Systems Thinking Perspective Project

Defense AT&L article on Leadership and Systems Thinking

I just found this article by George E. Reed on Leadership and Systems Thinking.  His thinking is much in line with what I've seen in the SLA Systems Thinking courses.  Here's one small part of what he is saying.

The systems approach is to:

• Identify a system. After all, not all things are systems.  Some systems are simple and predictable, while others are complex and dynamic. Most human social systems are the latter.

• Explain the behavior or properties of the whole system. This focus on the whole is the process of synthesis. Ackoff says that analysis looks into things while synthesis looks out of things.

• Explain the behavior or properties of the thing to be explained in terms of the role(s) or function(s) of the whole.

Discussion & Dialogue

The last section of the self-assessment instrument deals with the concepts of discussion and dialogue. We are trying to understand if discussions with colleagues invite alternative ways of viewing problems and suggestions for new ways of working. It is interesting to note that there are more "strongly agree" responses in this section than in any of the previous sections. Hopefully, this is an affirmation that information professionals are skilled communicators. We listen carefully, reflect on nuances of dialog, and act on information gleaned through conversation and discussions with colleagues.

The statement: I view admissions of mistakes as healthy rather than as a sign of weakness or failure on the part of an individual  resulted in 66% of persons responding saying that they strongly agreed. Another 25% agreed somewhat, while the remaining 9% were not sure or disagreed in some measure.

After raising the topic of comfort with admission of errors, the assessment looks at process failures: When there is a process failure, I seek to identify and understand the root causes of the problem, and then work on solutions.  Here, 68% responded that they strongly agreed and 21% agreed somewhat. The rest were not sure or disagreed.

Of the respondents who responded to this statement: I set the stage to allow solutions to problems to be developed and implemented thoughtfully and in a non-threatening environment, 48% strongly agreed, while 32% agreed somewhat.  13% were not sure and 7% disagreed.

It is likely that most adults find our final scenario to be challenging, partly because of time constraints and partly because it is not necessarily comfortable to spend time replaying difficult conversations, considering others' points of view, and considering how to achieve a more satisfactory outcome should similar conversations occur in the future. In general, responses from information professionals to this statement were quite positive: I carefully review difficult conversations in order to understand participants' mental models, and thus improve my part in subsequent conversations.  39% of those taking the survey strongly agreed with this statement, while 41% agreed somewhat. 11% were not sure and 9% disagreed.

Personal Mastery

It's time to provide an update on responses to the web-based assessment having to with Systems Thinking behaviors.  The third section of the assessment focuses on personal mastery--how we as information professionals encourage learning and knowledge sharing behaviors in the organizations in which we work. At this time, there are 74 responses to the assessment, although not all persons responding completed all parts of this question.  Overall, information professionals are quite positive about their part in sharing knowledge and in encouraging others to share knowledge. This should not be a surprise, given the evolution of our profession.

In response to this statement: I spend time with experts in other departments (i.e. physicians, engineers, account representatives) in order to observe how they use information resources in their work, 28% strongly agree, 38% somewhat agree, 9% are not sure, 21% somewhat disagree, and 5% strongly disagree.   

The next part of this topic focuses on sharing knowledge with persons in other parts of the organization as we become more familiar with their work: I spend time with experts in other departments to share knowledge with them as I learn more about their work. 28% strongly agree, 47% somewhat agree, 21% disagree and 4% are not sure.

Of the persons responding, 42% strongly agree with the following statement: I seek opinions from staff in a variety of departments to obtain a broad range of potential solutions to problems. 37% somewhat agree, 4% are not sure and the remainder disagree.

Finally, 83% of persons responding to the assessment, either strongly or somewhat agree with this statement: I routinely share what I learn from conferences and colleagues outside the organization with my staff and other colleagues and encourage them to share their learnings with others. Without further inquiry, it is not possible to know why the remainder would indicate that they do not share with colleagues what they learn from conferences or other venues outside of work.

KM mtg and resource

Last week I attended the ASIS&T International Conference on Knowledge Management and found many of the sessions to be of interest from a systems perspective. The presentations are available online at: http://www.ickm2005.org/ickm2005_powerpoint_presentation.htm

Once I have a chance to digest the wealth of ideas I picked up there, I'll drill down with more conversation specific to our group. In the meantime, however, please feel free to weigh in on your favorite presentation.

Identifying assumptions

I second Jan’s observation (see results posting) that it is important that we think about the effectiveness of our communication behaviors in articulating our assumptions. Assumptions and discussing them openly no doubt draws from our experience as a professional, the confidence we have in the fairness of the environment we work in, and the trust we have in our colleagues to receive discussions in the spirit they are presented in. A three step process can help you make your assumptions more explicit:

Recognize  -- what you are presupposed to. Be warned that this exercise may uncover things about yourself you don’t want to necessarily know—and that you certainly don’t want others to know. However, if committed to making change and finding true solutions to deep, pervasive problems, individuals need to recognize these influences in their own decisionmaking process prior to discussions to arrive at strategies and creative decisionmaking.

Reveal – the next step is to make the team you are working with aware of your assumptions. Team meetings and other events where work groups come together to launch projects or initiatives that have long term implications should facilitate the personal development of the team members and allow for the transparency needed in their thought processes and in laying out assumptions that have been recognized by individuals in the group.

Relinquish – once the assumptions have been mentioned and brought to bear on the dynamics of the group, they need to be relinquished and remain “suspended in the air” so to speak so others can help you keep them in check. Its is like hanging them out to dry on a line so others can see them and remind you of them when it is felt they are impacting the discussion or the decision making process.

Granted, every team meeting doesn’t have to have a facilitated “letting go” of assumptions, but it would be helpful to have it become a typical part of the team process. But before trying to implement it—if you get squirmy about it—think about what the team is trying to accomplish and weight the situation against starting off with unspoken assumptions hidden that could derail the effort. For example, are you deciding who gets to go home early, or who you’ll have to let go. With decisions of any magnitude, it's worth the effort to clear the air and be as honest as possible to arrive at the most effective and systems-oriented strategies.

Teaching smart people to learn

I recently tried to start a chat on a librarian’s listserv to discuss Chris Argyris’s classic HBR article “Teaching Smart People to Learn.”  The article is included in our webliography and crosswalks to three of the four areas highlighted in the assessment as a tool to help understand the issue and generate improvement and expanded thinking. I was disappointed to receive only one response. Recognizing how we, our leadership and our organizations facilitate learning is a key element to improving the “systemsness” of what we do. I am interested in how librarians integrate the insights from this innovative article into their own work behaviors and how we can best help them see that they to, are smart people that may need to think about changing the way they learn.

Librarians as systems thinkers

I have spend the last few days with a variety of scientists, aviators and clinicians who have yet to work with a librarian who is a systems thinker.  Given that these individuals work in high risk industries where systems thinking is essential to successful and safe operations, why do you think this is so? Where are the systems thinking librarians?

Partnership & Leverage

With 60 responses to the self assessment survey, it seems like a good time to review how information professionals rate ourselves in the area of partnership and leverage—and specifically, if we increase leverage and effectiveness through partnering with other departments and individuals.

In response to the statement: I build partnerships and resource connections outside of the information center. (i.e., I find opportunities for influence and reward are revealed when I know more about what is going on), 56% strongly agree and 24% somewhat agree.

Responses to the second statement: I regularly participate in open dialogues with information center management to check alignment with organizational priorities and to brainstorm ideas for increasing the effectiveness of the information center. (i.e., I employ brainstorming tools to look for opportunities that yield the best return), are somewhat less positive: 33% strongly agree and 37% somewhat agree. 12% responded that they are not sure.

The responses to this statement vary more: I have identified key stakeholders within the organization and communicate with them frequently to assess how information center products and services support creative thinking and innovation. 27% strongly agree, 37% somewhat agree, but 20% somewhat disagree and 8% strongly disagree. Is there an opportunity being surfaced here? How can our communications with other members of the organization in which we work, especially with thought leaders and decision makers, become more proactive and more strategic?

37% of the responses are in strong agreement, 35% are somewhat in agreement and 16% are not sure when considering this statement: I am confident I can articulate the challenges facing the information center and solicit potential solutions from management. We do not have sufficient data to draw definitive conclusions, but it would be beneficial to probe a bit more deeply about why the “agreement” responses to this question are greater than in response to the previous question (72% strongly or somewhat agree with this statement and 64% strongly or somewhat agree with the previous statement).

I periodically ask myself if I make my assumptions and opinions explicit when speaking with staff about performance objectives. 19% of the persons responding to the assessment are in strong agreement with this statement, 44% are somewhat in agreement, 23% are not sure, 10% somewhat disagree and 4% strongly disagree. Since clear and open communication among members of a team is critical to a high-performance team, it is important for us to review the effectiveness of our communication.

Finally, information professionals express strong confidence in response to this statement: I honestly believe I make my assumptions and opinions explicit when speaking with clients about projects we are undertaking. 27% strongly agree, 46% somewhat agree, 19% are not sure, 6% somewhat disagree and 2% strongly disagree.

Demo: An Introduction to System Dynamics

I came upon "An Introduction to System Dynamics" through a Bloglines feed that searches del.icio.us for the tag "system."  Dave Bayless of Small World Networks, and Don Greer of the Greer Black Company, put together this overview of the problems with decision-making, a clear description of the system dynamics toolset (including the specifics of causal loop diagrams and stock-flow models), and how to apply that toolset to "wicked" problems.  The entire demo and voice track takes 35 minutes. I like that it explains all the symbols used in the systems dynamics tools.  Suddenly those pluses and minuses on the arrows actually make sense.  :-)

Viewing the Organization as a System

A few days back -- I a heard a colleague discuss how hard it can be for individuals to identify the systems within which they interact. We aren't talking about computer systems here, but the related parts and processes within an organization that overlap and interact to create the properties that systems thinking helps us to clarify, understand and then leverage.

This brief tool -- from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement in Boston - discusses the value of seeing your organization as a system rather than the strictly linear "configuration of employees" that organizational charts often depict. It provides a nice example of how different these two ways of seeing things look.

Use this tool to see if it helps you or your staff see the systems and interconnectedness of the world you work in ... and then let us know how it works.