Home | Login | Recent Changes | Search | All Pages | Help

SessId020

SYSTEMS THINKING: BEYOND CAUSE AND EFFECT

Designers

Brian Pioreck and SteveSmith

Requirements

Max number of participants: to be decided

Min number of participants: 5

Optimum number of participants: to be decided

Duration of session: to be decided

Configuration of room: flexible, chairs only

Description

Most of us tend to see the world in causal terms: gravity makes the apple fall, rain makes things grow. For simple systems, the model of Cause and Effect works pretty well. But for complex systems -- including all the systems we actually work with -- the results of causal models are often misleading or just plain wrong. When interventions are built on these results, they fail, and we feel frustrated and powerless. What else can we do?

To be more effective, we have to replace the old linear way of understanding complex systems. In this session, we experiment with letting go of cause and effect, and explore methods for understanding complex systems non-causally. Using simple diagramming methods, your team will analyze complex systems collaboratively to develop effective system interventions.

Feedback Nynke: I assume this is about going from a mechanistical space to a quantum space (people, connections, possibilities and information flows)? If so, can we also work on finding ways to translate example images, words or feelings for people in the team who cannot easily "let go" and/or how to deal with that kind of situation internally when we can't(reframing/perception shift)?

Regarding your question about whether we can find ways to help teams who are struggling to "let go" of images, words or feelings, I'm unclear about what you are looking to do. Would you give me an example of a situation where you see this problem. Thanks, --Steve

As I understand it, DOE is a simple robust model/process that allows people to step without "knowing" they are doing the above (until it is too late)? I'd like to know more about the DOE process and the (human response) patterns you found so far when observing participants? And about effective tactics/strategies when facilitating the process? -Nynke

Yes, DOE is a simple robust model/process. It's the modeling (diagramming) tool that Jerry uses extensively in his Quality Software Management (QSM) series. Have you read QSM?

Here is the process I use to create a DOE: 0) Gather the most important people affected by the problem into a room with a whiteboard. 1) Create a problem statement that garners a consensus. 2) Make the assumption that the group has infinite money and time to measure anything they would like about the problem. 3) Brainstorm the measurable effects of the problem that interest everyone the most. 4) Work backwards from the effects to the causes and define the relationships between the two things as you go, 5) Brainstorm omitted effects and causes and add to the diagram.

My 6 step approach doesn't do justice to the description of DOE that Jerry has in QSM Vol 1.

I recommend strongly that you DO NOT underestimate the importance of step 0 and 1. I've noticed that doing the diagramming without the other people makes it my problem, rather than theirs. And, without a problem to solve everyone is wasting their time doing a diagram that turns out to be an exercise in futility. --Steve

I read QSM at the end of my direct involvement (internal consultant role) in the facilitation of such a process (much less focused than what I understand a DOE process can be).

Based on the assumption that QSM and the description of the DOE process shares "proven" successful ways of facilitation by you, Jerry, and all of the other people that contributed to QSM, I feel I can trust myself (more) as an advisor. Some problem descriptions in QSM and the by you mentioned importance of step 0 and 1, I recognize. I did see them (as essential) and was able to find several ways (more or less effectively) in the Maze of perceptions and information.

In QSM I also found some new stuff that I hadn't seen yet, and could recognize afterwards. And some more stuff I have not seen yet. I think it was important for me to initially learn "reality up" by throwing myself in.

I would like to hear all sorts of ways/stories from people who do similar types of facilitation. And I am convinced this session can give me some additional perceptions. I think DOE can be like an acceleration tool when I add it to my toolkit. Does the session at AYE include experiencing the process?

Nynke

I think that Brian and my thinking fits nicely with what you desire. We want to create an experience where people participate in the creation of a DOE and where people can share their experiences with DOE.

I'm happy to hear that you have read QSM, and have experience using DOE. I anticipate learning a lot from you.

Tell me about the lessons you learned during your project. --Steve

It sure feels good to read you are having fun. I'm having fun too!

Loads of lessons, and I'm still working through some of them. And here are 5 of the ones (not in priority order) that have already "settled" and we {Erwin, Nynke} hope to bring to the SM2001 Conference in San Diego in February:

- working in the organization�s world for building on what is already there is essential for effective change
- people need to see the usefulness of learning and openness for change at work in us, not only hear it from us
- a solution is not complete without implementation/distribution
- facilitation can mean doing �invisible� (to the organization) stuff, and feeling supported by people from the �change networks� {SEM, Shape, AYE, Inch} can be a life saver
- �doing nothing� may be a useful solution to a problem too, and can be extremely hard to implement

;-) Trade some (more) of yours with me?

--Nynke

I want to hear more about the lessons you described, starting with problems you've had "doing nothing".

I've got one quick lesson to share with you before I run off to participate in a meeting: Offer management concrete advice that is actionable. I've noticed over the years that consultants and employees give managment advice that is like what they get in a fortune cookie. Perhaps the follow on to that lesson (one I think that that I learned from Jerry's Secrets of Consulting) is that customer pay for getting advice, rather than taking the advice. Despite the brilliance of my advice, my customer may choose the "do nothing" option. I'll have more to share later. --Steve

I believe the motivation behind accepting verses taking advice comes from the clients ability to relate to it. Plus, you have to go back to what was originally contracted for. For me, this returns to a recurring situation. The things we observe are always the tip of the iceberg. The events leading up to an experience are non-linear. How many different ways do I have to see something before I can make a good decision on what to do? Do I have to see every event or their results? Probably not, but I have to be aware of the ones that matter to the people involved. This for me is one of the central points of this session --Brian