Collaborative Systems Thinking Culture: A Path to Success for Complex Projects

ABSTRACTThe world is filled with hard and complex problems, oftentimes requiring involved solutions. In large organizations attempting to solve these types of problems, a mindset shift and key candidate methodologies centered on collaborative systems thinking culture (CSTC) can assist significantly. The paper explores the state of the practice, change involved with implementing systems thinking, impacts of a collaborative approach within an organization, as well as the seven phases that a reader can introduce into their organization to realize some of the benefits. The same approach was used to create this paper under collective authorship from cohort 6 of the INCOSE Technical Leadership Institute (TLI); an international group of individuals collaborating exclusively through virtual platforms. From writing papers to executing large technical programs, the CSTC approach will prepare technical teams for tackling challenging problems in an inclusive way with the intent to finish projects on time while also cultivating healthy systems engineering habits and practices. This lessens the reliance on corporate engineering procedures to drive collaborative behavior by fiat. Finally, blending CSTC into the fabric and culture of an organization is emphasized as being needed for the full benefit. That benefit includes saving programs by moving to a CSTC.

Implementing a CSTC shift

As science and engineering projects are becoming increasingly more complex, sophisticated, comprehensive and multidisciplinary, there is a growing need for systems thinking skills to ensure successful project management. Systems thinking plays a major role in the initiation, effective management, and in facilitating inter-organizational tasks. This research assesses the capacity for engineering systems thinking and its contribution in carrying out a multidisciplinary project. The research also reviews the cognitive process through which systems thinking skill is acquired. The study focused on a group of students who have completed their senior design projects in high-tech industry, while their plans were being integrated into existing larger projects in the respective industrial sites. The systems thinking skill of the students was examined according to a questionnaire for assessing the Capacity for Engineering Systems Thinking (CEST). Statistical analysis shows significant differences in the students capacity for systems thinking at the beginning and end of the work (p<0.001). This research demonstrates that systems thinking skills can be improved through awareness and involvement in multidisciplinary projects.

Background: Systems Thinking (ST) is the new paradigm in Evaluation. It represents a significant mind-set shift for the evaluation field and it is a powerful tool to tackle complex environments. Heir to the systems concepts of the engineering field, and especially regarding the hard systems tools, ST in evaluation uses the same visual tools that were created many years ago. All these tools already incorporate data visualization features: they depict ideas, relationships and concepts relying in shapes and figures more than a textual explanation. Revisiting these tools and applying the latest data visualization principles, they could be optimised in order to provide with more information within the same concept. Purpose: To provide ST practitioners with more informative tools in order to facilitate: - ST experts and users can optimise the application of the tools to real life models beyond the initial set up of their visual representations. - Audiences of evaluations using ST as part of the toolkit can find the outputs more apprehensible and easy to understand. Setting: Not applicable. Intervention: Not applicable. Research Design: Not applicable. Data Collection and Analysis: Not applicable. Findings: Improving ST representations of reality and systems can help both enhance ST applications and make it more accessible and comprehensible for evaluation practitioners' and users. Six ways for improving the understanding of the current stock and flow diagrams were identified. The tools proposed consist of: customizing the colours and shape of the variables and their relationships to make them more informative; highlighting the existing subsystems within the model; and providing the specific sequence for reading the main causal chains.

In response to the COVID-19 crisis, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been applied to a range of applications in healthcare and public health such as case identification or monitoring of the population. The urgency of the situation should not be to the detriment of considering the ethical implications of such apps. Implementing ethics in medical AI is a complex issue calling for a systems thinking approach engaging diverse representatives of the stakeholders in a consultative process. The participatory engagement aims to gather the different perspectives of the stakeholders about the app in a transparent and inclusive way. In this study, we engaged a group of clinicians, patients, and AI developers in conversations about a fictitious app which was an aggregate of actual COVID-19 apps. The app featured a COVID-19 symptoms monitoring function for both the patient and the clinician, as well as infection clusters tracking for health agencies. Anchored in Soft Systems Methodology and Critical Systems Thinking, participants were asked to map the flow of knowledge between the clinician, the patient, and the AI app system and answer questions about the ethical boundaries of the system. Because data and information are the resource and the product of the AI app, understanding the nature of the information and knowledge exchanged between the different agents of the system can reveal ethical issues. In this study, not only the output of the participatory process was analysed, but the process of the stakeholders’ engagement itself was studied as well. To establish a strong foundation for the implementation of ethics in the AI app, the conversations among stakeholders need to be inclusive, respectful and allow for free and candid dialogues ensuring that the process is transparent for which a systemic intervention is well suited.

BackgroundHealth workers in low- and middle-income countries are increasingly demanded to collect more and more data to report them to higher levels of the health information system (HIS), in detriment of useful data for clinical and public health decision-making, potentially compromising the quality of their health care provison. In order to support health workers' decision-making, we engaged with partners in Côte d'Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria in a research project to conceive, design, produce, implement and test paper-based health information tools: the PHISICC tools. Our aim was to understand the use of PHISICC tools by health workers and to improve them based on their feedback.MethodsThe design Health Facility Laboratories (HF Labs) in Côte d'Ivoire and in Nigeria were set up after months of use of PHISICC tools. Activities were structured in three phases or ‘sprints' of co-creative research. We used a transdisciplinary approach, including anthropology and Human Centered Design (HCD), observations, shadowing, structured interviews and co-creation.ResultsHealth workers appreciated the standardization of the tools across different health care areas, with a common visual language that optimized use. Several design issues were raised, in terms of formats and contents. They strongly appreciated how the PHISICC registers guided their clinical decision-making and how it facilitated tallying and counting for monthly reporting. However, adherence to new procedures was not universal. The co-creation sessions resulted in modifications to the PHISICC tools of out-patient care and postnatal care.DiscussionAlthough health systems and systemic thinking allowed the teams to embrace complexity, it was the HCD approach that actually produced a shift in researchers' mind-set: from HIS as data management tools to HIS as quality of care instruments. HCD allowed navigating the complexity of health systems interventions due to its capacity to operate change: it not only allowed us to understand how the PHISICC tools were used but also how to further improve them. In the absence of (or even with) an analytical health systems framework, HCD approaches can work in real-life situations for the ideation, testing and implementation of interventions to improve health systems and health status outcomes.

Fundamentals and Paradoxes of Law which Regulates the Religious Education in Public Schools of Rio de Janeiro

Systems Research and Behavioral ScienceVolume 33, Issue 2 p. 209-212 Guest Editorial Guest Editorial J. D. R. de Raadt, Corresponding Author J. D. R. de Raadt Melbourne Centre for Community Development, Melbourne, Australia Correspondence to: J. Donald R. de Raadt, Melbourne Centre for Community Development, Melbourne, Australia. E-mail: donald@melbourneccd.comSearch for more papers by this authorVeronica D. de Raadt, Veronica D. de Raadt Melbourne Centre for Community Development, Melbourne, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author J. D. R. de Raadt, Corresponding Author J. D. R. de Raadt Melbourne Centre for Community Development, Melbourne, Australia Correspondence to: J. Donald R. de Raadt, Melbourne Centre for Community Development, Melbourne, Australia. E-mail: donald@melbourneccd.comSearch for more papers by this authorVeronica D. de Raadt, Veronica D. de Raadt Melbourne Centre for Community Development, Melbourne, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 07 December 2015 https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2376Citations: 1 www.melbourneccd.com Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume33, Issue2Special Issue: Addressing Human Needs: Collaborative Systems Thinking in BrazilMarch/April 2016Pages 209-212 RelatedInformation

INCOSE's Vision 2025 identifies the development of Systems Thinking and Technical Leadership as one of seven key areas of Systems Engineering ‘Competency’ required for delivery. Vision 2025 states: “Education and training of systems engineers and the infusion of systems thinking across a broad range of the engineering and management workforce will meet the demands for a growing number of systems engineers with the necessary technical and leadership competencies.” “The roles and competencies of the systems engineer will broaden to address the increasing complexity and diversity of future systems.” “The technical leadership role of the systems engineer on a project will be well established as critical to the success of a project.” These requirements imply the need to rapidly expand the art and science of Systems Technical Leadership. In response to this need, INCOSE established the INCOSE Institute for Technical Leadership. This paper describes the Institute and the work that the first Cohort (“Cohort of 2017”) has accomplished on developing a Technical Leadership Model for Systems Engineers. It is envisaged that this first Technical Leadership Model for Systems Engineers will be further developed and matured by the following cohorts of the INCOSE's Technical Leadership Institute.

A lot of the literature builds on a theory of communication that focuses on text contents and interactive learning. But in order to improve teaching and learning we need to understand why students communicate the way they do. In order to do so, research needs to begin with the actual process by which textual messages are produced. Then we can analyse the form and contents of the messages. The shift of focus from text products to working processes is a matter of didactic design. This chapter outlines the teachers’ didactic designs and the students’ verbal exchanges on a virtual platform. More specifically, what would be the characteristics of emerging patterns of interaction produced by ICT and social communication systems?

The last decade has seen shifts in both practice and research regarding client–supplier relationships. Cooperative project client–supplier relationships have become increasingly common, and have spurred a stream of vivid research on for example alliances and partnering. Despite increased attention, an insufficient understanding of the relationship dimension is identified, described as a ‘black box’. Here it is suggested that a key to unlock this ‘black box’ is to focus on the everyday practice and the role of the mindset of involved actors throughout the project. We argue that running partnering projects involves more deeply rooted changes than previously recognized. Changes relate to the mindset among involved actors, where service (instead of merely products or production) becomes the core denominator. First we aim to illustrate that a partnering project, if well functioning, can be understood as an engagement platform, and second we aim to discuss the consequences if this is acknowledged in practice. The case, a successful Swedish partnering project, is explored from a service-dominant logic perspective and it is suggested that successful partnering projects are to be defined as engagement platforms. A refined categorization of the components of partnering is provided and the implications of a shift in mindset discussed.

Rewilding is a transformative conservation strategy that emphasises the restoration of ecological processes and ecosystem resilience. This perspective article addresses limitations in current rewilding monitoring practices, which predominantly rely on quantitative metrics. We argue for the integration of qualitative approaches to better capture the complexity and interdependence of human–nature interactions that shape rewilding outcomes. Drawing on social–ecological systems (SES) thinking, we propose a holistic monitoring framework that combines quantitative and qualitative measures. This approach reflects emerging shifts in conservation mindsets – recognising humans as part of nature, valuing biodiversity intrinsically as well as instrumentally, and embracing uncertainty and complexity over control. We suggest that Holling’s panarchy – a framework for understanding adaptive cycles and cross-scale interactions – can support the design of rewilding interventions and guide monitoring. By focusing on fast- and slow-changing variables, panarchy enhances adaptive management and supports context-sensitive theories of change. This article contributes to the rewilding discourse by offering practical guidance for practitioners and policymakers, promoting a shift towards inclusive, adaptive and transformative monitoring practices.

Rewilding is a transformative conservation strategy that emphasises the restoration of ecological processes and ecosystem resilience. This perspective article addresses limitations in current rewilding monitoring practices, which predominantly rely on quantitative metrics. We argue for the integration of qualitative approaches to better capture the complexity and interdependence of human–nature interactions that shape rewilding outcomes. Drawing on social–ecological systems (SES) thinking, we propose a holistic monitoring framework that combines quantitative and qualitative measures. This approach reflects emerging shifts in conservation mindsets – recognising humans as part of nature, valuing biodiversity intrinsically as well as instrumentally, and embracing uncertainty and complexity over control. We suggest that Holling’s panarchy – a framework for understanding adaptive cycles and cross-scale interactions – can support the design of rewilding interventions and guide monitoring. By focusing on fast- and slow-changing variables, panarchy enhances adaptive management and supports context-sensitive theories of change. This article contributes to the rewilding discourse by offering practical guidance for practitioners and policymakers, promoting a shift towards inclusive, adaptive and transformative monitoring practices.

Rewilding is a transformative conservation strategy that emphasises the restoration of ecological processes and ecosystem resilience. This perspective article addresses limitations in current rewilding monitoring practices, which predominantly rely on quantitative metrics. We argue for the integration of qualitative approaches to better capture the complexity and interdependence of human–nature interactions that shape rewilding outcomes. Drawing on social–ecological systems (SES) thinking, we propose a holistic monitoring framework that combines quantitative and qualitative measures. This approach reflects emerging shifts in conservation mindsets – recognising humans as part of nature, valuing biodiversity intrinsically as well as instrumentally, and embracing uncertainty and complexity over control. We suggest that Holling’s panarchy – a framework for understanding adaptive cycles and cross-scale interactions – can support the design of rewilding interventions and guide monitoring. By focusing on fast- and slow-changing variables, panarchy enhances adaptive management and supports context-sensitive theories of change. This article contributes to the rewilding discourse by offering practical guidance for practitioners and policymakers, promoting a shift towards inclusive, adaptive and transformative monitoring practices.

Rewilding is a transformative conservation strategy that emphasises the restoration of ecological processes and ecosystem resilience. This perspective article addresses limitations in current rewilding monitoring practices, which predominantly rely on quantitative metrics. We argue for the integration of qualitative approaches to better capture the complexity and interdependence of human–nature interactions that shape rewilding outcomes. Drawing on social–ecological systems (SES) thinking, we propose a holistic monitoring framework that combines quantitative and qualitative measures. This approach reflects emerging shifts in conservation mindsets – recognising humans as part of nature, valuing biodiversity intrinsically as well as instrumentally, and embracing uncertainty and complexity over control. We suggest that Holling’s panarchy – a framework for understanding adaptive cycles and cross-scale interactions – can support the design of rewilding interventions and guide monitoring. By focusing on fast- and slow-changing variables, panarchy enhances adaptive management and supports context-sensitive theories of change. This article contributes to the rewilding discourse by offering practical guidance for practitioners and policymakers, promoting a shift towards inclusive, adaptive and transformative monitoring practices.