Sustainability, Systems Thinking and Ecological Worldview

Enterprise cybersecurity is undergoing significant transformation due to the widespread adoption of agile development and self-steering teams, particularly in large organizations. Traditionally, cybersecurity governance has been centralized, relying on structured coordination across people, processes, technologies, and compliance mechanisms. However, agile methodologies—marked by decentralized, autonomous teams—have shifted organizational dynamics from hierarchical to distributed models. While this enhances responsiveness and innovation, it also introduces fragmentation in cybersecurity responsibilities, complicating unified decision-making and the enforcement of security controls.This study explores how large agile enterprises can effectively manage cybersecurity, with a specific focus on ransomware threats. Through qualitative interviews with nine cybersecurity professionals from a highly digitalized public organization in the Netherlands, the research identifies two core organizational tensions: (1) balancing agility and cyber security in decision making about security controls and risk management, and (2) balancing operational business requirements with cybersecurity improvement.The first tension stems from the fragmentation of cybersecurity responsibilities across agile teams. Respondents reported weakened accountability, inconsistent policy enforcement, and an over-reliance on tools to bridge communication gaps. These challenges are linked to mechanistic thinking—an outdated organizational mindset that views departments as isolated units. This leads to siloed operations and a narrow focus on technical solutions. To address this, the study advocates for a systems thinking approach, which views organizations as dynamic networks of interdependent elements. Systems thinking emphasizes holistic understanding, collaboration, and feedback loops.A key recommendation is the introduction of boundary spanners—individuals who bridge communication gaps between teams and align local actions with enterprise cybersecurity goals. These roles facilitate cross-team coordination, support unified decision-making, and help integrate cybersecurity efforts across the organization.The second tension involves the misalignment between the steady rhythm of operational teams and the dynamic pace of cybersecurity innovation. Operational teams prioritize stability, while innovation efforts require flexibility and rapid iteration. This mismatch is exacerbated by Out-Group Bias, where teams resist adopting solutions developed externally, leading to inconsistent security practices and delayed implementation of improvements.To overcome these challenges, the study proposes a programmatic approach to cybersecurity improvement. A program, defined as a coordinated set of related projects, ensures strategic alignment, resource allocation, and effective decision-making. The approach incorporates short-cycled project phases—explore, experiment, pilot, and scale—each with clear objectives and standardized methods. This structure accommodates operational constraints while ensuring timely progress and shared ownership.A successful example of this method is found in the Dutch financial sector, where the Partnership for Cyber Security Innovation (PCSI) implemented a four-month cycle with joint steering committees. This setup promoted inclusivity, countered Out-Group Bias, and enhanced cross-organizational cybersecurity awareness.In conclusion, the study underscores the need for systemic thinking and structured program management to align agile practices with robust cybersecurity strategies. By addressing internal tensions and fostering collaboration across teams, organizations can enhance their resilience against complex cyber threats while maintaining the benefits of agility. Future work will involve field-testing these models, including training boundary spanners and implementing short-cycled programs, with a one-year implementation horizon recommended for optimal impact.

The article addresses the problem of determining the criteria of assessing systems thinking development within professional training in the field of Economics, as well as the issue of determining indicators and levels of systems thinking. The author conducted an analysis of dissertations on this topic resulting in identifying two ways of classification prevailing in research over the past one and a half decades - one being based on components of systems thinking and the other – on the process of problem solving using a systems approach. The author illustrates each method with a characterization of various researchers' position, considering its applicability to the experiment in terms of completeness, consistency of definitions and non-overlap of essential parameters. In the second part of the article, the author proposes the following criteria for ascertaining the formation of systemic thinking: motivational, theoretical, integrative and creative. The expected results for each of these criteria are described as four levels: insufficient, minimum, advanced, and high. The conclusion states the advantage of such a structure enabling an individualized assessment, over the previously widespread practice of generalized description of the of systems thinking levels.

In prior work, we proposed elements of a generalized core language for systems thinking that characterizes a systems approach. We developed this foundational language through the relationship between critical thought and systems in the definition of systems thinking. We submitted our interpretation of this language, i.e., the Dimensions of Systems Thinking (DST), to the systems community for further development. Assuming that the DST provides a basis in language to express systems thought in a systems design or analysis, our objective in this phase is to present a strategy for discovering objective statistical evidence of systems thinking based on the linguistic elements of the DST in an unread corpus of documents. With that goal, we consider statistical semantic characterization of systems thought through a process of supervised learning, term frequency and inverse document frequency (tf–idf), cosine similarity, and naive Bayes classifiers, specifically Rocchio classifiers and quadratic discriminant classification. Finding evidence of systems thinking in unread text through natural language processing establishes a foundation for computationally assessing systems thinking quality in a document or corpus of design-related documents without having to read the subject document or corpus. Once demonstrated, the method can be applied to systems thinking fluency in design-focused documents across a range of application areas, such as transportation, healthcare, and environmental policy. This study demonstrates that capability with a high degree of selectivity. Our approach establishes correlation and allows us to assess the systems thinking quality of a corpus of unread analysis and design studies on life cycle assessment. We show that assigning a prior probability improves that assessment. We posit that quantitative relations between the specific dimensions of systems thinking and a document would be useful for recognizing good systems thinking and improving the quality of systems analyses.

IntroductionHealthcare is a highly complex adaptive system, requiring a systems approach to understand its behaviour better. We adapt the Systems Thinking for Everyday Work (STEW) cue cards, initially introduced as...

Cybersecurity decisions are made across a range of social, technical, economic, regulatory and political domains. There is a gap between what companies and institutions plan to do while developing their internal IS-related policies and what should be done according to a multi-stakeholder system perspective in this area. Our task as researchers is to bridge this gap by offering potential solutions. The aim of our work is to promote the usage of the socio-technical systems (STS) approach to support the emerging role of systems thinking in cybersecurity education, using simulation as a supporting tool for learning. Meanwhile, new trends in cybersecurity curricula suggest an important shift toward new thinking approaches such as adversarial and systems thinking. We explored individuals’ adversarial and systems thinking skills in an open agent-based simulated environment and subsequently assessed the impact based on a participant survey. We discuss these results and point to directions for further investigation. The second contribution of the article is the provision of a tool for developing target users’ skills in making quantitative risk decisions and giving them a deeper understanding of the importance and use of key indices in the cyber risk management process.

Systemic thinking aims to develop a common language that makes it possible for scientists of different disciplines and technologies to communicate with one another. The specific methodology of systemic thinking is a means of tackling complex, interrelated problems by applying a holistic approach that focuses on the interrelation of individual aspects. In this article, an attempt is made to show the impact of systemic thinking in different areas of science and technology. In particular, the authors argue that a multidisciplinary, systemic approach can play an important role in developing a general theory of safety science. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Hum Factors Man 13: 231–242, 2003.

Deriving from a critique of the theory of management that has influenced the practice of project management, this article explores an alternative paradigm in the form of systems thinking. The known multi-disciplinary usefulness of systems thinking is proposed as a means of reconsidering project planning, implementation and control, leading to potential implications for the education of project managers. The appropriate selection of systems approaches for use in the planning and control of complex projects in any development sector, including construction, is considered. Although the specific details of any specific ‘process-based’ systems approaches are not presented, the conceptual rationale for such approaches to project planning and control is presented. This is done within a framework of critical consideration of those factors that are argued to contribute to failure to meet key project outcomes, especially in complex projects. Contemporary literature (extensively referred to in this article) increasingly suggests that there are limits to the established ‘rational-oriented’ approaches to project management. The current body of practice knowledge requires the addition of complementary, ‘process-based’ approaches for a new generation of strategic project managers. Specific recommendations for educational development in this regard are made. This article explores the influence of contemporary organisational theory on project management and hence the need to add critically necessary soft skills capacity to the current body of knowledge.

Is data‐driven analysis sufficient for understanding the COVID‐19 pandemic and for justifying public health regulations? In this paper, we argue that such analysis is insufficient. Rather what is needed is the identification and implementation of over‐arching hypothesis‐related and/or theory‐based rationales to conduct effective SARS‐CoV2/COVID‐19 (Corona) research. To that end, we analyse and compare several published recommendations for conceptual and methodological frameworks in medical research (e.g., public health, preventive medicine and health promotion) to current research approaches in medical Corona research. Although there were several efforts published in the literature to develop integrative conceptual frameworks before the COVID‐19 pandemic, such as social ecology for public health issues and systems thinking in health care, only a few attempts to utilize these concepts can be found in medical Corona research. For this reason, we propose nested and integrative systemic modelling approaches to understand Corona pandemic and Corona pathology. We conclude that institutional efforts for knowledge integration and systemic thinking, but also for integrated science, are urgently needed to avoid or mitigate future pandemics and to resolve infection pathology.

When seeking solutions to current problems in the field of computer science – and other fields – we encounter situations where traditional approaches no longer bring the desired results. Our cognitive skills also limit the implementation of reliable mental simulation within the basic set of relations. The world around us is becoming more complex and mutually interdependent, and this is reflected in the demands on computer support. Thus, in today‘s education and science in the field of computer science and all other disciplines and areas of life need to address the issue of the paradigm shift, which is generally accepted by experts. The goal of the paper is to present the systems thinking that facilitates and extends the understanding of the world through relations and linkages. Moreover, the paper introduces the essence of systems thinking and the possibilities to achieve mental a shift toward systems thinking skills. At the same time, the link between systems thinking and functional literacy is presented. We adopted the “Bathtub Test” from the variety of systems thinking tests that allow people to assess the understanding of basic systemic concepts, in order to assess the level of systems thinking. University students (potential information managers) were the examined subjects of the examination of systems thinking that was conducted over a longer time period and whose aim was to determine the status of systems thinking. . The paper demonstrates that some pedagogical concepts and activities, in our case the subject

Scholars from a variety of disciplines have been working to unravel the complexities of geodesign as an approach to tackling a host of problems. We argue that a mature understanding of geodesign requires a systemic perspective to organize the interconnections between ecological, social and economic conditions at multiple spatial and temporal scales. We reviewed definitions and perspectives of geodesign and key concepts of ecological systems thinking to develop a new framework for landscape architecture. We provide the state-of-the-art in geodesign within the context of systems thinking and coupled human-environmental resilience. We show that geodesign is capable to encourage public participation and interdisciplinary collaboration through its systemic planning processes and synergetic technologies. The thrust of geodesign-related research is the emerging paradigm of landscape-based sustainability. While landscape architecture is complex in many aspects, the integrated framework promotes our understanding about its social-ecological potential, spatial-temporal association and resilience of coupled human-environment systems. Based on the findings, we outline key contributions, implications, challenges and recommendations for future research.

Ecology and natural resource management: reflections from a systems perspective

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the impact of an intervention on primary school students’ construction of knowledge on ocean acidification and the development of their systems thinking. Eighty-five 11 to 12-year-old students from five different classes of two public primary schools in Greece participated in the 8-h intervention. The intervention included inquiry-based and knowledge-integration activities, and students worked in groups during all activities. Rich pictures, made by the groups at the beginning and the end of the intervention, were used to evaluate their progress in their knowledge concerning the carbon cycle, as well as in their systems thinking. Our findings showed that the intervention contributed to primary students’ conceptual knowledge of the carbon cycle and the inclusion of ocean acidification in the carbon cycle. It also helped them improve their systems thinking, indicating that students’ systems thinking at this age could be developed through formal instruction with interventions which emphasize content knowledge and use an earth systems approach. Moreover, our findings indicate that the systems thinking perspective can serve as an effective approach to help children better understand and critically engage with complex environmental issues, such as ocean acidification.

Healthy Together Victoria (HTV) was a large-scale intervention that adopted a systems approach to prevention. It established the capability of an inexperienced workforce by cultivating their understanding of systems theories, tools and practice. This paper explores how this capacity was developed and what helped and hindered the process. This qualitative research included 31 primary semi-structured interviews that focused on participants' understanding of systems thinking. Deductive thematic analysis was undertaken. A workforce development framework informed the coding that was used to create a causal loop diagram. The findings display the multiple influencers on capacity-building. Practice change was enabled with training-although it lacked coordination and participation was limited. Yet, the systems approach was strengthened with governance arrangements, policies, funding, team support and leadership that empowered practitioners to trial systems methods. Capacity-building was hindered by HTV's unspecified theory that made it harder for novice practitioners to grasp. Funding cuts due to political changes reduced the initiative's duration and prompted resignations, causing the newfound experience to exit the workforce. Capacity-building for systems practice requires a holistic approach of simultaneous, complimentary actions that address the individual and environmental influences of workforce development, especially the drivers of organisational culture that facilitate new practice. SO WHAT?: Effective training methods should specifically teach skills and knowledge that help practitioners to implement systems thinking. The workforce development requirements of other contributors also need to be considered, in addition to the policies, opportunities and resources that embed practice change.

Surrogacy intersects with ethical, social, and legal dilemmas, making it an invaluable case study for bioethics education. This paper posits that surrogacy can serve as an effective teaching tool, engaging students with complex issues that mirror broader societal concerns. By integrating systems thinking methodology into Moral Case Deliberation (MCD), educators can enhance students' understanding of these multifaceted dilemmas. Systems thinking allows for a holistic analysis of the interconnected factors and stakeholders involved in surrogacy, leading to more comprehensive and pragmatic solutions. The phenomenon of cross-border surrogacy, with its intricate layers involving surrogates, medical professionals, legal systems, and socio-economic factors, exemplifies a real-time bioethical issue. This approach encourages students to develop critical thinking, moral evaluation, and socio-cultural awareness. Adopting systems thinking in MCD enables bioethics education to address the complexities of modern reproductive technologies and their ethical implications more effectively.

Learning from near misses is an important component of maintaining safe work systems. Within safety science it is widely accepted that a systems approach is the most appropriate for analysing incidents in sociotechnical systems. The aim of this article is to determine whether industry-level near miss reporting systems are consistent with systems thinking. Twenty systems were identified, from a range of work domains, and were evaluated against systems thinking-based criteria. While none of the reporting systems fulfilled the full set of criteria, all are able to identify actors and contributing factors proximal to events in sociotechnical systems and many capture information on how accidents were prevented. It is concluded that the explanatory power of near miss reporting systems is limited by the systems currently used to gather data. The article closes by outlining a research agenda designed to ensure that near miss reporting systems can fully align with the systems approach.