Three generations of systems and design thinking
31
Co-Founder Dr. Alex Ryan Three Generations of Systems and Design Thinking
Transcript of Three generations of systems and design thinking
Co-FounderDr. Alex Ryan
Three Generations of Systems and Design Thinking
2
OUTLINE
Motivation
3Gs of Design
3Gs of Systems
Systemic Design
MOTIVATION
4
Remember this?
5
“This is not exactly the enemy we wargamed against.”–LTG William Wallace, quoted by COL Matthew Caffrey
6
“We imagined that the ‘quality of firsts’ would allow us to overmatch the forces of a peer or near peer competitor. But this did not take into account the decentralized, networked, syndicated non-state actor. We forgot that war is and will always be uncontrollable, unpredictable, and brutal.”
GEN Martin E. Dempsey, “A Campaign of Learning: Avoiding the Failure of Imagination,” RUSI Journal, 155 (3), June/July 2010.
7
The Army Planning Cycle
8
Remember this?
Image from http://bit.ly/2b8Ed3t
9
The Government Policy Cycle
10
Scientific Decision Making
Image from http://www.joe.org/joe/2011october/tt1.php
11
How Systemic Design is DifferentTechnical Rationality Systemic Design
Scientific model of decision making Designerly form of reflective practice
Assumes objectives can be clearly defined from the top down
Assumes objectives are ambiguous and contested
Requires statistically significant data, expert analysis, persistent monitoring and consistent evaluation
Requires thick description, stakeholder participation, prototyping in context, and selective retention
Logical, sequential, convergent, repeatable process
Messy, parallel, divergent, recoverable process
Privileges rigour: “Prove it!” Privileges relevance: “Show me!”
Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, AmbiguousData Rich, Technical, Bounded
Best suited for situations that are:
12
Systemic Design
Challenge to technical rationality: That better data and more analysis will lead to innovative solutions to our most complex challenges
Value: Generate discontinuous improvement in complex and dynamic situations
Drawing by Yunsun Chung, RSD4
DESIGN THINKING
14
Design Methods Movement (1G)
Divergence Transformation Convergence
15
The Designerly Way (2G)A designer makes an image–a representation–of something to be brought to reality, whether conceived primarily in visual, spatial, plastic terms or not. Designing in its broader sense involves complexity and synthesis. In contrast to analysts or critics, designers put things together and bring new things into being, dealing in the process with many variables and constraints, some initially known and some discovered through designing. Almost always, designers' moves have consequences other than those intended for them. Designers juggle variables, reconcile conflicting values, and maneuver around constraints-a process in which, although some design products may be superior to others, there are no unique right answers. – Donald Schön
16
Design moves upstream
No Conscious Design
Design as Styling
Form and Function
Design as Problem Solving
Design as Problem Framing
‘Design Maturity Model,’ in Rosa Wu and Jess McMullin, Investing in Design, Ambidextrous, 2006.
Design
Design Thinking
17
Human Centred Design (3G)
Image from: http://www.slideshare.net/fred.zimny/ac4-d-designlibrarygenerativedr
SYSTEMS THINKING
19
General Systems (1G)
input
elements relationships
feedbackloop boundary
System
Environment
output
20
Soft Systems Methodology (2G)
21
Critical Systems Thinking (3G)
Boundary judgments determine which empirical observations and value considerations count as relevant and which others are left out or considered less important. Because they condition both ‘facts’ and ‘values’, boundary judgments play an essential role when it comes to assessing the meaning and merits of a claim.
22
Critical Systems QuestionsSources of Influence
Boundary Judgments Informing a System of Interest (S)
Stakeholder Concerns Issues Sources of Motivation
1. BeneficiaryWho ought to be / is the intended beneficiary of S?
2. PurposeWhat ought to be / is the purpose of S?
3. Measure of ImprovementWhat ought to be / is S’s measure of success?
The Involved
Sources of Control
4. Decision MakerWho ought to be / is in control of the conditions of success of S?
5. ResourcesWhat conditions of success ought to be / are under the control of S?
6. Decision EnvironmentWhat conditions of success ought to be / are outside the control of the decision maker?
Sources of Knowledge
7. ExpertWho ought to be / is providing relevant knowledge and skills for S?
8. ExpertiseWhat ought to be / are relevant new knowledge and skills for S?
9. GuarantorWhat ought to be / are regarded as assurances of successful implementation?
Sources of Legitimacy
10. WitnessWho ought to be / is representing the interests of those negatively affected by but not involved with S?
11. EmancipationWhat ought to be / are the opportunities for the interests of those negatively affected to have expression and freedom from the worldview of S?
12. WorldviewWhat space ought to be / is available for reconciling differing worldviews regarding S among those involved and affected?
The Affected
23
Summary
Systems Thinking Design Thinking
1G (1950s-1960s)Key Concept
Hard SystemsFeedback
Design MethodsDivergence
2G (1970s-1980s)Key Concept
Soft SystemsWorldview
The Designerly WayReflective Practice
3G (1990s-2000s) Key Concept
Critical SystemsPower
Human-Centred DesignDesign With
There exist both parallels and convergence in the evolution of ST and DT
SYSTEMIC DESIGN
25
Systemics and Design are Complementary
26
Systemic Design
27
The Field of Possibility
Image from: http://www.slideshare.net/RSD2/intro-lecture-forproceedings
28
Systemic Design as an Activity System
29
What systemic design feels like
30
Example Applications
31
Discussion
Image from: https://cruciality.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/loser.jpg
