So… what exactly is this thing called Systems Thinking?

Systems Thinking (ST) is another way of looking at problems. ST does not advocate for reductionist thinking, that is, reducing a problem to manageable parts in order to find solutions. Instead, ST advocates for holistic thinking, a way of looking at the whole problem and instead of seeking 'solutions', look at improving the situation. Of course, there must be a necessary shift in the way we think.

Rather than give a simple definition of ST, the principle behind the LJ is to reflect upon what you learn, review it at later dates and see how your thinking and learning has changed from the early days as you gain experience and knowledge. Note that in ST, "problems", "situations", "messes", "complexity" are synonymous with problematic issues that need to be improved or resolved. You will therefore find me using these terms frequently, but they all have similar meanings.

ST is especially suited for what is deemed 'messy situations', or complex problems, in which there are no easy answers. It involves setting a boundary – limiting your view to a particular aspect of the problem – in order to improve the situation. One has to be adaptable, ready to discard ideas that do not work, change and tweak those ideas that need it in order to progress. ST is therefore in constant flux.

ST also has other unique characteristics.

First, it does not pretend that a situation/problem exists on its own. It involves people, situations of interest (problems, messes and complexity) and interrelationships between them.

Second, the person doing the systems thinking – let us call him the systems practitioner (SP) – is a part of the situation. But this is only one perspective. Other people are involved (called stakeholders) and will have different perspectives, and part of ST is to acknowledge and give weight and consideration to those perspectives. This gives a more holistic view not only of how the situation is viewed, but also it affects other people. Traditional problem-solving methods leave the practitioner outside of the situation.

Third, the SP has the task to set the boundary, that is the limitation from which the situation will be viewed. Setting the boundary too big will take in unnecessary factors, whereas setting the boundary too small will ignore necessary factors.

Fourth, ST makes ample use of diagrams. Think of mind maps/concept maps. Diagramming a complex problem will simplify relevant factors as well as the relationships between them.

Fifth, ST takes into consideration the emotions and feelings of stakeholders, mindful that these are important drivers which affect situations of interest.

Sixth, ST involves active participation and collaboration. It is not helpful if stakeholders or the SP is recalcitrant or stubborn.