in problematic situations integrating relevant actors. Regarding the findings a conceptual model is proposed based on a associative transformation among MSMEs emphasizing the use of variety, considering its integration. Also, this model seeks to provide emergent properties to the whole system that determine internal functioning and amplify capacities to transcend in its current context. This proposal will benefit the tourist MSMEs potentializing, through their diversity, the local dynamic and the identity of the destination in consonance with the socio- ecological system. Keywords: Tourism MSMEs, complementarity, soft system methodology, emergence, socio-ecological systems.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 151

4:00pm

Value Based Architecture of Digital Product-Service Systems
2844 In this services economy, products are increasingly taken for granted and services often serve as the differentiator for businesses. Invariably, product focused businesses package services around their products and service focused businesses package products around their services. As a result, in any business offering, there is a product component as well as a significant service component. In such a scenario, the architecture of product-service systems gains significant importance. This is further prompted by the change in employment patterns, job opportunities, contribution to GDP, ownership of intellectual property and reduction in sales. Such product-service systems have benefitted immensely due to the massive pace of digitization wherein businesses are adopting digital to connect to their customers in order to bring in a difference in their offerings. As a result, the convergence of digital technologies has become the platform for businesses wherein new product-service systems are created by fusing digital and physical worlds. In this setting, it has been found that the presence of many digital technologies contributes to innovation, competitiveness and growth of a business. Gartner is of the view that the nexus of forces (Cloud, Mobile, Social, and Information) are the driving factors for businesses. TCS is of the view that the digital five forces (Cloud, Big Data, Social, Mobility, and Robotics & Artificial intelligence) are the driving factors for business. HBR is of the view that smart, connected, miniaturized devices (Internet of Things) alter the structure, competition and value offered by a business. In essence, “digital” has established itself to be a force to be reckoned with by businesses and they increasingly strive for achieving domination on “Digital product-service systems”. While there exists numerous architecture frameworks, processes and reference models for architecture of enterprises, systems, products, software and services, it is often the case that most of these artefacts are not suited for “Digital product-service systems”. This paper presents a value based approach for architecting “Digital product-service systems”. As part of this approach, six different interdependent perspectives are considered as useful for architecting the system-of-interest. These perspectives are: • Context Perspective: The context perspective aids in understanding the situation and identifying the operative context based on the cause and effect relationships that exist in the situation. This perspective aids in the problem situation formulation and its appropriate expression. • Value Perspective: This perspective aids in developing a set of value propositions that would lead to customer delight, customer satisfaction and enhanced customer experience. This perspective aids in the formulation of value proposition of the Digital product-service system. • Quality Perspective: This perspective aids in understanding the ways/means by which the benefits can be delivered. This perspective aids in the development of the concept of operations, which describes the characteristics of the offering from the viewpoint of an individual who will consume it. • Purpose Perspective: This perspective aids in defining the statement of purpose of the offering. This perspective aids in the identification of the purpose and development of the function model. • Structure Perspective: This perspective aids in defining how the different components and their interfaces are organized and composed in order to provide the necessary resources for achieving the purpose. • Process Perspective: This perspective aids in defining how the different components are utilized to enable the purpose. The process perspective ensures that the supporting capabilities are available when and where necessary. In this paper, the use of these perspectives to architect “Digital product-service systems” and its application in businesses is illustrated with a case study. Keywords – Products, Services, Digital Technologies, Product-Service Systems, Digital Product-Service Systems, Context, Value, Quality, Purpose, Structure, Process

Chairs
avatar for Anand Kumar

Anand Kumar

Systems Achitecture and Engineering
Anand Kumar has more than 20 years of Industrial experience in Systems architecture and engineering. He has been a researcher in Architecture and Business systems for more than a decade. His interests are in Business Systems, Architecture and Digital Product-Service Systems. He has... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 1B51

4:30pm

Aristotle's Four Causes and Teamwork in Corporations
2803   Aristotle's Four Causes and Teamwork in Corporations Kulak, Daryl 

Chairs
DF

Dennis Finlayson

SIG Chair: Living Systems Science, Derbyshire, UK
SIG Chair: Living Systems ScienceThe principle purpose of the living systems (LSA) group is to investigate all things that live from the very small, such as cell, to and including societies to discover universal phenomena applicable to living things and to develop a living science... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 265

4:30pm

Designing an Accessible Tourism Destination: The Soft System Methodology and the Triple Helix as a Theoretical and Practical Proposal
2838 Accessible tourism has its origin in the 90´s, at the beginning it was proposed as part of the Social Tourism or Tourism for All programs that had their basis in the human rights. Later, with the changes in the paradigms about people with disabilities accessible tourism has not only become a matter of human rights but also an opportunity to develop business that satisfy a growing population of people with disabilities and older people that acquires one or more types of disabilities. Demographic factors such as the increasing in life expectancy, better health care and retirement of people increase the needs of designing and building products and services that satisfy this demand. The Soft System Methodology, developed by Peter Checkland consider social factors and complex relations in tourism, its 7 phases allow the researcher to compare and simulate different scenarios that brings to the most viable practice, it brings an approximation to a model of accessible tourism, gathering elements such as research, infrastructure needs, human resources and labour market, communications, signalling, and other things that should be considered in a competitive destination. The Triple Helix, as a theoretical and practical model allow the three main sectors, Academy, Government and Industry to join efforts to strengthen the tourism industry. The Triple Helix from Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff show that innovation can have its origins in the academy, considering that knowledge is the most valuable element nowadays in the innovation policies around the word. The Triple Helix propose that academy should work with the research and design of products and services, the government, as the policy maker should provide elements that enable academy and the industry to work together in the incorporation of research, development of products and services and funding projects. This model, designed from the Soft System Methodology considering the Triple Helix as the basis of the tourism offer propose a better way of building policies, products and services for people with disabilities and senior adults, making more competitive the destinations and it can be considered not only for this population, research has shown that accessible destinations are conceived as better places for all people because its conditions allow tourists to walk along, drive, take a bus in an easier way.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 151

4:30pm

Indigenous Contributions to Sustainability and Systems Education
2775 The denigration of the world’s ecosystems has been driven by the economic imperatives of insatiable multi-national corporations whose goals are to concentrate the ownership and control of global resources in a progressively narrowing band of society. The impacts of this denigration are understood as crises called, ozone depletion, global warming, sea-level rise, extreme weather events, water scarcity, and the shrinking polar ice regions. These challenges involve significant degrees of complexity in our rapidly changing world. Engaging societies and communities in the meaningful changes of behaviour necessary to halt and reverse the denigration of our life-supporting ecosystems is extremely difficult, given that the majority of these societies are a significant part of the problem. They rely almost universally on the same epistemological basis of understanding the world as the multi-national corporations that are destroying it. In many ways, these societies support the behaviours of the multi-national corporations through their consumerism and political systems of representation. Decision making frameworks based on systems thinking can facilitate enhanced understandings of sustainability and potentially enlighten societies to behave differently. However to do so they must communicate an understanding of complexity that engages society at the level of values and beliefs, as these determine actions. They must also be transparent, inclusive, contextually relevant, and based on epistemological concepts that are much more strongly aligned with sustainability. The epistemologies of Indigenous Peoples are based on principles of interconnectedness, holism, relevance over long periods of time, inter-generational equity, and uniqueness to place. Indigenous Peoples have out of necessity had to develop ways of retaining their values and beliefs while accommodating the enforced changes associated with the destructive colonisation processes experienced in many parts of the world. The Waitangi Tribunal was born of the first recognition of New Zealand’s 1840 founding document in the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975. This tribunal was established to avoid further transgressions of the Treaty. Many early claims were about environmental degradation while others related to the retention of cultural values, knowledge and language. Claims all identified impacts upon mauri, life supporting capacity. Indigenous concepts raised in hearings included; retention of intrinsic values / mauri; spiritual and cultural values; obligations to enhance mauri; and implications for future generations. Often successful, these claims resulted in significant rethinking of projects and ultimately informed changes in law. The Resource Management Act (1991) has the purpose of promoting sustainable development taking into account environmental, social, cultural and economic well-being of society. However while the ground-breaking new law incorporated numerous indigenous concepts, it stopped short of actually including mauri. The Mauri Model Decision Making Framework allows Indigenous Peoples to contribute understanding based on their own knowledge so that they can be effectively included in resource management decision making processes. The Framework adds a strengthened decision making context due to its ability to incorporate culturally relevant knowledge seamlessly alongside scientific understandings of a situation, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative data consistently into the same assessment. When mauri is defined as the life supporting capacity of the air, water and soil the theoretical basis is created for relevance in terms of New Zealand law, and a means to measure and evaluate impacts in a holistic way then exists. Thus through integrating systems techniques and the indigenous concept, Mauri, the Mauri Model Decision Making Framework creates a new approach to cross-cultural communication and action. Independent research has assessed the Mauri Model as an exemplar against Bellagio STAMP and it is now included in curricula in engineering, planning and international studies at the University of Auckland, as well as being an online resource.

Chairs
avatar for Professor Ockie Bosch

Professor Ockie Bosch

President, International Society for the Systems Sciences
Professor Ockie Bosch was born in Pretoria, South Africa. He first came to Australia in 1979 where he was an invited senior visiting scientist with the CSIRO in Alice Springs. After one year in Longreach (1989) he emigrated to New Zealand where he was offered a position with Landcare... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 245

4:30pm

Performance Evaluation System In Engineering Matters: Systematic and Theoretical Approach to Humanity
2742 As systematic approach to engineering matters, the performance evaluation system is proposed and examined theoretically by using mathematical model. The systematic and theoretical approach to humanity is described. In the long history of human activity, engineering, culture, tradition, customs, life style, language have been formed gradually based upon politics, economics, natural and social environments. In usual, facility (F) behaves and performs a certain interaction (I) under some environments (E). This general phenomenon (physics/chemistry) is due to nature laws and also applies to a general social phenomenon and human activity. Above F,E,I are considered to be primary elements of basic system V(F,E,I).The performance of V(F,E,I) is evaluated as a result of phenomenon. As rating index (p), five elements are defined: time(t), space(x),money(m), humanity(h), quality(q). Basic system V(F,E,I) is expressed in form of V(t,x,m,h,q) because of having rating index built-in. Performance evaluation system is formulated by mathematical model (partial differentiation form )of δV(F,E,I)/ δp. Primarily, it is revised to organize the basic system V(F,E,I) ,then build each hierarchy in detail, integrating independent phenomenon. 1)Partial cause /effect analysis : δV(F,E,I)/ δp= δV1(F)/ δp+ δV2(E)/ δp+ δV3(I)/ δp . 2)Primary evaluation: δV/δp (gradient/grade), quick/slow (t), large/small (x), tough/fragile, strong/weak (q), beautiful/dirty, bright/dark (h), expensive/cheap, rich/poor (m). 3)Secondary evaluation:δ2V/δp2 (acceleration/inertia/potential), life evaluation (t), spread characteristics, broad spectrum evaluation (x), safety, reliability evaluation (q), public opinion, reputation, use-related evaluation (h), money making characteristics, economic evaluation(m). 4)Multifarious evaluation δ2V/δp1δp2: System V is revised from different viewpoints.             δ2V/δmδt: change of stock prices. δ2V/δhδt: reputational future risk in time history. 5)Sequence order of evaluation time: The decision making is handled depending on a situation to develop one by one. The conclusion highly depends on time processing.  6)System V is classified to be function separated type and function integrated type, which results in big influence on performance evaluation in decision making(δ2V/δp1δp2 type). As the two-dimensional(X,Y)problem, the expression method of block diagram is discussed. It should be orthogonally designated by independent phenomenon each other. In X-Y axis, time(t),space(x), money(m),humanity(h),quality/quantity(q) are usually chosen as the rating index which are mutually exclusive and independent phenomenon each other. As a model, a risk diagram (occurrence probability-hazard relation) is used. In which for X-Y axis, rating index m/t are orthogonally designated. Furthermore, division of risk category A,B,C,D are made as risk matrix and used for risk management/control. The shape of this block domain highly depends on nature law (probability density function). The shape factor k has some properties: 1) k>1,too active/top heavy type,2) k=1, stable/natural type,3) k

Chairs
avatar for Anand Kumar

Anand Kumar

Systems Achitecture and Engineering
Anand Kumar has more than 20 years of Industrial experience in Systems architecture and engineering. He has been a researcher in Architecture and Business systems for more than a decade. His interests are in Business Systems, Architecture and Digital Product-Service Systems. He has... Read More →

Monday July 25, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 1B51

4:30pm

The Reconstruction of Systems Paradigm: Study on the Idea and Model for Boundary-Balance of Nonlinear Society
2770 The development of contemporary China is in a unique complex situation which refers to a nonlinear system situation stems from the complex interactions among elements, structure, function and environment of Chinese social system. One of important features of this complex situation is the unpredictability of system evolution at the edge of chaos. One fundamental dilemma for Chinese social system in transition is how to build a paradigm to adapt to this complex situation.While the endeavors to transplant “linear ideal model”from Western society failed, and the “Simple Science Paradigm”which once dominated Chinese society is deep in crisis now. The serious environmental problems derived from these endeavors force China to build a new approach related to green development. As one of important thought sources to build the paradigm to adapt to this complex situation, process philosophy provides us with enlightening thinking tools. First, ontologically speaking, process philosophy help us to understand interactions between human activity systems and natural systems from the perspective of time-space-matter relationship. Second, epistemologically speaking, process philosophy emphasizes the construction of “organism” knowledge at the level of life community. Third, methodologically speaking, process philosophy attempts to rebuild a co-existence relationship between human activity systems and natural systems with the “prehension” methodology. We believe that the critical steps for solving the fundamental dilemma for the development of contemporary China include--focus on the deep contradictions between current economic development and environmental protection, taking process philosophy as one of important thought sources, based on modern systems science and complexity research, popularizing the new idea of Eco-society, rebuilding a paradigm for social system with the characteristic of the continuous emergence of sustainability, and promoting the continuous evolution of this paradigm in practice.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Monday July 25, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 200
 
Tuesday, July 26
 

1:30pm

A Whole Systems Approach to Education Redesign: A Case Study on the Need for Inter-Generational Perspectives and Inclusion
2740 This study was commissioned by the Global Education Futures forum for presentation at its fourth International Conference in Moscow, Russia, from 29 February to 2 March 2016 (http://edu2035.org/#program). The objective was to conduct field research with a special focus on the vision of the future of education held by young people. This report presents some views and perspectives of my generation regarding what they want education to be like in the future. In northern California, my teachers Ms. B and Mr. Wahanik used the framework of questions and activities that my father and I developed to gather this kind of information by running a sort of “focus group” with my 10th Grade class and to find out what their views, perspective, opinions, ideas, hopes and concerns are regarding this theme. This group consisted of mainly 15 and 16 year olds, and there are around 40 students in my class. They had less than an hour to run the whole process, but everyone already knew each other really well so they could go quickly through the process, as described in this report. A similar process was run with a group of young people in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Here I had to work with people whom I had never met before and who also didn't know each other at all. We had exactly 12 students from a variety of public and private schools with an age range from 12 to 17 years old. However, we had a total of three hours with them, so we could do an icebreaker and take our time to move through the whole thing. In both cases (California and Argentina), the idea was to engage young people in a series of structured creative Future Thinking adventures that helped them “invent” what education (learning and teaching) should be like in the year 2035. The idea behind this is that educators and those involved in the systemic re-design of education systems might want to include this kind of data and these kind of perspectives in the work they are doing. I would like to present my findings at the ISSS and to see whether others think more of this kind of work should be done.

Chairs
avatar for Dr. Alexander Laszlo

Dr. Alexander Laszlo

President, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
SIG Chair: Leadership and Systemic InnovationThe LaSI SIG focuses on the formal area of research related to the theme of systemic innovation. As a place where change leaders and change makers team up with systems scientists to co-create impactful innovations, it aims to catalyze action... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 1B51

1:30pm

An Integrative Model of Four-Phase Adaptive Evolution in Organizations
2793 How do organizations become order-created and extinct through emergence and immergence in their evolutionary dynamic states? How macrosimplicity emerges from microcomplexity and how sophisticated behavior emerges from the interaction of relatively simplistic parts? Organization scholars have debated those questions for decades, but only recently have they been to gain insight into combining the linear and non-linear dynamics that lead to organizational bottom-up emergence and top- down immergence by explorative and exploitative learning, through the use of the complexity science. Two intriguing features of complex systems have been discussed in this paper: simple behavior at the high level emerging from convoluted underpinnings, and sophisticated behavior at the low level immerging from simple underpinnings. Complexity theory has sometimes concerned itself with the one sort of bottom-up emergence, sometimes with the other top- down immergence, and sometimes it seems to aim for both at the same time, seeking to explain behaviors that are both surprisingly stable and surprisingly sophisticated. Studied for organization science research, this paper summarizes these literatures, including the first comprehensive review of macro-simplicity and micro-complexity, cybernetic modernism, chaotic postmodernism and organizing postmodernity’s chaos in each of the 20 complexity science disciplines. In doing so, the paper makes a bold proposal for a discipline of organizational bottom-up emergence and top- down immergence by explorative and exploitative learning, and proposes an integrative model of four-phase adaptive evolution in organizations. The paper begins with a detailed premise of organizational theories, models and phenomena of order-creation and extinction, and then rigorously maps the processes of order-creation and extinction discovered by that complexity science to identify a four-phase adaptive evolution model in organizations. By way of conclusion, the author expects the four-phase adaptive evolution model could be applied to enact bottom-up emergence and top- down immergence by explorative and exploitative learning within and across organizations. Key words: bottom-up emergence, top- down immergence, exploration, exploitation, four-phase adaptive evolution

Chairs
avatar for David Rousseau

David Rousseau

Founder & Managing Director, Centre for Systems Philosophy
SIG Chair: Research Towards a General Theory of SystemsSIG Chair: Systems Philosophy Dr. David Rousseau is the Founder and Managing Director of the Centre for Systems Philosophy, which promotes the use of Systems Philosophy as a methodology for addressing problems that require both... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 265

1:30pm

CONSYS Approach for Building: A Link Between CONOPS and System Models in the Context of Model-Based Systems Engineering
2728 According to US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Planning Report 02-3, across the entire system development life cycle (SDLC), 70% of the defects are introduced in the Requirements Gathering and Analysis/Architectural Design stage. Enterprise Level Concept of Operations (CONOPs) may exist but are not linked to system models. The missing link between CONOPs and system models causes the requirements either inadequately or incorrectly defined. As systems become more complex and concepts continue evolving, there is a need for approaches that combine CONOPs with system models to build an integrated modelling environment. This paper proposes a CONSYS approach that extends system models to CONOPs in the context of Model-Base System Engineering (MBSE). This paper evaluates the benefits of this CONSYS approach. The goal is to build a link between CONOPs and system models so that CONOPs are baselined and change controlled as the way system models are. SysML has been widely adopted as the language to capture system models. A case study example is presented to demonstrate the CONSYS approach using a SysML tool and to show the benefits of this approach. The areas for further research is also discussed in this paper.

Chairs
avatar for Janet Singer

Janet Singer

Liaison to INCOSE, jwillissinger@measures.org
Janet Singer is a leader in joint efforts by ISSS and the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) to ‘co-mature’ systems science and systems engineering as disciplines that share a common systems thinking and systems appreciation core. She is a second-generation... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 245

1:30pm

How Teaching Cybernetics, in any Discipline, Can Bring Forth Systemic Change
2836 One way educators can work toward meaningful change in socio-ecological systems is to foster transformative change in students’ thinking. Since today’s students are tomorrow’s decision-makers, it can be argued that we have a responsibility to help students develop an understanding of how knowledge is constructed so that they might take responsibility for how they make sense of our world and see the connection between knowing and acting. Specifically, the reform in thinking needed is from our culturally conditioned habits of reductionism, duality, and linear thinking to more relational, systemic thinking. Educators are largely responsible for shaping the minds, values, and perceptions of students. We hope to inspire more educators to take their responsibility to heart and foster the kind of complex thinking that students will need to address the increasingly complex problems of our pluralistic world. In this presentation we will share our experiences, as teacher and student, in Creative Systemic Studies, an online doctoral program founded on the principles of cybernetics and systems thinking. Since epistemological change is transdisciplinary, it does not matter what discipline we teach in when we attempt to change minds. The Creative Systemic Studies program was designated a non-clinical Marriage and Family Therapy degree, yet students’ transformative learning experiences were not discipline-specific; they were triggered, in part, by learning cybernetics. In fact, students frequently testified that cybernetics changed their personal relationships and how they attended to the issues they were involved in, including homelessness, coaching youth, missionary work, grassroots organizing for social change, and therapeutic practices. Using a few concepts from cybernetics as examples - control, feedback, and distinctions - we will show how the principles of cybernetics can be creatively presented and integrated into any course of study. And we will show how these concepts influenced the way students think and know. We will also use these examples to highlight the fundamental principle of second order cybernetics which is that the observer is inextricable from - and responsible for - her observing. After introducing students to the subjective nature of interpretation and engaging this topic from multiple perspectives, students begin to see how their biases, values, and past experiences influence how they make meaning. Our knowing is necessarily self-referential and participatory. Cybernetics, General Systems Theory, chaos and complexity theories each have differences and a range of interpretations yet they are unified in that they all indicate a way of thinking that is intrinsically different from the reductionist/objectivist/deterministic orientation of modernist, rational thought. We use cybernetics as our exemplar for teaching students to think differently because we like it so much, but any of these theories would represent, and foster, epistemological change. We assert that changing minds has profound consequences because habits of mind become habits of action. Furthermore, every way of knowing contains an ethical trajectory. The ethical trajectory of cybernetics includes knowing that since we construct meanings, we are responsible for them - and we must respect this responsibility in others. Inspiring and developing in students a paradigmatic change from objectivity to a self-referential, participatory epistemology fundamentally concerned with responsibility is a nontrivial way that educators can foster meaningful change in socio-ecological systems. Additionally, it makes teaching even more exciting and satisfying.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 1B55

1:30pm

Ingenieros Sin Fronteras Colombia: Improvement of the Water Quality In the Community of Santa Isabel de Potosí
2780 Santa Isabel rural community is located between the municipalities of Guasca and La Calera in Colombia, it was composed of different stakeholders that coexist around the “El Asilo” creek. The people collect water from this water source for consumption and daily use. The water comes from Chingaza moorland, one of top three of water generation ecosystems in the country. Given the close relationship between the community and the ecological system, the environmental damage of this creek has generated big problems in health and quality of life of the inhabitants. Through joint work with the community was proposed a project called "Improvement of the quality of water in the community of Santa Isabel de Potosi". The group with the community is nowadays performing an analysis based on community-based decision-making taking into account the possible alternatives that could be implemented in order of diminishing in some percentage the impact of the issue and this way try to avoid the complete deterioration of the brook and the ecosystems in the area. Among the alternatives of intervention these are found: generation of a new method of community cooperation in behalf of the sanitation of the brook and the implementation of homemade filters in the improvement of the quality of the drinking water. This paper presents the analysis of the problem taking into account different points of view such as the environmental as well as the organizational one, highlighting the fact that this is not an isolated issue but an evidence of the possible environmental disaster that Colombia could live if nothing is done at the right time. Also this paper presents how engineering and work with the communities has been able to define the guidelines of intervention that are going to allow the next stage of the project, putting in practice the solutions proposed in behalf of a better quality of life.

Chairs
DF

Dennis Finlayson

SIG Chair: Living Systems Science, Derbyshire, UK
SIG Chair: Living Systems ScienceThe principle purpose of the living systems (LSA) group is to investigate all things that live from the very small, such as cell, to and including societies to discover universal phenomena applicable to living things and to develop a living science... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 200

1:30pm

Participatory Action-Research as a Methodology for the Development of Appropriate Technologies by Communities
2760 The social and environmental development potential of countries like Colombia, shows the need to articulate right from the communities, the processes and projects relevant to their territories. Furthermore when vital aspects of human health, such as access to clean water and water consumption, are also opportunities for the development of innovative technological solutions, stemming from the relationship between society and natural systems. In Colombia, for example, 62% of the municipalities have a medium to high risk of water availability vulnerability, and the remaining ones are on areas hard to reach or with a low population density. This amount increases to 80% if only the main cities are taken into account, which points to the importance of an efficient water resources management. In this context, a group of researchers together with a community of about 1,500 children and 15 teachers from schools of several municipalities of Cundinamarca department (Colombia), have been developing a technological platform founded on the community-based action research proposal of Ernest Stringer. This interactive technological platform, based on the use of SMS and the web, is called the “La Liga del Agua”. It is a jointly constructed space where synergies between the different stakeholders around the proper use of water resources can arise, based on the self-recognition of waste water problems on each of the participants’ homes. Thus, the problem is approached from the daily practices and the technological inefficiency, generating an empowerment of the water importance. The main theoretical foundation of this technological co-construction is based on the spirit of participatory and democratic systemic intervention, from the soft systems methodology of Peter Checkland, as well as the socio-cultural vision of the community that, voluntarily, intend to solve a problem collectively, as suggested by Rusell Ackoff. In this participatory co-construction, the following aspects were considered: i) the supply and environmental care systems are mediated by the interaction between the community stakeholders, ii) to develop solutions, it is not enough with the construction of appropriate technologies, research processes aimed at social appropriation of innovation are essential, and finally iii) the knowledge management, the use of technology and the impact of the teachers in the development of socio-environmental skills of the participating students. In this article, we will show the jointly design process of the “La Liga del Agua” platform and the incidence on the increase of the good practices of water resources usage. In addition, the results of the teaching strategies and recreational activities that seek to increase the empowerment by the actors and their interaction with the technology, will be presented. To conclude, all the learnings of the proposal will be introduced, so it can be replicated on other contexts with environmental concerns.

Chairs
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 151

2:00pm

Addressing the Whole Whole
2807 This paper argues the need to develop a comprehensive, coherent, system-oriented description of the universe, and that doing so over time is quite feasible with the right approach. Charles Francois has stated: "We are indeed still - and mostly unconsciously - subservients to the general Cartesian reductionist model, which, after destroying the relationships network for the sake of 'simplicity', does never reconstruct it as an organized whole." This implies that the most important mission of the systems movement is to reconstruct the organized whole. We are deterred from this mission because of its apparent difficulty. It has long been recognized that "the whole" must be addressed to understand a system. But what exactly is "the whole"? The whole includes all of a system's parts. It also includes the relationships and processes of interactions among the objects and with the environment. And it requires addressing all in concert. (Let's call this all of the whole.) Furthermore, since a system's environment consists of other systems, these other systems must be considered part of the whole. This line of thinking expands the scope of the whole and when taken to its logical conclusion encompasses the entire universe. Hence the whole must be interpreted to mean not just a single system but the universal system of systems (the whole whole). While instances of the system pattern are interesting individually, the system pattern is most significant as a key element of the architecture of the universe. Finally, the universe is evolving, not static. The deep hierarchies of systems existing today provide clear evidence of continuing system evolution since the Big Bang. Hence the universal process of system evolution (whole history) must also be included in the whole. The whole means all of the interconnections within the broadest scope of space and time. It means the universe viewed as a system of systems, including all of the whole, the whole whole, and system evolution over the whole history. How can a system so large and complex be addressed? The system pattern, being fundamental to the functioning, structure, and evolution of the universe, provides a basis for organizing a universal description. While we can never describe the universe completely, we can develop and persistently improve and extend a description of the web of interacting systems. To do so we must systematically integrate, unify, and generalize the relevant nuggets filtered out of the existing vast sea of information. With modern tools and techniques the complexity of such an effort can be managed. The dominant approach for centuries has ignored systems in order to avoid complexity. The opposite trade-off is now required: we must embrace complexity so as to understand systems. By embracing and learning to effectively manage complexity, it is possible to describe the whole in the broadest sense and so to develop an unprecedented understanding of the universe as a system of systems. This paper aims to show that doing so is now viable.

Chairs
avatar for David Rousseau

David Rousseau

Founder & Managing Director, Centre for Systems Philosophy
SIG Chair: Research Towards a General Theory of SystemsSIG Chair: Systems Philosophy Dr. David Rousseau is the Founder and Managing Director of the Centre for Systems Philosophy, which promotes the use of Systems Philosophy as a methodology for addressing problems that require both... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 265

2:00pm

Civilization, Technology, and Money: The Challenge of a Human Fit
2795 Civilization in its science-enabled industrial form highlights and gives exponential growth to forms of agency and motivation so removed from the dynamics of eco-systemic mutual constraint that the troubled culture-nature interface has finally assumed the proportions of a sustainability crisis. With the emergence about 12,000 years ago of agriculture and the subsequent rise of the complex, settled societies we refer to as “civilization,” our models of ourselves and of the world transformed in ways that decisively separated the character of human agency and motivation from the behaviors by which other forms of life make a living. The science-enabled Industrial Revolution made central and self-aware the long-nurtured civilized thrust to control and shape the world to our purposes, refining that mindset into what Jacques Ellul has described as the “technological mind,” the probing seach for an improved way of doing whatever we turn our minds to. With this mentality technology has moved to center stage both as our first resort in approaching any kind of problem and as our chief lever for economic growth. We have collapsed the constraints of space and time and the world of nature is quite outflanked by the speed and power with which thoughts and plans in the human mind can reshape and modify environments from the expectations structured into the way other species make a living. This puts a new and critical weight on the thoughts, feelings, and motivation of the human mind-and-heart. All living beings are motivated to act in order to achieve and maintain well-being. But human motivation is far from the direct response to needs and dangers common to other forms of life. Our motivation as action is mediated by technology, and our technology loops back to shape our motivation. As a well-being guided response our motivation is mediated by money, which offers none of the inherent guidance of actual well-being. The “better” achievement of whatever that is the animating thrust of technology promises an open-ended more: more productivity, more speed, more convenience, more ease. And at the heart of money is another more, the profit motive that guides us to proud achievements and likewise to humiliating dysfunction. We market the promise of the technological “more” for profit, and the drive for more profit powerfully fuels the technological drive for all sorts of innovation. Thus the incremental thrusts embedded in technology and money work in synergy to bring us to the exponential burst of transformation in culture and the natural world. In the process guidance of real well-being becomes hit or miss, distorted by a thirst for and expectation of novelty stoked by endless advertising or overshadowed in the anxious pursuit of profit. Seeing the deep structures that have brought civilization so rapidly to such an innovative and world-transforming peak reveals no easy answers: we cannot simply change ourselves without the difficult and uncertain process of reconfiguring elements structured into civilization that make us the kind of unpredictable and uncontrollable species we are at present. But it helps to know there are other ways available, perhaps even other ways of doing a civilization. If those alternatives are in any way open to our deliberate contrivance, that deliberation will have to include serious reflection on how the way we maintain our well-being has come to fit so ill with the well-being as pursued in the rest of the community of life. For humans, understanding is the guide to moving into a better future. Keywords: civilization, technology, money, motivation, Neo-lithic Revolution, Industrial Revolution

Chairs
DF

Dennis Finlayson

SIG Chair: Living Systems Science, Derbyshire, UK
SIG Chair: Living Systems ScienceThe principle purpose of the living systems (LSA) group is to investigate all things that live from the very small, such as cell, to and including societies to discover universal phenomena applicable to living things and to develop a living science... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 200

2:00pm

Crucial Institutional Innovations: Evolutionary Change in Higher Education
2752 In 1969, Erich Jantsch published his paper about the disruptive forces affecting higher education and society. He was serving as a research associate at MIT and studying the futures of MIT and the American University at the time. Jantsch (1969) said students were concerned about whether the college curriculum was relevant. Meanwhile, society was concerned about the degrading side effects of technology on the systems of human living, cities, and the natural environment. Lastly, Jantsch pointed to the rising concern about the lack of systems and futures thinking. He coined these concerns “disruptive forces” and believed that the university was well-positioned to assume a new leadership role in society in order to assist in transforming these concerns. Jantsch predicted (hoped for) five crucial institutional innovations in order to transform disruptions into “cohesive forces”. Jantsch passed away ten years after the publication of this document and didn’t have the opportunity to see if his ideas came to fruition. Using a mixed methods approach, this study explores the evolution of higher education institutions by posing questions that revolve around Jantsch’s five crucial innovations, including a new purpose for the university, socio-technological system engineering, altering the structure of the university, re-orienting the operational principles of the university, and a more active relationship between the new university and society. Five institutions highly referenced for their innovation will be invited to participate in this research. Jantsch’s “crucial innovations” frame this investigative study. The conceptual framework consists of the concepts of disruptive forces, the three functions of higher education, self-renewal, and integrative planning. This paper will present the preliminary findings to this study. Keywords- Erich Jantsch, higher education, disruptive forces, self-renewal, integrative planning, innovation.

Chairs
avatar for Dr. Alexander Laszlo

Dr. Alexander Laszlo

President, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
SIG Chair: Leadership and Systemic InnovationThe LaSI SIG focuses on the formal area of research related to the theme of systemic innovation. As a place where change leaders and change makers team up with systems scientists to co-create impactful innovations, it aims to catalyze action... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 1B51

2:00pm

Systemic Integration on Spatial Knowledge in Business
2732 A model to achieve technological development (DT) is proposed, in particular a satellite, with the following sub phases: 1.Analysis of International satellite system; 2. Analysis of the National satellite system; 3.diagnose, using the SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats); 4. Proposed solution; 5.Mission, vision, values and strategic objectives of the proposal; 6.Strategias using SWOT combinations: FO, FA, OD and AD; 7.Action plan; 8. Technological development. With analysis and diagnosis it was found that one of the great strengths in this country is the development of scientific research, in particular space, since the forties, but it is isolated, ie, not integrated in the productive industry and therefore state policy proposes establishing humanistic satellite companies to promote and preserve the ecology, self-financing, public, mixed, or private initiative, integrating scientific, basic and applied research, based on the goals, objectives and marketing strategies. Companies call for the design, construction and launch of satellites, thus providing efficient, fast, safe and cheap services to meet the demand of domestic and international users, as developed countries have done through their space agencies, in order to have DT in this area.

Chairs
avatar for Janet Singer

Janet Singer

Liaison to INCOSE, jwillissinger@measures.org
Janet Singer is a leader in joint efforts by ISSS and the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) to ‘co-mature’ systems science and systems engineering as disciplines that share a common systems thinking and systems appreciation core. She is a second-generation... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 245

2:00pm

The Illusion of Technology: A Generational Perception on the Need for a Human-Centered Approach in Dealing with Developments of Science and Technology
2842 We are at the turning point of an era with a huge potential of change in which humanity can decide to finally address the failures of our economic, social, governance and belief systems. However the current narrative build around the hopes of being saved by science and technology is getting more and more traction into a society in which digitalization, the illusion of zero marginal costs, sharing economies and big data seems to be the answer to our most pressing problems. This is ironical, since science and technology (S&T) have been not only central to the development model followed by human societies in the last centuries but often very effective instruments of mass destruction, environmental degradation and social exclusion. S&T have been definitely part of the problem, a key component of our model of economic development, and not only an exogenous factor as considered by mainstream economics, which anyway recognize their crucial role to improve productivity and sustain long-term growth. But they are also deemed to be the core of the solution, a paradoxical vision grounded in the idea that finding a technical fix is a good way to avoid the less comfortable question of how power and wealth are distributed in society and with what consequences. In particular the younger generation seems to be distracted by the excitement about technological and scientific new developments and its untapped potential. Addressing the systemic underlying root causes which are the real drivers of our problems is too complex compared to building the new app and the social enterprise that goes with it. While for previous generations changing the world for the better would require also political and social innovations, now it seems that S&T has even displaced every other source of hope. The launching of the latest digital artifact creates a widespread frenziness, but also a true and exciting entrepreneurial spirit is mobilized by the potential of technologies to address human challenges. In a sense, we put S&T at the core of societal evolution, or to say the least we do not conceive any transformation without them playing a significant role, and this is also why we think they should rescue us from all disasters, even those provoked by ourselves. In light of these developments I would like to emphasize the following questions in my contribution to ISSS 2016: How can we go beyond a paradigm of “S&T solutionism” and channel the huge potential these developments will bring? How can we change the route towards a future in which humanity has to adapt to digitalization and its consequences, instead of putting digitalisation at the service of humanity?

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 1B55

2:30pm

A Categorization of Socio-Technical Systems Approaches based on Context and Purpose
2889 Socio- technical systems are systems where humans interact with technology (hardware or software) towards the achievement of a goal. Because of the presence of the human behavior and the constant change and evolution of technology, such systems are constantly changing and are difficult to define. Various approaches exist to analyze and understand socio-technical systems’ behaviors, however many of these approaches analyze socio-technical systems from a certain discipline’s weltanschauung, problem context, and purpose of the system. Therefore, the proposed approaches only provide partial definitions that are difficult to generalize. The objective of this research is to provide a categorization of socio-technical systems based on their context and purpose, within the functionalist systems paradigm(s). The resulting categorization will serve as a foundation for a socio-technical systems framework to assist analysis select and/or design the right socio-technical intervention approach based on context and purpose. Keywords: Socio-Technical systems, Critical Systems Thinking, Problem Context, Methodological Purpose, Systems Thinking

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 1B55

2:30pm

A Good Approach to Wicked Problems
2774 One of the reasons that systems thinking has developed over the years is to address problems that seemed to be unresolvable; the social equivalent of a Gordian knot. Since the term was first used in 1973 by Rittel and Weber (1973) these difficult problems have become known as “Wicked Problems”. A Wicked Problem is usually a social or cultural problem that is difficult or impossible to solve. Wicked problems become “wicked” not because they are innately evil , but due to the number of stakeholders, resources, lack of knowledge upon the subject, cost involved, the great possibility of unanticipated results and other factors that multiply the complexity of the issue to be addressed.. One of the defining characteristics of a Wicked Problem is that “solutions to wicked problems are not true or false, but good or bad. Ordinary problems have solutions that can be objectively evaluated as right or wrong. Choosing a solution to a wicked problem is largely a matter of judgment” Questions of what is the good and what is the bad are informed by systems of ethics. There are numerous ethical approaches to the ultimate question “what is to be done”? This paper argues that the version of American Pragmatism that has come to be known at Neo‐Pragmatism is a good choice to approach Wicked Problems. Neo‐ Pragmatism is uniquely suited to finding a “good” approach to a Wicked Problem due to the social nature of Wicked Problems. Since a Wicked Problem is fundamentally social it consists of constantly changing and shifting parts. If there is any stability in a Wicked Problem it is the stability of constant change. Neo‐ Pragmatism is founded on the understanding that all elements of human society are fundamentally contingent; that is to say that again the only constant is change. Neo‐ pragmatism is simply the only ethical structure that can readily adapt to the constant flux that is a Wicked Problem.

Chairs
avatar for David Rousseau

David Rousseau

Founder & Managing Director, Centre for Systems Philosophy
SIG Chair: Research Towards a General Theory of SystemsSIG Chair: Systems Philosophy Dr. David Rousseau is the Founder and Managing Director of the Centre for Systems Philosophy, which promotes the use of Systems Philosophy as a methodology for addressing problems that require both... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 265

2:30pm

A Systemic Model for Communication Innovation
2823 A Systemic Model for a telecommunications innovation system was designed with the proposal for technological development, to avoid situations that endanger the cancellation, by the International Union of Communications of the satellite orbits assigned to Mexico, and thus promote public and private investment through the integration of basic and applied scientific research in enterprises. The idea is to make appropriate innovations and make significant improvements to products, thus meeting the demands of domestic and international consumers. Keywords: Systemic model, innovation, and technological development.

Chairs
avatar for Janet Singer

Janet Singer

Liaison to INCOSE, jwillissinger@measures.org
Janet Singer is a leader in joint efforts by ISSS and the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) to ‘co-mature’ systems science and systems engineering as disciplines that share a common systems thinking and systems appreciation core. She is a second-generation... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 245

2:30pm

Critical Systems Thinking Review on Decentralised Drinking Water Management in Nuali City, Indonesia
2843 This paper is based on a PhD project that strives to assess the performance of decentralised drinking water management in the city of Nauli, Indonesia. The implementation of decentralised government system followed by decentralizing some functions including drinking water services, is unsatisfactory in providing access to drinking water for all residents in the city of Nauli. Nauli Municipality that has just split up as an autonomous local government under the decentralized government system in Indonesia, is facing conflicts in providing water provision to the society, since there are three public water companies in this region: City PDAM, District PDAM, and Provincial BLUD. Furthermore, these governments and their water companies seem to forget the main objective of government in water provision as stated in the Indonesia Constitution: to fully control the water and manage it for meeting the people’s needs. The aim of this research is to apply Ulrich’s critical systems heuristics (CSH) to address the following research questions: (i) how effective is the current decentralized water management system?; and (ii) how the current system can be improved and what ought to be done? Keywords: Systems thinking, drinking water management, decentralisation, sustainability

Chairs
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 151

2:30pm

The Lighthouse - Innovating the Systems Sciences System
2771 The authors of this abstract sought to discover a way to communicate key systemic insights to a wider audience and the integration of those insights in real-life systems where they will have impact. The Lighthouse is a prototype alternative to traditional methods of disciplinary scholarship. The Lighthouse is a result of applying systems research, specifically systemic innovation, to the very system by which systems research is performed and communicated. A designed socio-technical system is added to complement the disciplinary organization, by taking advantage of recent advances in knowledge media research and development, and contemporary communication design. By design, The Lighthouse undertakes to fulfill in the systems movement, and in the CET SIG in particular, a function analogous to a lighthouse – of showing ‘stray ships’ (various change or sustainability or thrivability initiatives) a way to the safety of a ‘harbor’, which is an outpost of a ‘continent’ where issues can be handled and understood systemically. The Lighthouse focuses on a single key issue: Whether the evolution and control of core societal systems can be relegated to free competition (“the market”) – or whether it must be informed by systems research and insights. The current prototype has three phases: (1) synthesis or federation of points of view and results relevant to our issue, through a media-enabled transdisciplinary dialog of experts; (2) rendering the results of Phase One in accessible, communicable and engaging formats by applying state-of-the-art communication design; (3) strategic placement of the results of Phase Two in public sphere, and public awareness. The Lighthouse prototype is designed to evolve continuously, by observing how it meets the real-world challenges, and assimilating insights and results from relevant disciplines, notably the systems research and the knowledge media R&D. In this way this prototype of media-enabled transdisciplinary research is also conceived as a prototype ‘boundary object’ linking two communities and interests – systems research, and IT innovation. By it, systemic insights are allowed to directly influence technological, and also social-systemic innovation. The Lighthouse is part of our initiative to develop the CET SIG as a systemic innovation hub, where the emergence of better ways of transdisciplinary and transcommunity cross-fertilization is being curated.

Chairs
avatar for Dr. Alexander Laszlo

Dr. Alexander Laszlo

President, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
SIG Chair: Leadership and Systemic InnovationThe LaSI SIG focuses on the formal area of research related to the theme of systemic innovation. As a place where change leaders and change makers team up with systems scientists to co-create impactful innovations, it aims to catalyze action... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 1B51

2:30pm

Typology of Social Actions Based on the Living System Theory
2745 It is impossible to make progress in social theory without inquiring about social actions; therefore, many leading sociologists refer to this notion in their work. Max Weber, Talcott Parsons and many other sociologists attempted to ground not only their works but also the science of sociology as a whole on a theory of social actions. Max Weber defined sociology as "the science which attempts the interpretative understanding of social action in order thereby to arrive at a casual explanation of its course and effects". Moreover, he explicitly singled out social action as the “central subject matter” of his sociology. Hence, comprehensive typology of social actions can be very helpful in sociological analysis. Usually, social actions are classified by actors’ intentions. In this paper, types of social actions are categorized both by actors’ intentions and by the actions’ results, including both the intentional and unintentional outcomes. This was achieved through consideration of the social actions in the framework of J.G. Miller’s living systems theory. This theory regards each living system as composed of 20 subsystems that process information and matter/energy inside the living system and between the living system and its environment. These 20 subsystems are considered at eight levels: cell, organ, organism, group, organization, community, society and supranational systems. The first three constitute the level of biological living systems; the other five comprise the level of social living systems. Social actions are interactions among living systems or among different parts of one living system at the social level. The proposed typology of social actions is based on analysis of developmental, reproductive and interactional processes in the social systems. In order to live and function, living systems must allow their matter/energy-processing subsystems to work, so all social actions in social living systems can be associated with the functioning of these subsystems. Seemingly, the number of goals for social actions as well as the number of their outcomes is very high, however, by relating principal intention and main outcome of the considered social action to specific matter/energy-processing subsystems, their number can be significantly reduced. This is done by determining the main subsystem that was intended to be affected by the planned social action, and the main subsystem that was actually impacted by it. In many cases, it is the same subsystem; that is, the intention coincides with the consequence. As a result of this analysis, the two-dimensional matrix of types of social actions was constructed, and the methodology of assigning any social action to a specific cell in the typological matrix was proposed. Every social action in this typology is designated by the names of the pair of the involved subsystems; if they coincide, the type is labeled by the name of one subsystem. Obviously, as in any classification, there also exists an element of arbitrariness in the relating of the social action to its type. More detailed typology of social actions on the basis of the living systems theory can be developed by including in the analysis the information-processing subsystems.

Chairs
DF

Dennis Finlayson

SIG Chair: Living Systems Science, Derbyshire, UK
SIG Chair: Living Systems ScienceThe principle purpose of the living systems (LSA) group is to investigate all things that live from the very small, such as cell, to and including societies to discover universal phenomena applicable to living things and to develop a living science... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 200

3:30pm

A Communication System for Socio-Ecological Processes
2887 This article outlines a unified Communication Theory linking cyber-systemic, and cyber-semiotic perspectives. The objective is explaining communication as an emergent system from the interaction process between socio-ecological systems. The emergent communication system seen from a unified perspective is applied as a participative integral transformation process toward the harmonic relationship between human communities and their dynamic social and natural environment. It includes the description of an evolutionary communication process between social and environmental leaders of organizational networks under real conditions. It describes the evolutionary stages of the communication system between different social and environmental leaders who have been working in social organizational networks of Mexico in the last thirty years. The last stage of this emergent communication process among social organizational networks leaders began in 2009, is called: the Ecosystemic Dialogues, it is communication system with qualitative complexity and critical awareness. It is a social laboratory of change under real conditions, through a participative action-research cybernetic process, for a harmonic and sustainable relationship between human and natural systems, through a complex communication dynamic. It is a process toward the sustainable systemic health of the planet. Keywords: Communication, cyber-semiotic, qualitative complexity, emergent properties, ecosystemic metaphor

Chairs
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 151

3:30pm

Comparing the Current ISIS and the (Not Yet) Past Leninist States (USSR and Pre-1979 China)
2791 What our media named as terrorism today are perceived as revolution by some. What we call revolution in mainland China and Russia, are no less violent and cruel than terrorism too. This paper observes and identifies the roots, the triggering historic events, the similarities among the differences, of the two huge phenomena and their two driving ideologies, i.e. the Extreme Islamism and the Bloody Communism, that have deep influence to our time and our daily life. As one of our subject has been just fading away into history (not really) and another is still going on while this paper is being written, we highlight the similarities or even isomorph of these two violent social phenomena, raising a question behind such similarity – what are the driven forces that enable these phenomena to emerge, or, why on this planet a certain number of people are doomed to believe, engage, fight for, and victimized by such pathological ideologies?

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 245

3:30pm

Dynamics as Demarcation
2762 Like science, systems faces a demarcation problem. How might one specify what counts or doesn’t count as systemic thinking and practice? In this exploratory talk, I will review distinctions that others have drawn, and then describe a framework for understanding dynamics as a basis of distinction. This dynamics-as-demarcation approach has several advantages, including: illuminating various ways that systems thinking and practice have been described, historically and currently, and affording a “sweeping in” from across relevant academic fields of study and practice. A particular advantage of a dynamics-as-demarcation approach is the way in which it can be used to inform understandings of purposeful social change.

Chairs
avatar for David Rousseau

David Rousseau

Founder & Managing Director, Centre for Systems Philosophy
SIG Chair: Research Towards a General Theory of SystemsSIG Chair: Systems Philosophy Dr. David Rousseau is the Founder and Managing Director of the Centre for Systems Philosophy, which promotes the use of Systems Philosophy as a methodology for addressing problems that require both... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 200

3:30pm

Managing for the Health of Coupled Human and Natural Systems at the Watershed Scale
2800 Within all watersheds, ecosystem health is intrinsically linked to human health. The pathways of this coupling are multiple, diffuse and interacting. For example, the percentage of canopy cover in a given area is an indicator of both human and watershed health; more shade lowers surrounding temperature and helps to reduce rates of heat stress and skin cancer caused by sun exposure, and treed areas mitigate rainfall runoff, assist water infiltration and reduce risks of flooding. A recent study in Toronto found that having ten more trees on streets had a health impact equivalent to being seven years younger. To understand and manage such relationships requires an approach that appreciates the complex coupling of human and natural systems. The work we describe in this paper demonstrates an ecosystem approach to human health and well-being (a.k.a. an ecohealth approach) at the watershed scale. To explore the extent to which watershed governance agencies activity manage for both ecosystem and human health, we drew upon the Watershed Governance Prism to develop case studies and inform a self-assessment of five watershed governance organizations (the Fraser Basin Council, Cowichan Watershed Board, Save Our Seine Environment Inc., Otonabee Region Conservation Authority and Lake Simcoe and Region Conservation Authority). Through this work, we identified the need for a more strategic approach to watershed governance that actively seeks linkages with public health institutions to meet goals that are common to both the health and environment sectors. We found that watershed organizations’ programs affect the social and environmental determinants of health at multiple spatial and organizational scales, but awareness and indicators of the potential benefits are underdeveloped and poorly conceptualized. Stepping out from this study, researchers at York University and the Credit Valley Conservation Authority have collaborated on a project that seeks to understand and communicate the relationship among various watershed ecosystem components and human health and well-being. In the first phase of this project, we surveyed residents within the Credit River watershed about their perceptions of the connection(s) between their health and their surrounding environment, and we facilitated a workshop with governance stakeholders to identify key indicators of such relationships. Among our findings, we noted that some residents of the Credit River watershed understood that such fundamental relationships exist among the natural environment and their health. For example, many believed that places associated with water, such as streams and ponds, had a stronger effect on their health than other green spaces. We also found that older respondents had a greater appreciation of such connections than did younger respondents. Governance stakeholders identified several environmental indicators of health that would better communicate environment and health relationships. The top three were: percentage of canopy cover, access to green space, and percentage of impervious surfaces. We used this information in the design of an interactive web-based tool and geographic information system. This web-GIS displays provincial, regional, and municipal data related to the Credit River watershed, including indicators of health and descriptions of how they influence human health and well-being. It also includes a storytelling component that provides an opportunity for residents within the watershed to share personal experiences of their connection to the environment. The web-GIS is intended to educate the public about ecosystem services and their influence on people, and to demonstrate the impact of the work of Credit Valley Conservation not only on ecosystem health but also on human well-being. In the second phase of the project, we are further developing the web-GIS tool to support scenario planning for ecosystem and human health in the Credit River Watershed.

Chairs
avatar for Thomas Wong

Thomas Wong

SIG Chair: Health and Systems Thinking, Ancient Balance Medicine Education Centre
SIG Chair: Health and Systems ThinkingBachelor of Engineering with First Class Honours in ITBachelor of Traditional Chinese MedicineMaster of Engineering in TelecommunicationTherapist of Traditional Chinese Medicine Deep Tissue pain therapy (1991-now)Chair of Health and Systems Thinking... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 265

3:30pm

Opening the Field of Linguistic Design for Thrivability
2819 Language functions as a complex adaptive system. With time and circumstance, both its building blocks—the words that comprise it—and the guidelines according to which those blocks can be arranged—its grammar—are subject to evolution. Perhaps because it is often considered a function of culture, the question of how such linguistic evolution might be acted upon with intention is rarely considered. Yet language is no more a function of culture than culture of language. The two act interdependent and interdeterminant. And the manner in which disparate elements such as academic developments, political correctness, and pop culture drive linguistic change is both uncoordinated and acting on relatively weak leverage points. The foundational concern of this paper will be the ways in which the structures of language affect human behavior. It will employ existing research from the field of comparative economics to suggest the importance of approaching linguistic evolution from an idealized design perspective arguing that sustainability and thrivability are outcomes which, to be realized, must be supported by the language employed in their pursuit. Though this paper will, to some extent, address the role of neologisms in linguistic evolution, its focus will be on the more foundational aspects of language—on grammatical structures such as verb tense, possessives, pronouns, and article usage—and the behaviors they most readily facilitate. Just as a systems approach to organizational behavior must look beneath events and patterns for the structures and mental models that underlie them, this paper is intended to serve as the starting point of large scale inquiry into the mental models that are embedded in the linguistic structures of English and how they might be altered to better support human wellness. As the first global language, English is not only a convenient central test case for the inquiries of this paper, it is also an impactful one. In investigating the structures of English and the mental models they embody, the field of comparative linguistics will be pertinent providing points of comparison from other languages. By seeing what variations of language have evolved elsewhere, the project of envisioning an idealized version of English will provide itself with a range of possibilities upon which to draw. In that language is adaptive and contextual, it will not be possible for this paper to prescribe a final version of what is being proposed. Rather, the goals of the paper will be to propose the importance of this design question alongside suggestions about possible directions responses to it might take. In that its central argument will be that linguistic design is a field to which time and effort should be dedicated, this paper will also have to address the question of whether the changes proposed are realistic. In arguing that they are, evidence of how this approach has already been successfully employed and a summary description of how existing resources and networks might be employed in its realization will be presented.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 1B55

3:30pm

Patterns that Connect: Exploring the Potential of Patterns and Pattern Languages in Systemic Interventions towards Realizing Sustainable Futures
2778 “On each continent and in each nation one can find creative bubbling, a multitude of political initiatives in the direction of economic, social, political, cognitive, educational, ethical or existential regeneration. But everything that must be connected is yet dispersed, fragmented, separated. These initiatives are not aware of each other, no institution enumerates them, and no one is familiar with them. They are nonetheless the breeding stock for the future. It is now a matter of recognizing, aggregating, enlisting them in order to open up transformational paths. These multiple paths, jointly developing, will intermesh to form a new Path which will decompose the path we are following, and which will guide us toward the still invisible and inconceivable metamorphosis.” (Morin, 2011, p34) Working towards more sustainable systems is a critical endeavor of the 21st century requiring collaborative efforts for the broad development of systemic literacy. This paper explores the potential of patterns and pattern languages as tools for systemic change and transdisciplinary collaboration, investigation and design, and outlines the ways they could be further operationalized to develop and leverage collective intelligence and agency towards Curating the Emergence of Thrivability and Realizing Sustainable Futures in Socio-Ecological Systems. Considering patterns and pattern languages, social organization, and systemic change from a variety of perspectives, the author suggests that the concept of pattern has an unfulfilled potential as cognitive technology for meaning-making, mediation, systemic configuration and exchange of knowledge, both within and across domains of human activity. In particular, patterns have properties that could help address the unity versus diversity dilemma while dealing with complex challenges. Rather than giving a complete theoretical review of the field of transdisciplinarity and systemic change, the paper sets key elements of the context and investigates possibilities and directions for future work. Starting with an outline of the nature and dimensions of the complexity challenges the world is faced with from a systemic and cybernetic perspective, the paper explores the versatile properties and functions of patterns and shows how they could help conceive and develop a whole family of tools for systemic focus, interpretation and connectivity. Finally, it presents possibilities of applications of pattern-based approaches in transdisciplinary intervention contexts, using patterns as boundary objects to bring into focus different dimensions of complexity. Keywords: complex systems, patterns, pattern languages, systems literacy, critical systems thinking

Chairs
avatar for Dr. Alexander Laszlo

Dr. Alexander Laszlo

President, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
SIG Chair: Leadership and Systemic InnovationThe LaSI SIG focuses on the formal area of research related to the theme of systemic innovation. As a place where change leaders and change makers team up with systems scientists to co-create impactful innovations, it aims to catalyze action... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 1B51

4:00pm

Analogical Reasoning on Creation
2892 People get empirical knowledge through experience. It makes people being available to imagine something and reason several possible-world which could be happened in the future. Here are differences between knowledge by education and knowledge by experience. Empirical knowledge is not for reaching a certain answer what is required at education. This is useful when we need to have multi-answers and making a response to unpredictable objects. To experience world is meant that something interacts with objects and subjects with cognition. This zone could be called ‘the field where cognition and act coexist’. Furthermore, if we start to concern relations between cognition and act, the following questions are arisen “how to transfer feeling by body to perception in which is cognition part?” and “how people have utilized those abilities in real world?”. I focus on creation process to the above questions. In creation, human would utilize their whole knowledge spontaneously. Thus it is produced by creativity which one of the most important abilities in creation, even though we don’t know where is creativity and what is it precisely. In this paper, I argue how analogical reasoning works between cognition and target object. I discuss possible way how this research reaches to enhance creations in creativity way.

Chairs
avatar for Dr. Alexander Laszlo

Dr. Alexander Laszlo

President, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
SIG Chair: Leadership and Systemic InnovationThe LaSI SIG focuses on the formal area of research related to the theme of systemic innovation. As a place where change leaders and change makers team up with systems scientists to co-create impactful innovations, it aims to catalyze action... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 1B51

4:00pm

Architectural Parallels Between Biological and Engineered Solutions in Defence and Security €“ Adaption, Anticipation, and Sustainment.
2813 Bio-mimetics have often provided a useful means of inspiration for engineering design – for instance in fabrication of materials for aerospace. One more recent area of interest, from the perspective of cyber security has been in the remarkable ability of the immune system to cope with the diversity and evolution of threats such as bacteria and viruses. The focus of this presentation is to further examine the architectural parallels between biological systems and engineered solutions in defence and security. Systems thinking and modelling are the tools utilized in examining the architectures and the capabilities of the biological systems such as anticipatory, adaptability and sustainability. In performing such an examination it is anticipated that insight and potential improvements may be found in both directions – improvements in our approaches to combat complex disease and also possible inspiration in the science, architectures and designs for our sustainable systems.

Chairs
avatar for Thomas Wong

Thomas Wong

SIG Chair: Health and Systems Thinking, Ancient Balance Medicine Education Centre
SIG Chair: Health and Systems ThinkingBachelor of Engineering with First Class Honours in ITBachelor of Traditional Chinese MedicineMaster of Engineering in TelecommunicationTherapist of Traditional Chinese Medicine Deep Tissue pain therapy (1991-now)Chair of Health and Systems Thinking... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 265

4:00pm

Bringing Forth the Ecological Economy
2884 This paper looks at the development of Ecological Economic theory through the lens of second-order cybernetics. Ecological Economics aims to integrate Ecological and Economic disciplines while maintaining their distinction. This is required for the concept of “scale” which relates the size of the ecosystem with the size of the economy. Beyond the dynamic and complicated nature of these systems; this task is also conceptually difficult. How can the ecosystem be part of the economy but also distinct from it? How can the economic system be part of the ecosystem and also distinct? Which is the correct framing? While Ecological Economics was conceived in the era of “open systems” and “sub-systems”, second order systems theory may shed light on the paradoxes which naturally arise from this perspective. As second-order systems theory would suggest, this fundamental paradox of observation results in a circularity. This circularity can be illustrated by attempts within Ecological Economics to generate definitions of sustainability; most notoriously through valuation of ecosystem services but also within alternative social and ecologically based models. This yields a tension between a desire for objectivity and submission to relativity. Thus, authors within the field are calling for clarity regarding ontological and epistemological commitments. Second-order systems theory operates within this territory even if it does so on its own terms. By embracing this circularity with second-order cybernetics, a few possibilities open up. Primarily, it is my interest that the “organization” of the Ecological Economy be considered; such that the diversity of activities which considered within the domain of Ecological Economics become coordinated. As a student of both Ecological Economics and systems theory, I have been fascinated by the ongoing efforts within Ecological Economics to construct a perspective. This offers a great example of recursive cybernetics with natural tensions between variety and order.

Chairs
avatar for David Rousseau

David Rousseau

Founder & Managing Director, Centre for Systems Philosophy
SIG Chair: Research Towards a General Theory of SystemsSIG Chair: Systems Philosophy Dr. David Rousseau is the Founder and Managing Director of the Centre for Systems Philosophy, which promotes the use of Systems Philosophy as a methodology for addressing problems that require both... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 200

4:00pm

Evolution of Supply Chain Management Towards Green Supply Chain Management: Drivers and Their Impact
2872 Historically, the evolution of supply chain management passed in four stages: the physical distribution management (1960s); the logistics management (1970s-1980s), the SCM (1980s-1990s) and the Green Supply chain Management (1990- Till now). Green supply chain management (GSCM) integrates environmental thinking into supply chain management; from conceptual product design to the delivery of final product to the consumers, and also involves end-of-life management. The implementation of GSCM is supported by few factors which are known as GSCM drivers. The aim of this paper is to study the state of green supply chain in the Lebanese food industry and investigate focally on the drivers affecting GSCM. To approach this investigation, we selected four companies due to their size in the Lebanese food industry.

Chairs
avatar for Gerhard Chroust

Gerhard Chroust

Prof. Emeritus, Systems Engineering, Johannes Kepler Univ. Linz
Gerhard Chroust is an Austrian systems scientist, and Professor Emeritus for Systems Engineering and Automationat the Institute of System Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University of Linz, Austria. Chroust is an authority in the fields of formal programming languages and interdisciplinary... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 245

4:00pm

How to Design All Together? The Triple Bottom Line
2833 Business´ owners want their enterprises are profitable, and that profits stay forever. In other words, they want business economic and financially sustainable. Citizens want business socially responsible, and also environmentally careful, and contribute to recover it. The liquid societies (Bauman, 2000) create and destroy markets very quickly, and shareholders demand CEOs adapts their enterprises to those changes, maintaining profitable. Corruption scandals promote strong society claims, demand ethic behaviors. There are more sights about the environment. Paris signature authorities tell “these are not enough” (Paris Climate Agreement, 2016). There are theoretical papers about each of these aspects, but there aren’t a holistic view trying to find systemic answers. How have enterprises that are simultaneously sustainable, ethically behavior in all domains, and environmentally responsible: Are enough to choose a CEO who can make the triple goals? Can move the enterprise with a consulting work to the triple ends? Must promulgate laws, with strong penalties, to force enterprises to obtain the triple line? Is it necessary to (re-) design the enterprise to put on the way to the triple results? The first three questions are not enough. To choose a CEO with those capabilities is possible only for a few numbers of organizations, if it is possible. Consulting is, by definition, limited in time, and it needs a corporation’s behavior for the entire life. And if we have laws about, they cannot explain how to do it. It’s necessary that ALL the company, their members and all around collaborate and coordinate to have a chance to arrive. In recent times there are proposals to a new way of enterprises, with linked profit business with social impact and environment, call hybrid organizations. They try to generate at the same time, economic, social and environmental value (triple bottom line). Combine the current concepts of sustainability and systemic impact on all the dimensions requires a new design. In general, it is observed that the treatment of comprehensive way concerned is omitted. It focuses from one or another aspect, emphasis on certain features, but not about taking the overall design, which makes it difficult to appear companies at the same time achieve sustainability on all fronts. Those that exist are shown as successful examples, but is veiled how they succeeded, and the small number shown not allow inferring a viable design. It is about advancing the design companies that meet all requirements and work in line with the systemic dimensions that define Sustainability. Design tools and business models wide target. How to design organizations broad objectives that are sustainable from economic, social and environmental perspective, taking into account its surroundings and prospects? Cybernetic models available, such as VSM, systemic tools developed in recent decades, as models of Ackoff, Ulrich, Jackson, Checkland, Bosch, among others, suggest that counted with enough devices to address the design of this new type of companies. It is necessary to consider the behaviors of businessmen, culture and expectations, since what is being proposed are, to some extent, a Copernican shift in the way of acting and directing companies. It is necessary to consider that it will be necessary not only explain the design, especially its possible results and advantages compared to traditional. Today, when Millennium Development Goals post 2015 seeking simultaneously to defeat the scourge of poverty, and lead humanity to sustainable development, we must make all the productive forces in each place are aligned to work simultaneously on all fronts: economic, social, environmental, etc. This requires having previously developed academic responses, otherwise treated no objectives or goals but mere wishful thinking. Perhaps this is a small step in the right direction.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 1B55

4:00pm

Positive Systems Science: Using Positive Psychology to bring Systems Science to Life
2777 This paper introduces Positive Systems Science (PSS), which combines the strength-based lens of positive psychology with the holistic lens of system science, with the ultimate goal of bringing about desired systems change that supports the well-being of living systems. Systems science is an interdisciplinary field that studies the nature of systems—from simple to complex. Positive psychology aims to empirically understand and build wellbeing, resilience, and optimal function in individuals, organizations, and communities (Seligman & Csikzsentmihalyi, 2000). Like a pair of spectacles, each lens is valuable in and of itself, but we suggest that the synthesis of the two fields transcends the value of either one alone. Systems theory draws from diverse disciplines, including biology, sociology, ecology, engineering, computer science and philosophy. It enables interdisciplinary dialogue between autonomous areas as well as within the science itself. Although there are numerous approaches within systems science, they share three common aspects: 1)A desire to understand inter-relationships; 2)A commitment to multiple perspectives and 3)An awareness of boundaries (Williams & van’t Hof, 2014). Despite its successes and the potential of the science to address the complexity of real world problems, system science has never captured the attention of a wide audience. There is a vast literature on systems theory and methods that newcomers can feel overwhelmed, with nowhere to start. New users have to master a large number of theories, ideas and techniques and a subscription to a particular view of what system thinking is. Further, there is a lack of research on its practical application. In contrast, positive psychology has successfully engaged researchers, professionals, policy makers, and the general public, with scholarship in the field increasing by 410% of the past decade (Rusk & Waters, 2015). It provides scientific understanding of the human psyche and methods for affecting mindsets, motivations, and individual behaviors. We suggest that positive psychology adds value to systems thinking theory by emphasizing the importance of mindsets and motivations, and methods for shifting individual behaviour. Further, drawing on its strategies for connecting with various audiences, positive psychology can help make systems tools more useable, practical, and engaging. As an example, we demonstrate how a commonly used systems framework, Peter Senge’s ‘system archetypes’ can be adapted and strengthened by interpreting the archetypes from a positive lens. We will show how making tools more user friendly invites researchers from other disciplines, policy makers and practitioners to try on parts of the theory and benefit without having to master a large number of ideas and techniques before they can apply them in their work and life. Notably, the popularity of positive psychology has come at the cost of application going well beyond the science, with interventions and programs blindly implemented while ignoring the complex context in which people reside. Systems science challenges positive psychology to add sophistication to the methods and theories, which better captures real world experiences. Systems tools can take positive psychology to a deeper level that will have more sustainable impact. Thus, systems science and positive psychology both have strengths and weaknesses, and we suggest that the synthesis of the two perspectives will create frameworks, tools, and applications that are greater than either perspective alone. Such an approach does not simply identify and address existing problems, but generates pathways toward yet unimagined futures.

Chairs
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 151

4:30pm

Complementarist Approach to Categorize Different Stakeholders within Socio-Technical Systems
2895 Socio-technical systems is a systems approach to understanding complex systems when interactions between humans and technology are dominant. Thus, the term socio-technical relates to the relationship between complex human activity systems and the technical infrastructure that governs the nature of the system. Socio-technical systems typically have multiple stakeholders, either in charge of systemic development, governing the system, or being affected (directly or indirectly) by it. Thus, in order to understand a socio-technical system, it is important to understand the different roles the stakeholders have within the system of interest. This research contributes in providing a complementarist and pluralist approach in recognizing the roles of stakeholders within socio-technical systems and categorizing them by introducing a formative taxonomy flexible for any socio-technical system, dependent on its context and purpose. Critical systems thinking and boundary critique are utilized as a foundation for categorizing stakeholders, while the onion model along with soft system methodology are used to delineate the stratified spheres of influence each stakeholder category has on the system. Even though, the obligations vary across the different systems context and purposes, the proposed flexible approach is expected to be beneficial to system thinkers and analysts in realization, recognition and categorization of stakeholders within socio-technical systems.

Chairs
avatar for David Rousseau

David Rousseau

Founder & Managing Director, Centre for Systems Philosophy
SIG Chair: Research Towards a General Theory of SystemsSIG Chair: Systems Philosophy Dr. David Rousseau is the Founder and Managing Director of the Centre for Systems Philosophy, which promotes the use of Systems Philosophy as a methodology for addressing problems that require both... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 200

4:30pm

Developing a Theory of Systems Change Approach to Practice-Based Research in a Professional Public Health Doctoral Program
2921 At the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health, we are developing a distance learning doctoral program in public health (DrPH) focusing on adaptive leadership. Students complete dissertations, some explicitly using action research models, but all in support of the overarching program goal of developing practice based evidence for guiding systemic change. Core principles and skills embedded in our curriculum include systems thinking and systematic reflection. Dissertation research begins with building a problem statement for a “wicked” problem the student wishes to address, with associated initial action relevant broad research questions (how do we solve this problem?). We have required students to articulate their assumptions about what the problem is or might be and critically consider alternative ways of framing their problem statements, and have drawn from soft systems, systems dynamics, and Bob Williams’ syntheses of these and other systems traditions in doing so. As a next step, we require students to develop a conceptual framework and a visual representation of it that draws both from scholarly literature and from reflection on their practice experience. Identifying alternative ways of stating the problem does itself open up the exploration of more possibilities for solutions. Since, however, the ultimate goal of student scholarship is to contribute to solving a problem, not just stating it, developing the conceptual framework or model often involves describing a current state of affairs, selecting and specifying constructs or dimensions relevant to a description of this current state, as well as envisaging a more desirable future state and a pathway(s) to get to the future state from the current state. So there is a “theory of change,” or assumptions about what gets included in a description of the system, and how to get from point A to point B, that is at least implicit in the student’s model or conceptual framework, which we want to see made explicit. Furthermore, students need to develop, and operationalize (be able to apply to data collection and analysis) specific research questions investigating those pathways for change and/or refining the description of the current state. Thus far, not surprisingly, the results of research often include a re- or amended conceptualization of the model with which the student started, which can become the basis for action recommendations for change. In the more participatory action research options taken by some of the students, the student researcher is an active agent in those pathways for change, for instance acting as a developmental evaluator or facilitating community of practice discussions. In a “theory of change” approach one of the sources we draw from is evaluation methodology: evaluators from the Aspen Institute used the term in the 1990’s to discuss a participatory approach to evaluation that directed evaluators to facilitate discussions among stakeholders about what assumptions about how change happens they were bringing to a given intervention and, ideally, come to some consensus about this before finalizing a logic model for the intervention and relevant indicators. This has been further developed in evaluation circles via increasing critical attention paid to program logic and theory and intervention models. Another, more research-based approach to developing ‘theories of change,’ however, has to do with comparing the received ideas of the students as public health practitioners with what is supported in systems and social science literature. We would like to discuss with ISSS colleagues the implications of taking a “theory of change” approach to the development of conceptual frameworks and associated research questions as applied to the “wicked problems” our students select, and to that end will present some examples from our recent work with students.

Chairs
avatar for Shankar Sankaran

Shankar Sankaran

Professor, University of Technology Sydney
Vice President Research and Publications, International Society for the Systems Sciences.SIG Chair: Action Research (see below for information)Shankar Sankaran specialises in project management, systems thinking and action research. He is a Core Member of a UTS Research Centre on... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 151

4:30pm

Five Elements Systemic Healthcare Program for Physically Strong Emotionally Happy Mentally Kind Behaviorally Charitable and Spiritually Enlightened – Reuniting Nature and Humanity 五行養生法之修身健康、修心受樂、慈悲養性、修行為善、正見靈修、以體現天人合一。
2882 Systemic wishes for the Chinese New Year is the blessing to each other in China in the beginning of each year. According to the Five Aggregate Human Mind system developed by Buddha, our minds are composed of five systems. Systemic Healthcare should be about balancing each one of these systems, and balancing between the systems. The ultimate goal is to live healthily so that we can work and play and achieve our tasks in life. In this paper, we try to classify the Traditional Chinese healthcare therapies according to these five aggregates to help human to become physically strong, emotionally happy, mentally kind, behaviorally charitable, and spiritually enlightened. The basic essentials in life include clothing, food, housing and transportation. In the Confucian classic, one of the disciples once said “Food and sex are basic instincts of human beings”. The desire for food ensures the physical survival of oneself, and the instinct on sexual desire makes sure the continuation of the family, clan and race. In order to have a stable flow, better basic essentials are required. They are usually related to the following four-character blessing phrases. These desires stimulate the research into efficient and effective methods for good survival and continuity, and part of the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) Healthcare is about physical body healthcare. Here we will try to match it with the physical component of the Five Aggregate Human Mind System developed by Buddha. TCM healthcare can be divided into three different secret ingredients. The goal of emotional healthcare is to remain undisturbed by negative emotions thus falling into a vicious cycle. One should instead consistently concentrate on positive emotions, gradually and naturally resulting in the distillation of happy emotions and pleasant bodily sensations. Mental Healthcare aims to improve one’s habitual love and hate tendencies. We should eliminate feelings of jealousy for the rich and contempt for the poor. One should also forsake employing improper means purely to succeed. Nor should one selfishly seek pleasure at the expense of the feelings of others. In contrast we should develop our love towards the four pure characteristics in the teaching of Buddha, and relinquish the three evil toxic characteristics of human, namely craving, aversion and ignorance. The four pure characteristics can be simply understood as “unconditional love” towards others, mercy on the elderly and weak, sympathetic joy of sharing, and acceptance of the reality of life and human relations. Behavioral Healthcare is about our action, and we try to match it with the “Action Aggregate” of the Five Aggregate Human Mind system of the teaching of Buddha. Buddha divides the Action Aggregate into three different kinds, namely the bodily action, the verbal action and the mental intention action (brain wave? energy field?). The teachings of Buddha include: “Do not withhold an action because it will only do little good, and do not perform an action because it will only do little evil”. Therefore we should choose only charitable actions with goodwill. Only such actions could achieve the traditional Chinese wish of “Everyone embraced in one harmonious Qi”. The definition of being healthy by the World Health Organization, WHO, includes healthiness in three aspects, namely the physical, mental and “social”. Spiritual Healthcare is about the improvement of our in-born characteristics, possibly hidden in our physical DNA or our energetic “spirits” fields (Aura?). We now try to match this with the “Observation Aggregate” of the Five Aggregate Human Mind system in the teaching of Buddha. Here we must put our foundation in the fundamental teaching of Buddha in the “Four Nobel Truth”, guided especially by the “Right View” and “Right Thought” in the “Eight-Fold Nobel Path”, which is the fourth part of the Noble Truth.

Chairs
avatar for Thomas Wong

Thomas Wong

SIG Chair: Health and Systems Thinking, Ancient Balance Medicine Education Centre
SIG Chair: Health and Systems ThinkingBachelor of Engineering with First Class Honours in ITBachelor of Traditional Chinese MedicineMaster of Engineering in TelecommunicationTherapist of Traditional Chinese Medicine Deep Tissue pain therapy (1991-now)Chair of Health and Systems Thinking... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 265

4:30pm

Transnational Knowledge: Its Creation and Distribution Exploiting Entrepreneurship and Organisational Behaviour
2898 How can knowledge be created (incentivised) and distributed (shared socially) when it is what economists define as a public good - it is very expensive to produce, its use by any one person leaves no less for anyone else and it is generally difficult to sustain property rights over? In economic terms the marginal cost of distributing knowledge is zero and as marginal cost should equal price for optimality, price should be zero. Clearly if the price were zero there will be no incentive for anyone to produce it. So what is to be done? To charge for it on a per use basis is hard as it can be cheaply and costless transferred from one person to another. Despite this it is undoubtedly been made available in ever increasing quantities and quality. Universities were one traditional way of creating new knowledge in the public domain. These were supported out of general taxation or endowment and scholars working in them were expected to make their ideas available free to all who might be interested. Modern academic capitalism seeking to establish IPR in academically produced knowledge undermines that. These essence of creative advance in knowledge is that the ideas of all are available to all to do with what they will. If for commercial reasons sharing in this way may be undesirable and if it does not occur then a particular line of inquiry will be blocked of and in the longer term this could kill creativity.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 1B55

4:30pm

Unlimited Energy
2900 “We are gods in human bodies” Continuing on the line of the previous two abstracts : “Science and Spirituality” and “Thrive Human Beings” (Fabiana Crespo, ISSS conferences 2014 and 2015), where were considered that the human being is composed by mind, body and spirit. And if the human being is aware of the vital energy that can create, redirect and transform, he not only can heal, nourish and empower himself but also can use this energy for his projects and aims. Deeper in this sense, focused this paper on the wisdom that is hidden for most people: “The Alquimia”, as it is named in sacred books. Quantum Physics, Physics, Quantum Mechanics, Sacred Geometry, Mathematics, Numerology, Biology, Neuroscience and many other disciplines inter and intra related give us the evidence that we are a kind of “Gods in Human Bodies”. That is to say, we are capable to create the same powerful energy to perform whatever we want (miracles as God, for those religious people) within our limited bodies. Most of us -meanwhile we don’t develop our consciousness-, use to think in a local linear way. And Quantum Physics shows that the atoms exists in more than one places. In other words, an atom is spread out all over the place, is only in a particular place if a conscious observer decides to look at it. Quantum Mechanics describes parallel universes, parallel electrons. So, why many of us are using a local linear way to relate ourself instead of a multidimensional one? On the other hand, the rate the world is changing nowadays is exponential because of the new technologies, that have exponential formats: digitalized, in the language of the computers. So, why not “digitalize” human beings multidimensional way of thinking? Imagine the human being as a computer. Our brain is like a radio, receives and emits electromagnetic waves, as bioelectrical pulse frequency hertz. An EEG -electroencephalogram- can show this. We are like WIFI systems, we can perform wireless transmissions all the time. And instead of being local linear thinkers we can begin thinking in a exponential format. We can think as complex multidimensional holographic entities. And digitalize our related thoughts so as to grow in an exponential way, for human beings. Like a conscious point within the whole, the human being etheric energy body can behave as an unlimited spherical consciousness dot. Aware of the whole within it. What do you think would be the impact of this exponentials formats to relate the human being with the Universe?

Chairs
avatar for Dr. Alexander Laszlo

Dr. Alexander Laszlo

President, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
SIG Chair: Leadership and Systemic InnovationThe LaSI SIG focuses on the formal area of research related to the theme of systemic innovation. As a place where change leaders and change makers team up with systems scientists to co-create impactful innovations, it aims to catalyze action... Read More →

Tuesday July 26, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 1B51
 
Wednesday, July 27
 

3:30pm

System Wholeness and Unity In Diversity within ISSS
2905 System thinking is about seeing things as a whole, as unity. However the seeing could happen from different points of view according to their corresponding perspectives. As a result, there is a diversity of system thinking. This diversity provides the foundation to unite the different perspectives in order to advance to the next level of system thinking, the special systemic properties of the observers and decision makers. In this discussion panel, we present the Health and System Thinking from different perspectives, both theoretical and clinical, both microscopic and macroscopic, as well as both Eastern and Western. These include system thinking from Energy medicine, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Indian Ayurvedic Medicine, Micro-systemic environment of cancer cells, and Mathematical systemic view of acupuncture
 Coordinators: 1. Traditional Chinese Medicine: Thomas WONG 2. Energy medicine: Dr Dominique Surel https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-dominique-surel-2a081b
 Invited practitioners for in person or on video discussion: 1. Indian Ayurvedic Medicine by Dr. Shim 2. Micro-systemic environment of cancer cells by Gary Smith https://uk.linkedin.com/in/gary-smith-5338aa4 3. Mathematical systemic view of acupuncture by Kent Palmer https://www.linkedin.com/in/kent-palmer-95bb767

Each speaker will have a 5-10min talk about their work relating to health and system thinking. Then we will have discussions and questions concentrating on the theme of how “Unity in Diversity” may apply.


Wednesday July 27, 2016 3:30pm - Thursday July 21, 2016 5:00pm
ECCR 265
 
Thursday, July 28
 

1:30pm

Design for Social Innovation: Integrating the Theory and Practice of Action Research and Participatory Design for Organizational and Social Impact
2810 This paper explores the similarities, differences and potential synergy between action research, social systems design, and design thinking. As three distinct participatory approaches to systemic change with different origins and assumptions, the authors explore ways in which these approaches can converge for maximum social impact. Kurt Lewin is often referred as the originator of action research within the field of social psychology. In the late 1930s he created the foundation for organizational behaviour and introduced an interactive cycle of reflection, discussion, decision and action which empowered people affected by a problem to cooperate in its solution. Social systems design, as developed by Bela H. Banathy in the 1980s, is a disciplined future creating inquiry that synthesizes and grows from the soft systems science tradition. Its emphasis is in designing the ideal system through a values-driven dialogic process that engages stakeholders into an exploration of “what should be” rather than trying to fix the existing problems. Design thinking is a recent articulation of a similar way of thinking but with the intention of addressing the lack of creativity and innovation capacity in business corporations. Tim Brown coined the buzzword in 2009 and his design company, IDEO, became the leader is popularizing ‘human-centered design” for creative problem solving. Although there are differences in language, assumptions, and methodological approaches, these three participatory processes share the intention of involving people in the creation of new possibilities that will directly impact them. When looking at the complexity of social problems, it is becoming clear than trying to “fix” the current social systems is not sufficient to create a peaceful and sustainable culture. A systemic, future-oriented, and ideal-informed design orientation is necessary to innovate the evolution of human institutions. Education is one of those institutions that is ripe for radical redesign. Rather than continuing to prepare our youth for a broken socio-economic system that does not produce equity and is destroying the environment, we need to empower future generations to engage in a learning process that explores the edge between the known and unknown, and in the spirit of design, involves them in the design and experimentation of new possibilities. As part of the inquiry, the authors share insights, lessons and reflections from the experience of designing an alternative high school program. A group of stakeholders from a charter school in California engaged in the redesign of single subject classes to trans-disciplinary workshops, replacing grades with competency-based assessments such as digital badging, and incorporating deeper experiential learning throughout the high school curriculum. Designing a school in collaboration with the stakeholders was enlightening beyond developing pedagogical innovations customized for the community of learners. Concepts in human-centered design were critical to assist stakeholders, especially traditionally trained teachers, in embracing the systemic changes. Emotional challenges, such as anxiety and apprehension, were addressed through design-thinking principles, such as empathy. The authors learned how elements of each of the three methodologies of action research, social systems design and design thinking each contribute critical components in the process of creating systemic change. This paper explores the similarities, differences and potential synergy between action research, social systems design, and design thinking. As three distinct participatory approaches to systemic change with different origins and assumptions, the authors explore ways in which these approaches can converge for maximum social impact. Kurt Lewin is often referred as the originator of action research within the field of social psychology. In the late 1930s he created the foundation for organizational behaviour and introduced an interactive cycle of reflection, discussion, decision and action which empowered people affected by a problem to cooperate in its solution. Social systems design, as developed by Bela H. Banathy in the 1980s, is a disciplined future creating inquiry that synthesizes and grows from the soft systems science tradition. Its emphasis is in designing the ideal system through a values-driven dialogic process that engages stakeholders into an exploration of “what should be” rather than trying to fix the existing problems. Design thinking is a recent articulation of a similar way of thinking but with the intention of addressing the lack of creativity and innovation capacity in business corporations. Tim Brown coined the buzzword in 2009 and his design company, IDEO, became the leader is popularizing ‘human-centered design” for creative problem solving. Although there are differences in language, assumptions, and methodological approaches, these three participatory processes share the intention of involving people in the creation of new possibilities that will directly impact them. When looking at the complexity of social problems, it is becoming clear than trying to “fix” the current social systems is not sufficient to create a peaceful and sustainable culture. A systemic, future-oriented, and ideal-informed design orientation is necessary to innovate the evolution of human institutions. Education is one of those institutions that is ripe for radical redesign. Rather than continuing to prepare our youth for a broken socio-economic system that does not produce equity and is destroying the environment, we need to empower future generations to engage in a learning process that explores the edge between the known and unknown, and in the spirit of design, involves them in the design and experimentation of new possibilities. As part of the inquiry, the authors share insights, lessons and reflections from the experience of designing an alternative high school program. A group of stakeholders from a charter school in California engaged in the redesign of single subject classes to trans-disciplinary workshops, replacing grades with competency-based assessments such as digital badging, and incorporating deeper experiential learning throughout the high school curriculum. Designing a school in collaboration with the stakeholders was enlightening beyond developing pedagogical innovations customized for the community of learners. Concepts in human-centered design were critical to assist stakeholders, especially traditionally trained teachers, in embracing the systemic changes. Emotional challenges, such as anxiety and apprehension, were addressed through design-thinking principles, such as empathy. The authors learned how elements of each of the three methodologies of action research, social systems design and design thinking each contribute critical components in the process of creating systemic change.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 200

1:30pm

Post-Normal Science V Citizen Science: An Exploration of Custom and Practice
2860 We live in an age of complexity and complexity gives rise to uncertainty. Recognition of this, over 25 years ago, led to the suggestion of post-normal science which provides a method to support the explicit recognition and management of uncertainty. The suggestion of such a method, though, challenges the pre-eminent status of scientific knowledge and, as such, it is hardly likely to find support from scientists or the policy makers they advise who expect certainty and hard evidence. Hence it is not suprising to find there has not been a massive take-up of post-normal science. Yet, at the same time, another alternative form of science, citizen science, which also challenges the scientific establishment in suggesting that the interests of citizens should drive the research agenda, has grown signficantly. So, why has one achieved traction and the other not? In this paper, we look to address this question by exploring the custom and practice of both post normal science and citizen science.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Thursday July 28, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 265

1:30pm

Toward a Diagnosis of Viability of Small Manufacturing Enterprises. Case: Metal Mechanic Industry
2839 The purpose of this research is to determine, from the point of view of Systems Science, the weak organizational viability of Small Manufacturing Enterprises (SMEs) in order to advice how to raise its organizational and functional structure to face market complexity , for example attenuating the factors which affect the operation to early close enterprise . To achieve this end it were identified and ranked the most frequent factors that cause early closure of SMEs , these data were analyzed conceptually based on the Model of Viable Systems, defining a total of 30 ( thirty) elements that , empirically, provide the benchmarks for diagnosing and redesigning the organizational and functional operation of an SME in order to viable organization, that is, not only to maintain its existence but to transcend the variety of market. Keywords: Viability, SMEs, Viable System Model, Variety

Chairs
Thursday July 28, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 245

1:30pm

Transforming to Sustainable Futures: Learning From 45 Years of Systems Thinking In Practice Pedagogy
2870

Chairs
avatar for Professor Ockie Bosch

Professor Ockie Bosch

President, International Society for the Systems Sciences
Professor Ockie Bosch was born in Pretoria, South Africa. He first came to Australia in 1979 where he was an invited senior visiting scientist with the CSIRO in Alice Springs. After one year in Longreach (1989) he emigrated to New Zealand where he was offered a position with Landcare... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 1:30pm - 2:00pm
ECCR 151

1:30pm

Analysis of Global Quality Indicators in the National Polytechnic Institute, Mexico
2927 The public education of quality can mitigate educational differences between rich and poor families, according the report of United Nations about Human Development in 2014. The Human Development Index (HDI) is an index that measures the achievements of a country in three basic dimensions of human development: 1) A long and healthy Life, 2) Access to education and knowledge and 3) Dignified standard of life. The same report states that primary and secondary education worldwide remains at acceptable progress but in higher education levels there are large gaps between developed countries and those it in developing. Derived of policy national and institutional in education of Mexico, quality indicators involve various parameters within which highlighted, approval rating, the reproof rate and the desertion rate; although these rates are not the best way to measure the quality that exists in the process of educational training. It has been observed that ethics and responsibility of all stakeholders in the education system of this level have an influence unfavorably on the values presented by the mentioned parameters. This research attempts to find relation between educational performance and the behavior of the actors involved in the educational system; employing, a systemic methodology that allows us to evaluate the problem and contributing to the resolution of a holistically. Keyboards: Quality indicators, Educational Performance, Ethics, Responsibility.

Chairs
avatar for Professor Ockie Bosch

Professor Ockie Bosch

President, International Society for the Systems Sciences
Professor Ockie Bosch was born in Pretoria, South Africa. He first came to Australia in 1979 where he was an invited senior visiting scientist with the CSIRO in Alice Springs. After one year in Longreach (1989) he emigrated to New Zealand where he was offered a position with Landcare... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 1:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 245

2:00pm

A Systemic Approach of the Technological Innovation Process in Mexico
2841 Schumpeter points out that innovation is a dynamic force that causes the continuous transformation of social, institutional and economic structures which ensures a plausible quality of life of its inhabitants. Innovation is a complex process of interactions between different actors can be understood best as a system where different social and institutional agents interact and promote the innovation and the development of the countries. To try to understand the complexity of this process were studied 41 variables which were related through network analysis and it was found emergent properties that reveal that less than 10 % of the variables are relevant and there are political and social, this result was mainly in developing countries like Mexico which was analyzed from 1980 to 2015. The results also show that these actors found in systemic innovation process have hampered the efficiency of the process. Keywords: Systemic Approach, Innovation, Networks

Chairs
Thursday July 28, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 245

2:00pm

Engaging Partnership to Improve Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries
2966 The CSR concept as it exists does not capture the essence of the kind of partnership required by CSR in developing countries to make the needed impact. In the bid to make CSR more beneficial in addressing developing country needs, partnership among stakeholders has been advocated as the panacea for CSR. In an attempt to develop a suitable CSR partnership for developing countries therefore, the study analyzed some NGO/corporate partnerships and community/corporate partnerships currently being used for CSR delivery in Ghana. Benefits of the NGO/corporate partnership include the availability of expertise and funds for CSR projects while the community/corporate partnerships benefit from the close interaction between the key stakeholders and targeted funding from the MNCs. The major drawback of both partnerships is their inability to engage in CSR from a systems perspective thus excluding some key stakeholders, particularly the communities. The government of Ghana which is in a pivotal position for development has no clear polices regarding CSR implementation and rather plays an indirect role in facilitating CSR by granting licenses and approvals for development projects. While NGO/corporate partnership and community/corporate partnerships met some CSR needs they were not effective in delivering the CSR that Ghana and developing countries require. I therefore posit the community corporate partnership responsibility (CCPR), a three stage concept that recognizes the key role of partnership among stakeholders for meaningful and mutually beneficial outcomes. The CCPR process involves community pre-entry processes, community engagement processes, and the CSR implementation processes and activities. Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility; Partnership; Systems; Developing Countries; NGO/Corporate Partnerships; Community/Corporate Partnerships

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Speakers

Thursday July 28, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 265

2:00pm

Proposing Values and Practices for a Culture of Organizational Ingenuity: Hacking Systems Thinking to Pursue the Preposterous and Produce the Impossible
2812 What is the difference between people outside, or within, organizations that look at a problem with a lot of limits and see unusual and new possibilities, and those who look at a problem with a lot of limits and see no way out? How would an organization intentionally transform its worldview and its problem-solving practices to creatively reconsider its own structures, policies, and assumptions when solutions to key needs and complex problems are limited or prevented by institutional or resource constraints? Education, government, and business leaders agree that creativity and innovation are essential for future organizational success and even survival, yet leaders are often blinded by past policies, organizational goals, or assumptions about resources and systems relationships when faced with complex and changing problems. However, research suggests that there are qualitative differences between individuals, teams, and organizations that become cleverly, resourcefully innovative in the face of complex problems under constraints, and those who do not. The culture and practices that activate shrewd, transdisciplinary, and unconventional problem-solving in the face of resource limits and other constraints are associated with a familiar, but largely unexamined, concept called ingenuity. Most frequently, ingenuity has been used to describe innovative solutions that are surprisingly smart, unconventionally resourceful, and contextually superior, often completely changing an institution or social-technical culture. In this messy intersection where creative, innovative problem-solving is at once demanded and prevented, ingenuity is the human factor necessary to hack the hairball, to pursue the impossible by being willing to seek unconventional connections arising from diverse knowledge, skills, and perspectives; dialogue at the margins; resilience; imagination; creative and resourceful improvisation; and systems thinking. The culture and practices of organizational ingenuity integrate systems thinking into a framework designed to provoke the unconventional approaches to complex problems that produce exponentially better solutions for sustainable business and a sustainable world. As organizations develop broad-based cultures and capacities for ongoing innovation, there is a need to distinguish the concept and value of an innovation culture that integrates systems thinking and the resilient, empathetic, value-driven, collaborative, improvisational, diverse, counter-intuitive, paradoxical capacities of ingenuity. Keywords: systems thinking, innovative, business, resilience, human factor

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 2:00pm - 2:30pm
ECCR 200

2:30pm

Homeostats, Recursions and Time Scales: A Viable System Model Enquiry
2827 The Viable System Model is a broadly applicable organizational model originally developed by Stafford Beer in the steel industry and includes a number of homeostats, including the one between the attention to the present and to the future (the three/four homeostat monitored by System Five), the vertical authority/horizontal autonomy homeostat and the homeostat between the system (systems one/two and three). Also important are the many homeostats that connect the system with its present contractual and contextual environments and the ones oriented toward varying aspects of future time. The Viable System Model is recursive: that is that each system is embedded in a number of other more comprehensive subsystems ranging from authority relationships to community and regulatory ones. These are not authority relations in the strict sense as, although a community has standards and norms, and a regulatory body its rules, these apply primarily within strict boundaries or parameters. These homeostats and recursive relationships do not follow a normal ordinal pattern or straightforward time scale. A lower level of recursion may be (e.g. the ‘grass roots’ where the most far reaching potential innovations are explored while the more comprehensive level may be constrained to pursue mainly those ‘possible futures’ that are acceptable to the full range of their members. They may have shorter or longer feedback cycles and they may be working within frameworks that are anywhere from hundreds of years old to yesterday. This can and sometimes does lead to systems pathologies as well as new opportunities for integrated approaches. In this presentation, I will illustrate some of these homeostats and their implications for progress on environmental, social and organizational fronts. Keywords: Viable System Model, homeostasis, recursion, time scale

Chairs
Paper-Wshop

Thursday July 28, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 245

2:30pm

Outdoor Adolescent Rites of Passages: Theoretical Foundations, Contemporary Shortcomings, and the Emerging New Model
2788 The proposed presentation will present the theoretical findings of my master’s thesis, as well as their practical application to youth engagement programming around the world. The presentation will first outline a traditional rites of passage framework as it relates to community-based engagement of youth. Research from the fields of psychology, anthropology, experiential education, and systems dynamics will be presented to demonstrate the importance of such practices in healthy youth and community development. The challenges that contemporary outdoor youth engagement programs are encountering will be explored, highlighting the specific system obstacles they face in effective implementation. The presentation will progress to present a research backed, theoretical model for the development of community-based outdoor rites of passage programming. The proposed model involves active community mentorship networks, locally based preparation and reintegration of participants by community members, and self-directed adolescent design of rites of passage experiences. Lastly, I will discuss the practical application of this model in various youth engagement initiatives around the world. The audience will be engaged to both share their own outdoor rites of passage experiences, as well as contribute tangible additions to the emerging new model of community-based outdoor youth engagement. Future research on the relationship of such programming to asset building communities will be proposed and discussed at the end of the presentation.

Chairs
avatar for Professor Ockie Bosch

Professor Ockie Bosch

President, International Society for the Systems Sciences
Professor Ockie Bosch was born in Pretoria, South Africa. He first came to Australia in 1979 where he was an invited senior visiting scientist with the CSIRO in Alice Springs. After one year in Longreach (1989) he emigrated to New Zealand where he was offered a position with Landcare... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 151

2:30pm

Title: Collaboframework - A Framework for Sustaining Socio-Ecological Systems through Dialogical Knowledge and Action Space
2782 In this paper we discuss how socio-technical intervention in socio-ecological systems can increase understanding of burning issues that drives systems unstable and unbalanced. Using the challenge of drilling oil in the Yasuni National Park ecosystem in Ecuador and balancing it with the diversity of socio-cultural inhabitants in the ecosystem, we show how we can develop a space for evolution of mutual understanding of a CoI (Community of Interest) consisting of multiple system stakeholders and what mechanisms can help us in articulating concrete actions happening across different domains - ranging from scientific findings and publications all the way to artistic and emotional-engaging interventions, evolving in this way from mere transdisciplinary to rather holistic approach of solving complex socio-ecological problem. Paper presents outcomes of the pre-event, at-event, and post-event interventions at the workshop “Which data to look for? How to build thriving knowledge communities?“ related to the BunB conference. Our unique approach was to provide CollaboFramework (consisting of CollaboScience and CollaboArte socio-technical systems) that creates a dialogical space for mapping mutual fuzzy and multi-truth knowledge of known issues and guiding evolution of that initial knowledge through the set of dialogical interactions among stakeholders. CollaboFramework system is a novel approach that unites infrastructure for the collective-knowledge space with the set of socio-technical tools that incrementally evolve that collective-knowledge weaving. With CollaboFramework we recognize uniqueness and complexity of transdisciplinary dialogue of CoIs that aim solving wicked problems. We provide support for modeling personalized socio-technical processes governing each of those communities. Processes coordinate different components of CollaboFramework in the most efficient way for particular CoI and challenges it is facing at the moment. Processes guided with socio-psychological insights help CoIs to converge multidisciplinary knowledge into coherent and landscaped knowledge with the set of insights that will be capable of governing future actions and interventions in the problem-space, namely creating public media and artistic projects that will engage society and let all relevant stakeholders to be heard and recognized. In the future iterations of the CoI events, this will bring additional insights and start another iteration in the spiral of CollaboDialogue and calls for actions. In this paper we discuss how socio-technical intervention in socio-ecological systems can increase understanding of burning issues that drives systems unstable and unbalanced. Using the challenge of drilling oil in the Yasuni National Park ecosystem in Ecuador and balancing it with the diversity of socio-cultural inhabitants in the ecosystem, we show how we can develop a space for evolution of mutual understanding of a CoI (Community of Interest) consisting of multiple system stakeholders and what mechanisms can help us in articulating concrete actions happening across different domains - ranging from scientific findings and publications all the way to artistic and emotional-engaging interventions, evolving in this way from mere transdisciplinary to rather holistic approach of solving complex socio-ecological problem. Paper presents outcomes of the pre-event, at-event, and post-event interventions at the workshop “Which data to look for? How to build thriving knowledge communities?“ related to the BunB conference. Our unique approach was to provide CollaboFramework (consisting of CollaboScience and CollaboArte socio-technical systems) that creates a dialogical space for mapping mutual fuzzy and multi-truth knowledge of known issues and guiding evolution of that initial knowledge through the set of dialogical interactions among stakeholders. CollaboFramework system is a novel approach that unites infrastructure for the collective-knowledge space with the set of socio-technical tools that incrementally evolve that collective-knowledge weaving. With CollaboFramework we recognize uniqueness and complexity of transdisciplinary dialogue of CoIs that aim solving wicked problems. We provide support for modeling personalized socio-technical processes governing each of those communities. Processes coordinate different components of CollaboFramework in the most efficient way for particular CoI and challenges it is facing at the moment. Processes guided with socio-psychological insights help CoIs to converge multidisciplinary knowledge into coherent and landscaped knowledge with the set of insights that will be capable of governing future actions and interventions in the problem-space, namely creating public media and artistic projects that will engage society and let all relevant stakeholders to be heard and recognized. In the future iterations of the CoI events, this will bring additional insights and start another iteration in the spiral of CollaboDialogue and calls for actions.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Thursday July 28, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 265

2:30pm

Toxic Leadership in Context
2815 A sizeable body of research and literature is developing about toxic leadership and workplace bullying. Our earlier work found distinctions between tough bosses and true bullies in the workplace. A later study showed that military officers were able to clearly identify differences between hard but effective leaders and toxic leaders. That work was extended into the organizational climates which seem to promote toxic leaders and bullies. Other colleagues have explored potentials for changes in bullying behavior through executive coaching interventions, noting that some executives simply lack awareness of their behaviors, or the effects on those around them. The focus of this paper is the synthesis of earlier findings, to begin a more systemic understanding about the relationships between individual, organizational, and societal behaviors with respect to bullying and toxic leadership.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 2:30pm - 3:00pm
ECCR 200

3:30pm

A Framework for Understanding and Achieving Sustainability of Complex Systems
2737 This paper takes a systems approach to outlining a framework for the sustainability of complex systems. Complex systems have one or more functions that strongly interact with their environments, or meta-system in which they are embedded. The success of the system in interacting with its environment over an extended time frame depends on that system’s ability to regulate its activities, both internal and external so as to remain ‘fit’. The concept of fitness derives directly from the evolutionary theory of phenotypic traits and capabilities (behaviors) being selected for or against by the environment of the system. But it is generalized beyond the standard neoDarwinian biological process. The roles of adaptivity and evolvability and the mechanisms of a hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem in maintaining these are advanced as necessary conditions for achieving sustainability. An operational definition of sustainability is advanced along with a set of necessary conditions that must obtain in order for complex systems to achieve it. Several systemic dysfunctional conditions are explored to show how complex systems fail to achieve sustainability by failure of the hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem. Examples from several natural and human-built systems are used to demonstrate these conditions. Clarification of the meaning of complexity across a spectrum of system types is given. A definition of complexity based on hierarchical levels of organization is given to ground the discussion of the hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem and justify its necessity to achieve and maintain stable dynamics in unstable environments. The purposes and uses of this framework are discussed and examples provided. A brief description of the use of systems analysis to explore and discover functional and dysfunctional subsystems within the hierarchical cybernetic governance subsystem and how this might provide insights for the design of better performing subsystems is also provided. The paper concludes with a projection of the benefits of applying this methodology to the governance of the human social system (HSS).

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Thursday July 28, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 265

3:30pm

Creating Enduring Social Impact: A Model for Multi-Sector Transformational Change
2753 The nonprofit and public sectors are in the midst of a paradigm shift from addressing community concerns individually and competing with each other for existing funding to working collaboratively and thinking collectively across sectors to solve some of our most intractable social problems. This transition requires new approaches that challenge assumptions and generate new knowledge. Existing models for change, while theoretically sound, are difficult to adapt to multi-sector transformational change. Undertaking multi-sector transformational change is substantially different than the vast majority of change efforts that take place within a single organization, differing in scope, complexity, and leadership. This paper describes a new model specifically designed to address the unique needs of multi-sector change efforts. It is built on the theoretical framework of complexity science and complex adaptive systems, organization development, transformative and organizational learning, and multi-sector transformational change. Multi-sector transformational change efforts take place within highly complex systems, where stakeholders (components of the system) come together to do work that none of them can accomplish alone. This work requires participants to develop their adaptive capacity in response to a constantly changing environment where outcomes are uncertain and thus, cannot be planned for. Participants must also be capable of surfacing and challenging their own assumptions through transformative and organizational learning in order to create space for generative dialogue. These frameworks are essential to the success of multi-sector transformational change. The model consists of five phases: (1) discovery and dialogue; (2) deepening, refining, and assessing; (3) infrastructure, communication, and coordination; (4) ongoing implementation and progress reporting; and (5) learning, celebration, and sustainability. Phase 1 focuses on understanding current reality, identifying key stakeholders, building relationships, and creating a shared vision. Phase 2 continues to deepen and refine the work of Phase 1 while at the same time establishing a practice of reflection. Phase 3 initiates implementation and establishes feedback mechanisms. Phase 4 delves deep into implementation, launches feedback mechanisms, and looks ahead to sustainability. Phase 5 provides more formal evaluation of the project outcomes and processes and requires participants to decide whether the effort is completed or if it continues. These five phases represent a cycle that is designed to be iterative, building on new knowledge gained from the previous cycle. Aside from providing a new approach to multi-sector transformational change, the significance of this model is its adaptability and flexibility, with the caveat that certain critical processes not be omitted. Broad stakeholder representation is essential to mobilize and engage those who care about or are affected by the particular issue. Building strong relationships with those stakeholders, as well as sponsors, funders, and partner organizations, establishes robust connections that will serve to propel the project forward and reinforce the project during challenging periods. Identifying influential champions, those who reduce barriers, open doors, and make connections, provides the project with loyal advocates. Fully funding a facilitation, communication, and support organization enables organizational and community leaders to focus on the creation of new knowledge and provides a level of oversight that will maintain the momentum throughout the project. Developing the transformative learning capacity of all participants and weaving that together to create a learning organization will ensure that the wisdom of all participants is brought forth to understand the nuances of the issue and explore possibilities. These five processes provide the backbone for any multi-sector transformational change effort. Keywords: Multi-sector, Transformational Change, Transformative Learning, Organizational Learning, Complexity, Complex Adaptive Systems, Organization Development, Dialogue, Stakeholders

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 3:30pm - 4:00pm
ECCR 200

3:30pm

Mapping the Macro-Level for Interdisciplinary Decision Making - A Visual Framework and Method
2920 Universities are organized into disciplines, but most real world problems are interdisciplinary. Holistic conceptual models could help to overcome this fragmentation in our thinking and allow a more multi-perspective view of issues. When analyzing complex problems in business or politics, there are a wide range of micro- and macro-economic factors involved. One of the most often used concepts in business literature is the so called PESTEL framework (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, Legal) – some variations on this are PEST and PESTLE. The PESTEL framework is used for environmental scanning of risks and trends in strategic management. Despite its worldwide distribution there are known to be a couple of flaws with this framework. The selection of categories is questionable; the categories are often discussed in separate boxes and important interconnections between variables are lost. What is needed is a more systemic approach that does not cut complex issues into fragmented pieces but provides a more coherent picture. However it must still be easy and efficient to use in business practice. The goal of this current project is to build on the tradition of PESTEL but also to suggest some adjustments that would lift the concept up to new levels of analysis, application and visual representation. The new framework is the result of a cross-comparison of several dozen category frameworks used in business, politics and sustainability. The criteria for the development process and present version were a well-balanced selection of categories, practically useful for team work in the business context and beyond, and providing a better representation of important interconnections. The result is establishing a bridge between the PESTEL tradition and systems methods such as causal loop diagrams and thus allowing a more holistic view of complex issues. It allows visualizing global risks, megatrends or other topics of interest on the global or local level. Keywords: Problem solving, management, strategy, decision making, sustainable development, visualization, causal loop diagram, interdisciplinary, transdisciplinarity

Chairs
avatar for John Vodonick

John Vodonick

SIG Chair: Systemic Ethics, Exploratory Group: Business Systems Laboratory, Two Ravens Consulting
I teach, write and consult in the areas of corporate social responsibility, change management, organizational design and social ethics. Most organizations come to a place in their evolution when the needs of the stakeholders are not being met and if that continues to be the norm the... Read More →

Speakers

Thursday July 28, 2016 3:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 245

4:00pm

Systems Models of the Social Ecology of Traffic Safety to Analyze the Effectiveness of Interventions
2878 The study will inform the development of a systems model(s) of the social ecology of traffic safety to test intervention effectiveness in reducing motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths for the State of Texas by accomplishing the following three objectives: (1) analyze the traffic safety goals proposed in the Texas Department of Transportation’s Highway Safety Plan for 2016 from a systems perspective; (2) assess the applicability of different systems modeling methods suited to analyze the causal relationships and effectiveness of interventions; and, (3) develop preliminary recommendations for a systems model(s) of traffic integrating the conditions and relationships perpetuating motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, deaths, and their potential interventions. The study will provide the fields of traffic safety, bioinformatics, epidemiology, biostatistics, behavioral, human factors, and engineering research with a better understanding of the dynamics driving motor-vehicle crash injuries and deaths to (a) improve crash and injury outcomes and quality of life; (b) decrease spending and/or use of those that are ineffective and increase use of those that are; and, (c) increase understanding of the causes and the outcomes of motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths individually, socially, culturally, and economically. Collectively, this enables previously impracticable prevention efforts and is a novel way for assessing the effectiveness of different interventions aimed at reducing motor-vehicle-related morbidity and mortality. Systems approaches are capable of capturing the dynamic complexity inherent within traffic and social systems in ways traditional approaches cannot. This analysis will involve identifying suitable systems approaches for analyzing relationships between the traffic system and interventions, including traditional countermeasures to reduce crash and injury morbidity and mortality, such as Texas traffic policies and regulations for motor-vehicles (e.g., speed limits, licensing and educational requirements for motor-vehicle drivers, road geometry and material requirements, safety belt requirements; indicators of motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths (e.g., morbidity and mortality data for accidents that involve alcohol, drugs, intersections, large trucks, and pedestrians); and, proposed interventions for increasing the use of such practices (e.g., incentives driving use—or lack thereof—of motorcycle safety gear, monetary discounts for safety training programs). While policy makers, economists, and other constituents have proposed specific goals or targets to decrease motor vehicle injuries, crashes, and deaths, none have been tested using methods that capture the dynamic complexity of real-world social systems to not only understand how and why these problems occur, but also what are the best leverage points for change given the effect and cost of the proposed solutions. Accordingly, the systems model to be developed could be used to conduct virtual experiments to test whether the goals set in the Texas Department of Transportation’s Highway Safety Plan for 2016 would be better targeted at one or two specific populations or applied more generally across the state but respective to important social, policy, and environmental factors. If a targeted approach was to be used, the model could help identify which populations or environments exhibit initial conditions favoring adoption of a proposed intervention(s) and hence are the best targets for the intervention. Ultimately, the study seeks to create an optimal portfolio of motor-vehicle safety interventions for use by state and local governments to address the need for truly effective interventions to reduce motor-vehicle crash and injury morbidity and mortality. The model will fulfill a significant need within traffic safety, bioinformatics, epidemiology, biostatistics, behavioral, human factors, and engineering research, as it provides a novel way to assess proposed solutions for reducing motor-vehicle crashes, injuries, and deaths through a means capable of capturing dynamic interactions, adaptivity, and non-linearity inherent within traffic and social systems, that are less time-consuming, and far less costly than traditional approaches.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Thursday July 28, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 265

4:00pm

Transformative Learning Networks
2781 Learning networks combine multistakeholder collaboration with community-spanning interaction and exchange across sites and scales. They are inter-organizational voluntary collaboratives that support innovation and social learning to promote systemic change. Learning networks are often attempted in situations where existing institutional arrangements cannot address looming challenges, and change is thwarted by a combination of lack of capacity and a powerful status quo. The four learning networks we are examining address the challenges of ecological fire restoration, urban resilience, fostering adaptive capacity to climate change and other unprecedented challenges in developing countries, and the deep cultural divide between the academy and the public (also see our team website www.brugo.org). We will consider how these LNs increase capacity to transform complex adaptive systems in which they are embedded. Our definition of resilience is grounded in how collective action can purposefully reconfigure systemic relationships to promote a new and desired state. We will explore how learning networks can balance the autonomy that individual organizations and communities require with the cohesion required to catalyze transformative change in policy and institutions operating at higher spatial/temporal/organizational scales. Different kinds of learning take place at each of different network levels – it is the effective interweaving of these heterogeneous interactions that fosters transformative capacity. Learning networks are bridging organizations: they form a bridge between different ways of knowing in communities and organizations, and they bridge to alternative futures by fostering innovation. Learning networks disrupt old habits and foster new collaborative relationships, reinforcing participants’ shared ties and purpose while providing freedom to experiment with innovative approaches. Learning networks rely on effective design and ongoing facilitation to function effectively. Network facilitators or “netweavers” may be formally identified or may emerge from among network participants. These netweavers collaborate with participants in identifying goals and an effective network topology and infrastructure. Netweavers initiate activities that build community and promote a shared identity that provides the foundation for common practice and purpose. Ties within the network deepen over time as participants identify collaborative solutions. We will explore these features by drawing insights from the origin, design and netweaving of our four learning networks. We will show how effective learning networks possess a loose, light structure that allows them to learn and adapt as their membership becomes more confident and experienced, as new needs and opportunities are recognized, and as resources and institutional support require. We will also consider how network design is cross-scalar, combining interpersonal and group collaboration with network-spanning interaction and exchange. Finally, we will reflect on how networks foster transformative capacity, an idea that is both conceptually subtle and difficult to detect over the short timescale of our fieldwork. To the extent possible, our work is conducted by our being embedded in network leadership teams and actively participating in ongoing discussion about the network design and facilitation. We will also discuss how participatory action research and developmental evaluation frameworks enable this balance between participation and analytical engagement.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 4:00pm - 4:30pm
ECCR 200

4:30pm

Opportunity Tension at the Center of Sustainable Organization: Positive Organizational Scholarship and Generative Emergence
2786 It is widely understood that the complexity of the challenges we face globally and locally in this increasingly interdependent and VUCA world require our collective intelligence to create emergent adaptive approaches that sustain. Benyamin Lichtenstein has developed a framework for emergence that synthesizes previous scholarship and has gone further to identify the concept of “opportunity tension” that is at the core of the individual and collective entrepreneurial spirit that can create generative emergent social structures through acts precipitating sufficient disequilibrium in a system. Opportunity tension combines the extensive entrepreneurial literatures of both opportunity and motivation. This paper posits the critical and pivotal nature of opportunity tension as a driver of emergence. Five factors are identified that contribute to a nonlinear increase in the sense of opportunity tension. 1) The sense of opportunity tension perceived by those involved is expanded in a mutually reinforcing way as participants bring their capital (physical, human, social, cultural) to the endeavor. The more capital, the more opportunity surface is exposed. 2) Positive organizational behaviors (positive emotions, high-quality connections, enhanced knowledge creation, positive human traits, etc.) are mutually reinforcing and are consistently associates with positive outcomes in groups. They are attractive and inherently motivate participation. 3) Mutual reinforcement creates an upward spiral (nonlinear) sense of increased opportunity 4) All of these factors operate from the micro to the meso to the macro creating a web of reinforcing forces across scale and across units of analysis. This cross-hierarchical web becomes a powerful driver of cross scale action and cross-scale disequilibrium. 5) Emergence manifests across scale as a result contributing to a rising tide effect. The evidence for this deepening theory of opportunity tension comes from very extensive literatures in positive organizational scholarship, recent frameworks for types of emergence, and a developing body of thought around complexity leadership. The paper draws together these bodies of literature and the empirical evidence to create a richer theory of generative emergence of collective social structure from individual intention and sense of opportunity. Understanding this process is critical to developing organizations that use positive organization behaviors grounded in a relational calculus of organization as organism rather than organization as machine.

Chairs
avatar for Louis Klein

Louis Klein

SIG Chair: Organizational Transformation and Social Change, louis.klein@segroup.de
Vice President Conferences (2015), International Society for the Systems Sciences SIG Chair:    Systems Applications in Business and Industry SIG Chair:    Organizational Transformation and Social ChangeLouis Klein is an internationally recognized expert in the field of systemic... Read More →

Thursday July 28, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 200

4:30pm

The Need for a General Systems Transdisciplinarity to Solve Serious Systemic Challenges facing Present-Day Socio-Ecological and Socio-Technological Systems
2918 Based on the concrete request of the European Commission (EC) for Mobility and Transport to support the cabinet in political decision processes as Special Advisor the author will elaborate in his contribution the need for and potential advantages of a General Systems Transdisciplinarity to solve serious systemic challenges facing one particular socio-ecological and socio-technological system. The EC for Mobility and Transport has announced its political agenda “A roadmap to a single European Transport Area towards a competitive and resource-efficient transport system” in 2011 and set the goals to foster further economic growth and job creation while anticipating resource and environmental constraints, e.g. drastically reduce world greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with the goal of limiting climate change, supporting the development of innovative sustainable transport systems. Growing transport and supporting mobility while reaching the 60 % emission reduction target seems to be contradictory. But the EC strongly assumes that through optimising the performance of multimodal logistic chains, including by making greater use of more energy-efficient modes and through increasing the efficiency of transport and of infrastructure use with information systems and market-based incentives the systemic challenge can be unravelled. As this endeavour addresses multiple layers, multi-stakeholder, and cross-sectoral systems the EC called for a solid systems model to support and guide their political decisions and actions. Large scale technological and social behavioural changes are needed resulting in technological and social innovations. The EC takes on the responsibility of an active enabler of the emergent opportunities in the transport system through legislation and investments. Thus understanding the system and its emergent properties becomes a key success factor. The layers of the European transport eco system have been identified as Transport Infrastructure, Data, Applications, Service and Solutions, and Value Networks. But these layers are embedded in multi- and cross sectoral systems like the current inter-dependent political systems, economic systems, technological systems, environmental systems, social systems and cultural systems. Each of the systems can be addressed, analysed and through interventions possibly designed with different systems approaches, but we are today lacking the integration of these disciplinary grounded methodologies stemming out of and representing different schools of systems science in a sound transdisciplinary general systemology, bridging and enriching the disciplines like e.g. engineering, design, economics, and social sciences. The author assumes that through such real life complex challenges a most needed General Systems Transdisciplinarity can be put forward. The contribution is just one starting point, but a call for interested academic allies to co-create appropriate approaches to inform the development of a General Systems Transdisciplinarity for Discovery, Insight, and Innovation.

Chairs
avatar for Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

Mag. Stefan Blachfellner

SIG Chair: Socio-Ecological Systems and Design, Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science
https://about.me/bstefan

Thursday July 28, 2016 4:30pm - 5:00pm
ECCR 265