SYSTEMS AND SYSTEMATICS

(Provisional Title)

Robin Matthews

Draft of work in progress

ABSTRACT

Soft Systems Methodology is seen as metacognition, a technique for thinking about thinking,

revealing implicit assumptions managers bring to problems, and encouraging creativity and

leading to action and implementation and consequently adaptation and revision. As a

technique, it was designed to resolve fuzzy, complex problems: involving human interactions,

conflicting interests, open to many interpretations and solutions that are likely to be

compromises and at best, Second Best.

SYSTEMS AND SYSTEMATICS

INTRODUCTION

Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is a well- established technique, developed in Operations

Research, designed to facilitate creative thinking. It is particularly adapted to fuzzy, ill

defined problems in management, that have many, often conflicting solutions, or quasi

solutions, depending on the point of view of the people concerned, representing compromises

that are not optimal from any point of view and having perhaps no solution at all, just a

succession of fudges. SSM is especially appropriate to the consideration of human

interactions and agent-based modelling.

A theme running through this paper, which may be more apparent in a later version, is that

systems thinking in management has correspondences in science and religion especially in

perennial (mystical) philosophy; the correspondence being that reality in itself is knowable

only through the mental models and instruments that are used to observe it and that in exactly

the same way as a tool, for example a screwdriver or a kango hammer defines the problem to

be tackled, so does the mental model determine the version of reality under discussion. The

paper extends a fundamental understanding in SSM that reality is socially constructed, to the

notion attributable to Neils Bohr that in the limit a correspondence exists, in the limit,

between Classical and Quantum physics.

Thinking is conditioned by socially and personality determined habit patterns, by mental

models, implicit assumptions, mind sets and paradigms that are adopted unconsciously.

Emotional, instinctive and irrational responses are involved as well as pure thinking - if there

is such a thing as pure thought. And mental models differ from one era to another: The past is

another country. Cultural norms and beliefs account for differences in mental models.

International disputes often display such disparities that parties often appear to be playing a

different game with different rules. Differences are not always binary. When there are many

parties involved in a dispute there are many discordant voices (polyphonic voices) and often

when there is apparent concord between parties, implicit differences in interpretation emerge

about what each previously understood to be common unambiguous rules.

When an issue arises and perceptions differ, differences in opinions are implied about the

systems involved and about what the problem is. Creating a level playing field is often cited

as a precondition for a solution, when the actual problem is that the parties are playing on

wildly different landscapes. SSM is concerned with making difference explicit as a starting

point rather than attempting to dissolve difference. The distinction between the French

diffèrance and difference may apply: the precondition to approaching a problem may be to

defer resolution of difference, perhaps indefinitely.

When faced with an issue or problem, our responses are self-organizing. Often, we are not

even aware that self organization is happening. Think, for example, how our bodies self

organize when attacked by a germ. Ordinarily the immune system self organizes to combat

the attack without outside intervention. Our cognitive systems self organize when faced for

example, by a mathematical puzzle, checking the items on a bill, or adding and subtracting

scores in a game of darts, or in solving more complex puzzles, proving a theorem or applying

a principle to an engineering problem.

Innate and learned mental models have evolved to cope successfully with ordinary problems

but when extraordinary problems arise, the models that ordinarily serve us well, box us in to a

habitual way of thinking that may not be appropriate.

The metaphor thinking out of the box is an accurate paraphrase for creative thinking. So are

lateral thinking, brain storming, divergent thinking, innovation. SSM provides an algorithm

for creative thinking that asks us to begin by

a. viewing problems as part of, or sub-systems of, a multi dimensional extensive system,

that

b. contains other systems related more or less closely to the system, issue or problem in

question

and

c. asks to recognize that the problem in question can be perceived in many ways.

Through the use of rich pictures. I will summarize some of the things we spoke about in our

seminars. In the first seminar (April 19) we talked about soft systems methodology (SSM).

SSM is an algorithm or a procedure for dealing with unstructured management problems

(Checkland & Poulter, 2010).

This note focuses on systems and their relationship to complexity and

networks. The broad topic area of the note is systematics. Systematics

describes the study of different types of systems and their complexity.

The theme running through the note is that reality is not a given, but a

construction. A conceptual model for example, describes a view of what exists (a view of

reality) is not a description of what exists (not a description of reality).

Systems

A system is a set entities, resources people, raw materials, facilities, or information that are

organized to fulfil a purpose achieve desired results (Reisman 1979, p. 2). Examples are the

immune system, the digestive and neural systems (Siegal & Varley, 2002), the autonomic

nervous system, the biosphere, the earth, the oceans, lakes and mountains, clouds are

systems. Organisations are systems and we can treat the words organization and system as

synonymous (Adams, et al., 2014).

Complex systems

Complex systems are made up of a large number of interdependent entities and events, with

local interactions that give rise to the emergence of new phenomena between one part and

another, so that in contrast to simple linear system, non-linearity, novelty, unpredictability

and ambiguity emerges in complex systems.

Systematics includes both the quantitative and qualitative

aspects of systems and has a close affinity with networks and

graph theory. For example, in a network systematics will

consider the number of entities (vertices) and the number of

linkages (edges) and the strength of linkages. It will also

“By a complex system, I mean one made up of a large number of parts that have many interactions”. (Simon, 1996, page 184).

Systematics is the study of systems and their contribution to understanding the world

consider qualitative aspects of networks: full example the nodes may refer to culture, ethics,

friendships and the quality and strength of linkages or relationships between them.

Systematics and meaning

Systematics is described as a process of finding meaning, patterns and order in complex

systems. It is also described as the science of diversity, investigating entire entities and

events, their differences, origins, relationships between them and with their environment.

Development of the paper

In the second section, I consider the systematics of organisations. It is easier to introduce

general aspects of systems in section 3 with examples.

In the third section of this note I discuss complex systems and some distinctions; between

hard systems and soft systems methodologies, between systems and subsystems, and open

and closed systems.

In the fourth section, I outline Peter Checkland’s soft systems methodology and refer you to

articles, YouTube lectures that describe the methodology in detail.

In the final section, I try to explain one of the key insights of SSM the proposition that that

nature in itself has no meaning apart from the meaning that human beings impose on it.

2. ORGANIZATIONS AS SYSTEMS

What is an organisation? It is a system that is organized for a purpose (or purposes). In what

follows organization may refer to small or large businesses, institutions such as governments,

universities, religious institutions, governments and international institutions, the United

Nations, the World Bank, the IMF, OECD, NATO. Alternatively, organization refers to

subsets of all the above; functional areas (marketing, finance, operations, resources), business

units and departments within businesses, projects and project teams.

Organizations are hierarchical systems

Any organization is made up of subsets of itself. They are hierarchical systems. Large

corporations for example are organized regionally, and each region may be organized into

national entities, and national entities into business units and business units organized into

functions, projects and within them teams of individuals. Such is the formal organization;

systems within systems within systems, each consisting of connected subsystems.

Large corporations cooperate with others via contractual arrangements: alliances,

partnerships, off-shoring, outsourcing, or they may be acquired by other organizations via

mergers and acquisitions. They are also connected to governments and international

institutions via laws and regulations.

Generally, connections within subsystems, for example within business units are stronger

than connections between systems. They can be partitioned (decomposed) into subsystem

which are somewhat artificially treated separately: artificially separate because they are

never completely separate from other levels of the hierarchy.

Organizations are hierarchical systems

Any organization is made up of subsets of itself. They are hierarchical systems. Large

corporations for example are organized regionally, and each region may be organized into

national entities, and national entities into business units and business units organized into

functions, projects and within them teams of individuals. Such is the formal organization;

systems within systems within systems; systems each consisting of connected subsystems.

Large corporations are connected to others via alliances, partnerships, off-shoring,

outsourcing, or be connected by mergers and acquisitions. They are also connected to

governments and international institutions.

The organization as a matrix of activities

Alternatively, an organization can be thought of as a matrix of activities. The word activities

refers to what firms do; producing something, producing, buying, selling, consuming,

financing, planning and disposing of something. Rather than using the word sets, we might

describe an organization as being composed of coalitions of activities and every coalition

containing coalitions within coalitions: hierarchies of activities, beginning with fundamental

activities or teams, leading to coalitions of the teams that make up the firm’s projects and

then to coalitions of projects that form business units. Corporations are coalitions of business

units or divisions, formed into value chain and supply chain coalitions, joint ventures,

partnerships and alliances. On the diagonal of the organisation matrix we have activities

viewed individually and in off diagonal positions on an organisation matrix we have

combinations of activities.

3. GENERAL ASPECTS OF SYSTEMS

Complex systems

Complex systems or as they are sometimes called, complex adaptive systems are everywhere;

the universe, the climate system, the autonomic nervous system in mammals, the human

brain, or indeed the brains of all living things, ecosystems, societies, cities, international

relations and the European Union which as negotiators of Brexit are finding, much more

complex than they imagined. The global economy is a complex system illustrated in a

presentation (accompanying this note, which also summarises aspects of complex systems.

What is a complex system? A complex system is made

up of a large number of connected entities that evolve in

unpredictable ways. Complex systems can be illustrated

by network diagrams where entities in the complex

system correspond to nodes (vertices) in a network. Connections correspond to the edges

(linkages) between nodes.

The entities of a complex system are interrelated giving rise to synergy between them. For

example, assets complement one another, so the productivity assets combined is greater (or

less) than their productivity or revenue if they were separate. contains synergy and the system

cannot be understood as a collection of separate parts. The whole transcends the sum of the

parts. Complex systems contain feedbacks through time. Current events affect future events

and current affects are influenced by past events.

Complexity is the study of the behaviour of macroscopic collections of such units atoms,

molecules, neurons or bits in a computer, that have the potential for evolution in time

(Coveney and Highfield, 1995).

Systems and subsystems.

Complex systems are hierarchical, made up of subsystems

which contain subsystems, which contain subsystems…….

until we reach the most elementary subsystem. Each

containing interrelated parts, in addition being interrelated

with other levels of the hierarchy. each of which is hierarchic,

A hierarchic system is composed of interrelated systems, each of which is hierarchic, until we

reach some lowest level of elementary subsystem.

In nature it is more or less arbitrary where we leave off the partitioning and what subsystems

we take as elementary. Physics takes the elementary particle as the base but particles have a

tendency not to remain elementary for long are never completely decomposable in that they

cannot be understood in terms of their separate parts.

The degree of complexity of a system is indicated by the length of the of its description

Three properties of complex systems are: emergence, hierarchy and near decomposability.

A global corporation contains subsystems; hierarchies of regional units and within them

national businesses containing projects functions and teams. Levels of the hierarchy interact

with one another and with other hierarchies; businesses with social, political, family and eco

systems.and are subsystems of the global economy, which is a subsystem of the biosphere,

the solar system and the universe.

Emergence

In complex systems such as agent based models, disturbances arise from interactions within

the system. Dynamics of agent-based models are endogenous not exogenous. Interactions

may amplify or dampen cycles and give rise to tipping points. They are called emergent

properties because they emerge within the system rather than being stimulated from the

outside. And they are difficult to predict because they arise from complex interaction.

Examples of emergence properties sand pile experiments, the flocking of birds and fish

whose movements exhibit complex and sometimes chaotic patterns of motion, traffic jams.

In emergent systems aggregating over the microscopic properties of a system is very unlikely

to give useful insights into behaviour in the macro system.

The behaviour of a complex system as a whole disappears when it is reduced to simpler

system. One. In biology for example multi cellular organisms have properties that individual

cells do not have. An enormous amount of data is needed to describe a complex system at the

microeconomic level.

Hard and soft systems

As distinct from hard systems methodology, SSM is designed for fuzzy, poorly defined

situations, often involving human actions, issues that stakeholders and observers perceive

differently, problems that demand a creative out of the box approach and understanding

rather than hard and fast solutions.

Hard systems approach to problem solving such as systems engineering, operations research,

assume an objective reality that everyone can agree on and well-defined problems with ideal

solutions.

Often problems have both hard and soft aspects so the two methodologies are

combined. When soft aspects are ignored, debacles can arise as in the recent

computer systems failure at TSB, British Airways and the billions wasted on

the NHS computer system because technical considerations dominated human

needs.

Soft systems methodology is concerned with human activity systems which less predictable

than physical systems.

We went on to discuss open systems and closed system and open system is

open to its environment. Examples above, of systems are open to other

systems within the body. Organisations are open to their environments,

including their competitors, science and technology and regulation. Systems are so

interdependent that it is difficult to close them off entirely, but it is necessary to try to if we

wish to focus on the interaction of one set of variables and exclude others.

They are not independent entities and their interaction makes them complex systems with

many local interactions. SSM is method or algorithm for understanding and perhaps

exercising some control over complex systems.

Organisations are social systems whose behaviour is determined by the behaviour of many

people. So, we can think of organizations or systems at the macro level arising from

interactions at the micro level.

An organisation is more than the sum of its parts. It's more than the sum of the subsystem's

that the organisation. It can only artificially be reduced to the behaviour of its sub-systems.

Many examples of computer systems (SE) debacles when users (SSM) are not consulted.

Systems are organized purposely

4. SOFT SYSTEMS AND CONSTRUCTION OF MEANING

Social constructivism

Some problems facing managers are fuzzy. Fuzziness means that the

problem lack clear definition of the elements of that problem. Problems

are often unstructured and they have multiple solution's or even no

solution or no solutions that will satisfy everyone. Solutions require

compromises and negotiation and cooperation.

One author explained this aspect of social constructive this constructivism by saying that the

past is a different country. If reality is socially constructed, there are as many realities as we

can conceive of. Constructing one reality is to exclude other realities. Adopting one approach

to a problem means excluding other ways of looking the problem.

Rich pictures

The first step in soft systems methodology is to recognise that managerial problems are often

unstructured. So before attempting to structure the problem, let’s try to look at it in the

broadest possible way and one way of doing this is to express the problem situation in a rich

picture.

People ask: What should I include in my rich picture? The whole purpose of

rich pictures is to include impression, emotional responses, metaphors, things

that come to mind immediately, relative uncensored by preconceptions about

the proper way thinking.

What we are trying to do with the rich picture is somehow to rid ourselves of

preconception. Structuring and making sense of the problem can come later.

Reality is constructed by the tools or models used to conceive it

Fixed mind sets because: Neurons that fire together wire together

For our purposes we have to recognise that any system is made up of sub systems check talks

about identifying these sub systems and defining these sub systems. He speaks about root

definitions. aspects.

Having identified the sub-systems in the rich picture, there comes the choice

as to which subsystem or groups of subsystems to consider. Having done so

we are closer to defining the problem; or, more accurately, because some

aspects have been excluded, and since the problem has many faces, the

definition is in terms of one face to the exclusion of other faces.

Conceptual Models

A conceptual model is a proposition inputting some control (independent) variables (X) into a

system, they will transform (T) they will they will transform other (dependent) variables (Y)

into a better (or worse) situation. For example: if the base rate in the UK is raised by the

Central Bank Monetary Policy Committee, the rate of exchange Pound against the Euro will

appreciate in favour of the Pound; or a firm that has a network of relationships with

customers for one product in its portfolio can leverage these capabilities successfully into

another product.

Then we have a functional relationship that a set of dependent variables depend on

independent variables, at least variables that are independent for our purposes and recall them

X. So why is a function of X when we our conceptual models.

What we have done is to construct a way of looking at the world we have constructed, or if

you like, socially constructed a version of the world and the question to ask is do our models

correspond with what we observe in do they correspond to reality that solutions way of

saying it because if reality is socially constructed what where asking is whether our our

construction of reality corresponds to other constructions of reality and if they don't

correspond then we have to adjust our conceptions of reality or adjust the social construction

of reality

Rich pictures are intended to free up fixed mind sets

The conceptual model we decide to go proposes or states that if way adapt

policies to with respect to the independent variable. This will result in changes

in the system more in the organisation and we have to consider whether these

changes are desirable. What are our goals. What is it we want to change and

why we also have to consider whether the changes we're considering and the

independent variables, whether they are feasible whether the changes are feasible. Whether

the independent variables. The control variable are feasible. Having decided that issue, at

least for the moment is we have to think about how these changes can be implemented and

what the barriers are to, and what the barriers are to implementation.

(Bassett-Jones, 2005) (Parjanen, 2012) (Proctor, 1991) (Fillis & Rentschler, 2010) (Baer, 2012)

(Martins & Terblanche, 2003) (Burleson, 2005) (Florio, et al., 2013)

(Checkland & Poulter, ) (Checkland, ) (Checkland, 1999)

5. ONTOLOGY AND SYSTEMS

An affinity exists between aspects of business and aspects of the spiritual domain so the

purpose of this paper is to establish a link between business and spirituality by spirituality

and I mean the recognition of a transcendent reality that is a reality which is beyond

description and beyond the bounds of understanding the correspondence or affinity between

business and spirituality, which I am concerned with here is the correspondence between soft

systems methodology and the five planes of being, as described by Ibn Arabi, 1/12 century

Sufi mystic scholar and philosophy and philosopher the correspondence. The correspondence

begins the correspondence begins by the recognition in both systems of an absolute that is

beyond understanding. Check describes this absolute check lens version of the absolute or

underlying reality which is beyond description and perhaps beyond understanding. In itself

by saying that the grass of reality available to artists human being is through the social

construction of reality, reality, or perhaps we should say the truth can only be understood

through an instrument or through an algorithm. The algorithm is the soft systems

methodology, which is a process of constructing meaning. The first step in the process is to

accept the fact that reality is a social construction and begin with that proposition because if

reality is a social construction. There are many, perhaps an infinity of such constructions for

coal Foucault describes the social construction Foucault is. Social construction is cast in the

language of a geniality genealogies. There are many there are many possible constructions of

A conceptual model: X affects Y, or X explains Y or Y is a function of X

reality. Social constructions of reality, so anyone construction is relative relative to other

construction of reality Foucault's version of relative notes is cast by his metaphor of

genealogies the genealogies of knowledge. So, to summarise the beginning proposition of

soft systems methodology is the relative to visit of of the red lit to this of one. Social

construction to other possible social constructions of the absolute reality. Correspondingly

Ibn Arabi Ibn Arabi's five planes of being big in with the first plane or severe of being. Or the

first had rat in his as an Ibn Arabi describes it, the first plane then or the first had ran

corresponds to the concept of that the word he uses to describe the absolute Ibn Arabi's

system proceeds through three levels of spirituality, the second level or second had ran being

the manifestations of the absolute the third had rather being the the second had ran being the

absolute manifesting himself or itself as God in Islam. Generally this second had ran is

spoken of as the names or or allow the third plane of being is the manifestation of the

absolute as the arcade types archetypes correspond to Plato's notion of forms. The fourth had

rather or plane of being is part spiritual and part material and it is only at the fifth had ran that

the absolute is manifested in the material or sensible worlds world

It seems to be a common understanding that one of the results of the Renaissance and the

subsequent Reformation was that a clear boundary was created between science and religion

or science and spirituality. Subsequently, I realise that there was not so much a split between

science and spirituality abuts a convergence but a convergence between the two, a

convergence which took place on different converging path's the path of science and the path

of spirituality, at least according to Ibn Arabi's system. The path's can be described by saying

that bold were and remain to be millionaire path's millenarian path's

Adams, K. M. et al., 2014. Systems Theory as the Foundation for Understanding Systems.

Systems Engineering, , 17(1), pp. 112-123.

Anon., . Systematics – study of multi-term systems. [Online]

Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematics_–_study_of_multi-term_systems

[Accessed 4 5 2018].

Anon., . Systematics: Meaning, Branches and Its Application. [Online]

Available at: http://www.biologydiscussion.com/animals-2/systematics-meaning-branches-

and-its-application/32374

[Accessed 4 5 2018].

Baer, M., 2012. Putting Creativity to Work: The Implementation of Creative Ideas in

Organizations. Academy of Management Journal, , 55(5), pp. 1102-1119.

Bassett-Jones, N., 2005. The Paradox of Diversity Management, Creativity and Innovation.

Creativity and Innovation Management, , 14(2), pp. 169-175.

Burleson, W., 2005. Developing creativity, motivation, and self-actualization with learning

systems. International Journal of Human-computer Studies \/ International Journal of Man-

machine Studies, , 63(), pp. 436-451.

Checkland, P., 1999. Systems thinking, systems practice. ed. (): John Wiley & Sons.

Checkland, P., 2000. Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective a. Systems

Research and Behavioral Science, , 17(), p. .

Checkland, P., . Progress in cybernetics and systems research. ed. (): Hemisphere Pub. Corp..

Checkland, P. & Poulter, J., 2010. Soft Systems Methodology. Human systems management,

, 8(4), pp. 191-242.

Checkland, P. & Poulter, J., . Learning for action: a short definitive account of soft systems

methodology and its use for practitioner, teachers, and students. ed. (): John Wiley & Sons.

Fillis, I. & Rentschler, R., 2010. The Role Of Creativity In Entrepreneurship. Journal of

Enterprising Culture, , 18(01), pp. 49-81.

Florio, V. D., Bakhouya, M., Coronato, A. & Marzo, G. D., 2013. Models and Concepts for

Socio-Technical Complex Systems: Towards Fractal Social Organizations. Systems Research

and Behavioral Science, , 30(6), pp. 750-772.

Martins, E. & Terblanche, F., 2003. Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity

and innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, , 6(1), pp. 64-74.

Parjanen, S., 2012. Experiencing Creativity in the Organization: From Individual Creativity

to Collective Creativity. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and

Management, , 7(), pp. 109-128.

Pitcher, L., . Q & A: The difference between hard and soft links. [Online]

Available at: http://linuxgazette.net/105/pitcher.html

[Accessed 30 4 2018].

Proctor, R. A., 1991. The Importance of Creativity in the Management Field. British Journal

of Management, , 2(4), pp. 223-230.

Siegal, M. & Varley, R., 2002. Neural systems involved in "theory of mind".. Nature

Reviews Neuroscience, , 3(6), pp. 463-471.

Winter, M. & Checkland, P., 2003. Soft systems: a fresh perspective for project management.

[Online]

Available at: http://icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/10.1680/cien.2003.156.4.187

[Accessed 20 4 2018].

Checkland, P., 1999. Systems thinking, systems practice. ed. (): John Wiley & Sons.

Checkland, P., 2000. Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective a. Systems

Research and Behavioral Science, , 17(), p. .

Checkland, P., . Progress in cybernetics and systems research. ed. (): Hemisphere Pub. Corp..

Checkland, P. & Poulter, J., 2010. Soft Systems Methodology. Human systems management,

, 8(4), pp. 191-242.

Checkland, P. & Poulter, J., . Learning for action: a short definitive account of soft systems

methodology and its use for practitioner, teachers, and students. ed. (): John Wiley & Sons.

Winter, M. & Checkland, P., 2003. Soft systems: a fresh perspective for project management.

[Online]

Available at: http://icevirtuallibrary.com/doi/10.1680/cien.2003.156.4.187

[Accessed 20 4 2018].

In mathematics, graph theory is the study of graphs, which are mathematical structures used

to model pairwise relations between objects. A graph in this context is made up of vertices,

nodes, or points which are connected by edges, arcs, or lines. A graph may be undirected,

meaning that there is no distinction between the two vertices associated with each edge, or its

edges may be directed from one vertex to another; see Graph for more detailed definitions

and for other variations in the types of graph that are commonly considered. Graphs are one

of the prime objects of study in discrete mathematics.