Doctoral Program in Leadership and Systemic Innovation

Systems Thinking:
Conceptual Tools for Social Change Agents

Alexander Laszlo
alaszlo@itba.edu.ar
Key Components of Systemic Innovation

✓ Systems Thinking
✓ Collective Intelligence
✓ Disruptive Innovation
✓ Design Thinking
✓ Empathy Based Learning
✓ Experimental Prototyping
Disruptive Innovation

uber.com
Design Thinking

image credit:
Shimon Shmueli
Connective Intelligence
 Connective Intelligence

• the ability to identify and establish feedback links with relevant and
leveragable information sources and enablers
– other human beings
– networks (social, virtual, socio-technical)
– specific ICT (information and communication technologies)
• the capability of enabling and empowering collective intelligence
through -
– creation of operational platforms that -
• enhanced collective decision taking
• improve collective action
• augment the intertwingling of inherent synergic potentials
Collective Intelligence
 Collective Intelligence
• The ability of a collective of information processing systems
(sentient or extra-somatic) to leverage dynamic information sources
(including itself) to attain higher levels of synergy among its socio-
technical components than could be easily attained by any of its
component parts independently.
Two forms: Weak CI and Strong CI
» The ability to harness the neural power of the human intellect in
order to augment human problem-solving capability through auto-
catalytic and cross-catalytic information loops that are measurable,
modelable and replicable = Weak CI
» The manifestation of an emergent level of consciousness that
expresses qualities of sentience arising at the level of the collective
in ways that are irreducible to the sentient behavior or expressions
of its members = Strong CI
9
 A Better Compass…

๏ As a society, we have to learn better how to

learn – I call it social learning; it is the dynamism
for change that could lead us to a new kind of
society that will not destroy itself from its own
excesses… for we must share a vision for a new
society before we can realize it. Designing a
better society and maintaining a good life require
deep thought and sustained effort by all of us.
Reasoning together is the only way we can bring
it about.
• Lester W. Milbrath – 1989
 A Historical View of 

Societal Evolution
Stage one Stage two Stage three Stage four Stage 5
hunting gathering agricultural society industrial society post-industrial society

half million years ten thousand years five hundred years fifty years
electronic
speech writing print
communication
communities regional/global
wandering tribes nation states
city-states societies
magico-myth logico-philosophical deterministic scientific systems
paradigm paradigm paradigm paradigm

survival technology fabricating technology machine technology intellectual technology

 Changing Worldviews

The OLD story The NEW story

World as machine Biomimicry
Hierarchy Networks
Money is value Life is value
Win or Lose Win-Win-Win
Systems Thinking
From Systems Thinking
to Systems Seeing
to Systems Feeling
to Systems Sensing
to Curating Emergence
Connected Intelligence
 The Next Stage of
the Systems Movement

• From Systems Thinking & Systems Practice

• To Systems
Consciousness &
Systems Being

Relational
Intelligence
Toward a Relational Intelligence
• Emotional Intelligence — Daniel Goleman
– Social Intelligence
• Ecological Intelligence
– Spiritual Intelligence — Dana Zohar

• Multiple Intelligences — Howard Gardner

– Naturalistic Intelligence (nature smarts)
– Musical Intelligence (musical smarts)
– Logical-Mathematical Intelligence (number/reasoning smarts)
– Existential Intelligence (being/knowing smarts)
– Interpersonal Intelligence (people smarts)
– Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence (body smarts)
– Linguistic Intelligence (word smarts)
– Intra-personal Intelligence (self smarts)
– Spatial Intelligence (picture smarts)
 Synthesis Pyramid of Meaning
S
y Reaches new
Enlightenment planes of
s - is transcendent consciousness

t
e Wisdom Requires
empathy
m - is valuative and is
normative
i Answers to ...
c Understanding - why?
... type questions
- is explanatory
Limits of Limits of
P Teaching Teaching
e
Knowledge
r - is instructive
Answers to ...
- how?
s - how to?
... type questions
p
Information
e - is descriptive
Answers to ...
- who?
c - what?
- when?
t - where?
- how many?
i Data ... type questions

v Elements of
information
e without context
"factoids"
Analysis
 Playing the Macro-Violin
๏ To describe his Theory U, Otto Scharmer quotes the
violinist Miha Pogacnik recounting the insight he gained
during his first concert in Chartres:

๏ I felt that the cathedral almost kicked me out. ‘Get out with
you!’ she said. For I was young and I tried to perform as I
always did: by just playing my violin. But then I realized that
in Chartres you actually cannot play your small violin, but
you have to play the ‘macro violin’. The small violin is the
instrument that is in your hands. The macro-violin is the
whole cathedral that surrounds you. The cathedral of
Chartres is built entirely according to musical principles.
Playing the macro violin requires you to listen and to play
from another place, from the periphery. You have to move
your listening and playing from within to beyond yourself.
 Knowledge Frameworks
• Experiential knowing – learning through direct experience.
Words, images or representations cannot be used to
convey this level of knowing.

• Presentational knowing – learning through creative

interpretation. The arts, literature, spiritual allegory are
effective vehicles for this level of knowing.

• Propositional knowing – learning through words, formal

concept, models and theories. Readings, lectures, writing
are at this level.

• Practical knowing – learning through doing, participating,

designing and engaging in different types of projects that
apply models, theories, and other forms of propositional
- from Heron & Reason, 1997
MindWalk
Seeing Systems
Defining “system”
• Ecosystem

• Digestive system

• Production system

• Computer system

• Solar system
Key Distinction: Set vs. System

System

Structured Set

Set
 System - defined
“A set of two or more interrelated elements with the following
properties:
1. Each element has an effect on the functioning of the whole.
2. Each element is affected by at least one other element
in the system.
3. All possible subgroups of elements also have
the first two properties.”
(Ackoff, Russell L. Creating the corporate future: Plan or
be planned for. New York: Wiley, 1981. Pp. 15-16.)

In short, a whole made up of interdependent components in

interaction is identified as a system.
“A system is less a thing than a pattern”
– Joanna Macy
 What is Systems Thinking?
Analysis Structure (identification of components)
Synthesis Function (identification of role)

Analysis Knowledge (answers to “how to” & “what” questions)

Synthesis Understanding (answers to “why” questions)

∴ in order to both know and understand

our environment, we must use
analysis and synthesis

analysis + synthesis = Systems Thinking

Ways of knowing
Ways of knowing
Describing an orange
Beyond Structural Constraints
The need for Systems Thinking
• Increasing interdependencies among
social, technological and
environmental systems
• Increasing power of technology to
shape our world
the
– for better unleashed power of
the atom has changed
everything …
– or for worse save our modes of
thinking,
and thus we drift
toward unparalleled
catastrophes
Systemic Interdependencies
 Influences on Modern GST

• Thales of Miletus (624 – 546 BCE)

• Nicholas of Cusa (1401 – 1464 ACE)
• Alfred North Whitehead (1861 – 1947 ACE)
• Aleksandr Bogdánov (1873 – 1928 ACE)
• Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901 – 1972 ACE)
 The
Systems Movement
• 1954 the modern-day Movement begins
– objective: to develop a humanly relevant science, capable of
addressing the pressing needs of a burgeoning humanity seemingly
plagued by increasing levels of complexity and interdependence.
– Founders of the Movement —
– Ludwig von Bertalanffy
– Anatol Rapoport
– Ralph Gerard
– Kenneth Boulding
– These four establish the Society for the Advancement of General Systems
Theory in 1954, which is renamed to the Society for General Systems
Research in 1956, with the collaboration of —
– James Grier Miller
– Margaret Mead
The Aims of GST according to von Bertalanffy
1. There is a general tendency toward integration in the
various sciences, natural and social.
2. Such integration seems to be centered in a general
theory of systems.
3. Such theory may be an important means for aiming at
exact theory in the nonphysical fields of science.
4. Developing unifying principles running "vertically"
through the universe of the individual sciences, this
theory brings us nearer the goal of the unity of science.
5. This can lead to a much-needed integration in scientific
education.
– von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Essays on its foundation
and development, rev. ed. New York: George Braziller, p. 38.
 General System Theory

Allgemeine Systemtheorie
• What it is:
– “A theory, not of systems of a more or less
special kind, but of universal principles applying
to systems in general”
» Von Bertalanffy, 1968

– The point is that there is a kind of theory

known as system theory, and there is a general
form of this theory: general system theory
 General System Theory

• What it is not:
– A theory that relates to several entities called
systems
– A theory of an entity called general system
– Theorie der algemeinene Systeme
• General Systems Theory
Boulding to Bertalanffy on humanities

I seem to have come to much the same conclusion as you

have reached, though approaching it from the direction of
economics and the social sciences rather than from biology
– that there is a body of what I have been calling “general
empirical theory,” or “general system theory” in your
excellent terminology, which is of wide applicability in many
different disciplines. I am sure there are many people all
over the world who have come to essentially the same
position that we have, but we are so widely scattered and
do not know each other, so difficult is it to cross the
boundaries of the disciplines.

– Letter from Kenneth Boulding to Ludwig von Bertalanffy in 1953.

 The shape of the systems movement
indicating the progressive development of particular theoretical branches
Relative interpretive power of two frameworks for sociocultural change

r
e
l GS T
e
v
e
n
c
e
PS T

t ime s c a le & g ro u p s iz e
 Systemic Possibilities
nature of the relationship between participants
unitary pluralist coercive
mechanical
nature of the system

Hard Systems
Thinking Soft Emancipatory
Systems Systems
Thinking Thinking

Organizations as
systemic

Systems

Organizational
Cybernetics

Critical Systems Thinking

after Mike C. Jackson

 Clusters of scientific approaches

Paradigms and types of New clusters of

scientific inquiry scientific approaches

functionalist + analytical scientist Natural Scientist

radical structuralist + conceptual General Theorist

theorist
radical humanist + conceptual Human Scientist
humanist
interpretative + particular Particular
humanist Humanist
Types of
scientific inquiry

based on Jung’s 

personality types
 Methods appropriate for types of inquiry

Arena Examples of Methods Natural Particular Human General

Scientist Humanist Scientist Theorist
Explanation naturalistic observation
experimentation
correlational method
survey
Understanding participant observation
interview
ethnography
case study
phenomenology
hermeneutics
Social Action evaluation research
heuristics
focus group
action research
systems methodologies
Integration spiritual inquiry (e.g. meditation)
complexity inquiry (e.g. systems dynamics)
 Four systemic stances for
humanistic and social studies

RADICAL CHANGE radical humanist radical structuralist

Nature of
Society
REGULATION interpretative functionalist

SUBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE

Nature of Social Science

 Taxonomy of systems

according to Boulding
• Type of systems • Examples
– Static structure – Framework
– Symple dynamic system – Mechanical clock
– Control mechanism or cybernetic system – Thermostat
– Open systems – Cell
– Genetic-societal systems – Plant
– Animal system – Dog
– Human system – Human being
– Social system – Family
– Transcendental systems – God
 Taxonomy of systems

according to Checkland

• Type of systems • Examples

– Natural systems – Atoms, planet Earth, animals,
galactic systems
– Designed physical systems – Hammers, trains, space ships,
sculptures
– Designed abstract systems – Mathematics, poetry,
philosophy
– Human activity systems – Orchestra, international
political system
– Transcendental systems – God, spirit/soul, paradise
 Core ideas
on Checkland Real World Conceptual World

1. Observe the unstructured

problem situation

2. Rich picture of the 3. Speculation on possible

problem situation solutions: root definitions
of the potential new system
(CATWOE)
5. Comparison
of steps 4 and 2

6. Feasible and
4. Development of models
desirable changes
of the potential new
systems: what they do

7. Implementation:
introducing the changes
 assessment of 1. Formulating
what is now the mess

Core ideas on Ackoff

through
system of problems

systems obstacles what would happen if

analysis things would not change?

2. Idealized design technological feasible

should
operationally viable
be
capable of rapid learning

“the most effective ideal-

shared vision of the future
seeking systems of which
designers can conceive”

Process:
1) selecting a mission
2) specifying properties of the design
3) designing the system

3. Design of the
management system that will 1) guide the new system
2) identify threats and opportunities
3) identy what and how to do it
4) maintain and improve performance
5) guide organizational learning

4. Implementation 1) selecting or creting the means by

planning which the ends can be pursued
2) defining and acquiring the
necessary resources
3) who is doing what, when, how, and
where
 The Three Cultures
Science Humanities Design

Focus The natural world The human experience The man-made world
Problem finding Understand the human Solution finding
Describe what “is” experience and portray it What “should be”

Primary Experimentation Analogy Modelling

Method Pattern recognition Metaphor Pattern formation
Analysis Criticism Synthesis
Classification Valuation Conjecture
Deduction Induction Abduction

What is Objectivity Subjectivity Practicality

Valued Rationality Imagination Creativity
Neutrality Commitment Empathy
Concern for “Truth” Concern for “Justice” Concern for “Goodness
of Fit”

after Bela H. Banathy

Scientific bases of ESD

Theory

Sciences
Human
of
Science
Complexity

Systems
Thinking

Philosophy Methodology
Epistemological Foundations of ESD
The ESD Journey
Evolutionary Praxis:
Catalyze evolutionary development

Evolutionary
Learning
Evolutionary
Community
Competence :
Ability to act

Evolutionary
Literacy: Life-long
Understanding the implications Evolutionary
Learning

Evolutionary
Consciousness:
Awareness of situation

51
 Emerging a Design Culture

Ty pe of Compe t e nc e

•
• ELC ecosystem
• Meta-ELC
Evolutionary ELC
DESIGN
• CULTURE
Design HAC

•
Learning how to learn Learning community
• Community
•
Human Activity System

E v olut iona ry s t a ge
 The Evolution of Community
level of complexity
Community
of Syntony

Evolutionary Learning
Community

Community
of Practice

Learning
Community

Healthy and Authentic

Community
Human Activity
time
System
B B B B B
 Systems Thinking Types
! Systems thinking An internalized manifestation (in
the thinking of individuals or social systems) of systems
concepts, systems principles, and systems models.
! Systematic thinking Any methodical step-by-step
approach that is carried out according to a pre-determined
algorithm or a fixed plan.
! Systemic thinking A tendency or natural
predisposition to think in terms of systemic relationships
without necessarily drawing upon systems concepts,
systems principles, or systems models. Some examples of
areas that incorporate and foster such thinking include
permaculture, feminist studies, ecology, and the I Ching.
Systems Dynamics
 Symptoma+c"
+" solu+on"

B""
+"

Symptom" 6" Collateral"Effect"

6" R"

B""

+"
Profound"
solu+on" 6"
Systems Thinking and Causality

• The common understanding of causality is that A causes B, B

causes C and C causes D. This describes a linear or sequential
relationship.

A B C D

• Such an understanding rarely takes into account the feedback

and the delays that almost always affect these relationships.
B

A C

D
Cyclical Components
Variable

Link between
variables
+

Levels of Actions that

Stress Relax
-

Direction of the link (– = opposite + = same)

 System Dynamics –
Feedback Cycles

Feedback cycles are the basic elements of a systemic

relationships. There are two basic types of feedback:

– Balancing Cycles
These cycles neutralize change;
they seek to maintain a state of equilibrium -
(they promote stability)

– Reinforcing Cycles
These cycles reinforce change; +
they seek to move out of a state of equilibrium
(they promote change)
 Types of Feedback Cycles

• A simple system may consist of a reinforcing cycle and a balancing

cycle.

+ -

• Sets of feedback cycles are the building blocks of systems that have
interdependent dynamics; these comprise more complex systems.

+ + -

- -
Example of positive
feedback;

chickens
eggs chickens
R
eggs
+

time
Example of negative
feedback;

chickens road road

B
crossings crossings
-
chickens

time
The dynamic structure of
multiple feedback cycles

+
+

chickens road
eggs R B
crossings
+ -
Archetypes

• Recurrent systemic structures

• Generalized tendencies
• Exemplify different types of problems
• Found in various kinds of environments
• Useful for identifying the systemic
structure of problems and for finding
solutions to them.
Fixes that Fail

+
Quick
Symptom B Fix
-
+

R
+
Undesirable
Outcome
Shifting the Burden
Symptomatic
+
Solution

+
Collateral
Symptom - R Effect
-
(addiction)

+
Profound
Solution -
Example of a basic
reinforcing cycle
+ Quality of
academic
programs
+
Socio-technical
training of
instructors Quality of
teaching +
+
+ R
+
Time
demand on
Funding Impact on
instructors
community

Creativity
+ B and energy
B Number of
+ of instructors
students

+ -
Workload of
instructors
+
Systemic Wolves!!

Fuente: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB1KKBpYxvE
 Systemic
Leverage Points
for Emerging a
Global Eco-
Civilization
• Donella Meadows:

“Paradigms are the sources of
systems.”
(D. Meadows. “Leverage Points: Places to
 Downward Causation?

• Is any creative process of emergence

shaped only by the interaction of its
parts?
• Is there really such a thing as “empty
space” or a true “vacuum”?
» Curating Emergence for Thrivability
Systemic Nurturance Spaces for
Conviviality & Thrivability
• Ivan Illich suggests conviviality is a mode of
autonomous and creative interaction among
people and between people and their
environment.
– it shifts from planning to designing and
ultimately to curating the dynamics of
emergence
• planning imposes and involves projecting onto
• designing imagines and involves creating with
Guiding Questions for a Practice Systems Being

! At the first level (personal systemicity): Who am I and what is my life’s

purpose? What are my talents? To what do I feel called to contribute? What
brings meaning to my life? What supports my personal development?
! At the second level (socio-cultural systemicity): What common cares bring
us together? What is our shared vision? How do we want to contribute to the
flourishing of life forever? Who are our partners and collaborators? What do we
need to learn? What do we want to create? What is our value proposition or
unique contribution to all our stakeholders? What affirms our values, identity
and culture?
! At the third level (ecological systemicity): What gifts do we receive from
nature that we have not acknowledged? What relationships and connections
need to be restored? How can we contribute to the regeneration of our
ecosystems? What would a thriving relationship with nature look like?
! At the fourth level (evolutionary systemicity): What would our ancestors think
of our work and life? What would our children’s children think of our choices?
How do we honor our past and create our future intentionally? How do we
become active and conscious participants in the unfolding of life?
 What kind of glocal
eco-civilization do we want?
• Be the systems you want to see in the world…
Systems Design
You see things as they are
and ask: Why?

But I dream of things

that never were
and ask: Why not?
– George Bernard Shaw
 5 Generations of Design

Expert (provides the solution) Designs

- Gives a man fish
for
Specialist (gets feedback)
- Fishes for him others
 Animator (promotes design)
Designs
- Teaches him how to fish

with
Facilitator (capacitates for design)

- “Learns” him how to fish

others

Catalyst (enables ongoing design)

- Empowers self-provision
Ethical Frameworks
Evocentric
Ethics
Ethics

Ecocentric
Ethics

Homocentric
Ethics

Egocentric
Ethics
Evolutionary Learning Community
A community that
learns how to learn
… two or more people in harmony with the
… with a shared identity and dynamics of its
b r o a d e r
… a common purpose environment.
… committed to the joint creation of meaning.

spaces where people can learn together about the

interconnected nature of our world, the ecological impact
of our individual and collective choices, and the joy of
finding a meaningful way to contribute to the emergence
of sustainable and evolutionary futures.
 The process of ELC empowerment

Evolutionary
corporation
Evolutionary
family
Empowered individuals and
ELC
groups catalyze evolutionary
socio-ecological transformation

Evolutionary
collective learning neighborhood

Drawing on the learning

environment creates a knowledge ELC
base for evolutionary development

knowledge Facilitating evolutionary

learning
creates a local learning ecology
individual learning

resources

ELC

information
 Learning Activity

• [1] Think of a community where you

would like to catalyze some evolutionary
development
• [2] What kind of designer/facilitator you
think will be most appropriate for you in
that context?
 Design
works back from an ideal image
explores values, aspirations, and
expectations
describes the system that has the
potential to realize the aspirations
works in a spiral and recursive
fashion
is continuous and becomes the
approach to organizational change
and renewal
Planning
works out from the existing
system
prescribes goals/objectives
sets forth specific steps to take
within a time scheme
proceeds in a linear fashion
establishes an overall time
frame (3-5 years) at the end of
which another planning cycle
starts
 Planning vs. Design

Decreasing Increasing
resources opportunity
1
2
Evolving
Current Planning Sustainable
reality System
3

Decreasin
Increasin
g
g
stressors
demand
 Complementarity of Approaches
Strategic Design + Strategic Planning " understanding the
complexity of the situation. There are two ways to do this:
1. DESIGN: Normative/Possibilistic Approach. Idealize - Start with the idealization
- what potential exists? What is it that the company wants to do in the world?
What is the tool to be used to achieve this?
2. PLANNING: Exploratory/Probabilistic Approach. Mission driven/Fact based
Approach - Here the objective is to think realistically...what are the trends in the
business environment...how can we aim higher and better using existing
frameworks?

These are not in conflict: strategic management can utilize both

approaches to identify what is likely to occur (in, say, five years)
and how that compares to where the company sees itself in the
same amount of time. Gap analysis can then be used to determine
strategies that ought to be applied to move the probabilistic
scenario closer to the possibilistic scenario.
 Gap Analysis
L
NS1 Normative/Possibilistic
e Scenario
v Realistic/Desirable
e
l Scenario
o
f
O
r
g
a PS1
n Exploratory/Probabilistic
i
z Scenario
a
t
i
o
n
a
l r5
D
e r4
v
e r3
l
o
p r2
m r1
e
n
t
t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 Time
 Transcending and Design
• Transcending the state of the existing system and
leaving it behind is the most difficult part of design. To
ask: what would happen if we were not to change the
system? can help in the transcendence process.

# Preactive conservative
Difficult to transcend
# Reactive reactionary
# Proactive anticipatory
Easier to transcend
# Interactive evolutionary
 From Design to Planning
Design Journey

Planning Implementation Planning

• what are the projects and programs derived from our design?
• how will we guide the accomplishment of the functions?
• what knowledge, skills and values are required of the people
who will participate in the system?
• what resources are needed?
• how much, when, and where will each of these resources be
required?
• what is the gap between what is required and what is available?
how much will it cost to close the gap?
• how will we measure the performance of the system?
• how will we continue to redesign the system?
 Learning Activity

• [6]Which ethical framework is currently

embraced by your community?
• How can you help your community to
learn about the eco and evocentric
frameworks?
Three-Lens Approach
Seeks to provide a
Systems-
rich, multidimensional
Environment view of a system

System of focus

Functions- Process-
Structure Behavior
The Lenses as Systems Models
• Environment Model
– Describing the system in its natural and social context
– “Birds-eye view” of the system

• Function/Structure model
– Describing the actions of the system, the parts that
carry out these actions, and their relationships
– “Snap shot” of the system

• Process Model
– Describing the system in movement, over time, in
interaction with its parts and with the environment
– “Moving picture” of the system
Example of the Systems Models
! What is a
Human?
Environment Model
– From a socio-cultural and
ecological perspective

– From a biological Structure/Function

perspective
Model

– From an evolutionary and

Process Model
developmental perspective
Systems …and
are
include part
of
other
other
systems systems
…
The biosphere is a single dynamic living system with both human
societies and embedding life-support systems fueled by the sun

Source: E. Laszlo, Evolution, 1987

 The Four Design Spaces of SSD

Definition of evaluation criteria

Experimentation with solution alternatives
• Description of the current situation
• Generation of core ideas and core values Experimentation
• Establishment of inquiry boundaries and
• Exploration of design options Evaluation Space
• Creation of an image of the future system

Description
Exploration
of the
and
Future System
Image Creation
Space
(Modeling)
Space

Design Information
Organization of knowledge Display of the model of the system:
and
relevant for the design process: – system environment
– content and context of design Knowledge Space
– functions/structure
– characteristics of system environment – processes
– design models, methods, tools
from which to select
93
 Learning Activity

• [7]What evaluation criteria is useful and

relevant for your ELC processes and
products?
» In other words, how will you know that you are moving in
the right direction?
 Learning Activity
• [8] Generate a list of questions to initiate and guide the
conversation in your community. The questions should
facilitate:
– Community building (e.g., creation of shared identity and common
purpose)
– Evolutionary learning (e.g., understanding challenges and
opportunities; learning systems thinking; sharing information, knowledge,
tools, approaches)
– Strategic design and decision making (e.g. definition of actions and
responsibilities, priorities, time frames)
 Learning Activity
• [3] What knowledge (theories, methodologies,
stories, cases) are useful to have in your
knowledge base?
• How will your community learn from and expand
this knowledge base?
• [4] What concrete actions related to your vision
can be implemented today to help start the
process?
 Learning Activity
• [5]Generate a list of essential characteristics
(core ideas) that describe your vision of your
ideal system
– Group them in categories
– Prioritize them
– How are the groupings related?
– Can you express a concise statement that captures
your vision?
 Learning Activity

• [9]Where will you draw the boundary of

your system?
• Where will you draw the boundary of
your environment?
• How is your community nested in its
environment?
 Learning Activity

• [10]What are the functions of your ideal

system? (Think in terms of verbs —
actions!)
– How are these functions related? How can
they be organized and coordinated?
 Learning Activity
• [11]What are the main inputs (e.g., people,
resources, ideas) to your system?
• What are the main expected outcomes of your
system?
• What is the main “transformation” (the main
activity) of your system?
• How will you create a culture of ongoing learning,
improvement, evolution?
 Summary of Learning Activities
Choosing your community [1]
Defining your style of facilitation/generation of
designer [2]
Start building your knowledge base [3] 4 6
Identify immediate actions for experimentation 7
[4] 9
Core ideas about your ideal system [5] 1
Make explicit the ethics that will
guide your design [6]
2 8 11
Define evaluation criteria [7]
5 10
Design guiding questions for learning and
design conversation [8]
Start creating your systems environment model
[9] 3
Start creating your functions/structure
model [10]
Start creating your processes model [11]
Design Territory
 A quote for the times...

To live in an evolutionary spirit means to engage with full

ambition and without any reserve in the structure of the
present, and yet to let go and flow into a new structure
when the right time has come.



– Erich Jantsch

The Self-Organizing Universe