Loading…
#ISSS2016 Boulder has ended

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

ECCR 1B51 [clear filter]
Thursday, July 21
 

2:00pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51
 
Sunday, July 24
 

10:00am MDT

Systems Basics in Understanding System Wholeness 'Reuniting Nature and Humanity': The Oriental Systems Thinking In the Teaching of Buddha
2865 

Wholeness could be explained from an oriental point of view, but in the end it seems to coincide with modern western systems thinking. It starts from the concentration on the parts in Reductionistic thinking, to the concentration on wholeness in Systems thinking. The second step involved the combination of the observer and decision maker with the teaching of Buddha. Finally last step would be to investigate the structure of the environment.

The application of system theory requires the understanding of ourselves, each other, the nature,  the past and future possibilities in a systemic way. That is, we need to understand both the structure and dynamics of our physical body systems, and of our mental observers. Research shows that the composition of our body and that of our mind may be explained by the same system theory relating energy, matter, life and information. We employed this simple ancient system theory as taught by Buddha to investigate how our naturally systemic-structured mind artificially developed all this non-systemic and problematic thinkings.  We use our body to experience the world around us but our mind is the one who is observing and making the decisions to change the world. System theory sees the world composed of observers,decision makers, systems, the environment, the boundaries and the relationships among them. And there are two opposite forces in the world that constantly interacting with each other, creating the flow of energy, matter and information between systems and the environment. On one hand we have the disorder force governed by the second law of thermodynamics that drive everything into a equilibrium state with maximum entropy. On the other hand we have the organizational force governed by the constrains of a system that drive the system into a particular desired  steady state with a low entropy.
 
Our mind are both the observer and the decision maker with a major problem. Throughout our life we have been looking for satisfaction that brings happiness. Our government have been relying on economics to achieve this but 80% of the time we are dis-satisfied with the people and situations around us, bringing craving, aversion and ignorance into our minds and creating all sorts of problems in our society. This is called suffering in the teaching of Buddha, and he offered us with a three step solution for our mind. In this workshop we investigate the systemic view of these three steps namely self protection, concentration and purification of our mind. We also investigate a 10 days Vipassana mental healthcare program for people of all religions including scientific communities. It is believed such a program could bring happiness, peacefulness and harmony for our community. 

Death is the end of our lives or just the beginning of another new life? A system undergoes a transition of system state upon death, but will the system continue in other forms at other places? Or will it just terminate totally? What are the possible new system states and are they sustainable? In this workshop we will investigate the sustainability of Heaven, Hell, Earth and Nibbana (null). And we investigate the way to prepare ourselves to transit into these states.   

Speakers

Sunday July 24, 2016 10:00am - 12:00pm MDT
ECCR 1B51

2:00pm MDT

Systems Basics in Understanding System Wholeness 'Reuniting Nature and Humanity': The Oriental Systems Thinking In Traditional Chinese Medicine
2866

The systemic thinking of the unification of nature and man has been the fundamental concept in traditional Chinese culture since around 500BC. The concept is also embedded in the teaching of Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Traditional Chinese Medicine. The traditional Chinese system theories under investigation include the Taichi yin-yang system theory, the Five systems theory of the human mind, and the Traditional Chinese Medicine differential diagnosis-cure process. These theories are found to be related to different modern system theories compared including Viable system model.

Taichi yin-yang system theory describes the relationship between any two entities (element/process) at any level of interest. It concerns the quantitative and qualitative changes between the entities. This is related to causal loop diagram (CLD) in system dynamics which uses reinforcing loop and balancing loop. The observer is not specified in the theories, but the perspectives of the observer actually determine the entities, the unit of quantitative changes, and the ratio of qualitative changes.The Five systems theory of the human mind is one of the important concepts developed in the teaching of Buddha. The Five systems are: awareness, perspective, sensation, action and physical object. These five systems are able to describe the properties of the observer and the decision maker.

The Traditional Chinese Medicine differential diagnosis-cure process is a practical systemic process that has been used daily for more than 2000 years. It is believed that the whole macroscopic-microscopic spectrum of systems is suitable. The system state identification involves three pairs of direction-forming spectrums. The Superficial and Internal spectrum gathers information between the boundary and the system. The Cold and Hot spectrum gathers information between the form and function, or matter and energy within the system. The Deficient and Excess spectrum gathers information between the environment and the system. Strategy can then be formulated to regulate and maintain the system.

Keywords:
Reuniting Nature and Humanity, Buddhism, Causal loop diagram CLD, Confucianism, Five systems of human mind, General System Theory, Health and system thinking, quantitative and qualitative changes, Spirituality and Systems, System dynamics, Taichi Yin-Yang System Theory, Taoism, Buddha's teaching, Traditional Chinese Medicine differential diagnosis-cure process, Unification of nature and man, Viable system model VSM. 

Supporting Agencies:
Ancient Balance Medicine Research and Education Fund Foundation Ltd. 

Speakers

Sunday July 24, 2016 2:00pm - 5:00pm MDT
ECCR 1B51
 
Monday, July 25
 

1:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

2:00pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

2:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

3:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

4:00pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

4:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51
 
Tuesday, July 26
 

1:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

2:00pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

2:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

3:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

4:00pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51

4:30pm MDT

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 MDT
ECCR 1B51
 
Wednesday, July 27
 

1:30pm MDT

Workshop: Anticipatory Systems and Gender Dysphoria
2949  What is it like to be Trans-Gendered? Is it easier to comprehend through the Anticipatory Systems Lens of Robert Rosen's scientific work?In this dual presentation, we will explore these ideas and hopefully arrive at a much clearer understanding of what Gender Dysphoria is like to live with as well as a greater comprehension of what causes it, from a model-based, model-guided Systems Science perspective.Donna Rosen is a trans-gendered woman who has already undergone the process of transition and surgery that is currently the standard of medical care in the United States. She has written a book about her experiences and will share what it's like at the age of 3 to realize you are stuck in a strange situation that other people cannot see but you can't tell anybody about it, either.Judith Rosen will discuss Anticipatory Systems Theory and show how the human mind and body represent an evolutionary development as a dual-Anticipatory System in one living organism. The interaction between mental models and somatic models can often be dysfunctional, particularly when they are each defining the “self” in conflicting ways. Gender Dysphoria is precisely that situation.

Chairs
DR

Donna Rosen

Rosen Enterprises
avatar for Judith Rosen

Judith Rosen

CEO, Rosen Enterprises
SIG Co-Chair: Relational ScienceJudith Rosen is a writer, researcher, and artist who, through interaction with her father, the mathematial biologist Robert Rosen, has a comprehensive understanding of his scientific work. She traveled on numerous scientific trips with Robert Rosen... Read More →

Wednesday July 27, 2016 1:30pm - 3:00pm MDT
ECCR 1B51

3:30pm MDT

Workshop: Anticipatory Systems and Gender Dysphoria
2949  What is it like to be Trans-Gendered? Is it easier to comprehend through the Anticipatory Systems Lens of Robert Rosen's scientific work?In this dual presentation, we will explore these ideas and hopefully arrive at a much clearer understanding of what Gender Dysphoria is like to live with as well as a greater comprehension of what causes it, from a model-based, model-guided Systems Science perspective.Donna Rosen is a trans-gendered woman who has already undergone the process of transition and surgery that is currently the standard of medical care in the United States. She has written a book about her experiences and will share what it's like at the age of 3 to realize you are stuck in a strange situation that other people cannot see but you can't tell anybody about it, either.Judith Rosen will discuss Anticipatory Systems Theory and show how the human mind and body represent an evolutionary development as a dual-Anticipatory System in one living organism. The interaction between mental models and somatic models can often be dysfunctional, particularly when they are each defining the “self” in conflicting ways. Gender Dysphoria is precisely that situation.

Chairs
DR

Donna Rosen

Rosen Enterprises
avatar for Judith Rosen

Judith Rosen

CEO, Rosen Enterprises
SIG Co-Chair: Relational ScienceJudith Rosen is a writer, researcher, and artist who, through interaction with her father, the mathematial biologist Robert Rosen, has a comprehensive understanding of his scientific work. She traveled on numerous scientific trips with Robert Rosen... Read More →

Wednesday July 27, 2016 3:30pm - 5:00pm MDT
ECCR 1B51
 


Filter sessions
Apply filters to sessions.
  • Break
  • Discussion Panel
  • ISSS
  • #ISSS2016 India
  • #ISSS2016 USA
  • Keynote
  • Paper Presentation
  • Public Event
  • Q&A
  • Registration
  • Roundtable
  • Social
  • Special Event
  • Student Program
  • Theme
  • Workshop