Evaluating the Role of Systems Thinking in Global and Local Sustainability Challenges - Essay Example

evaluating the role of systems thinking in global and local sustainability challenges Name Surname A Research Essay ­­­ August 2015 Introduction The topic of this research essay is evaluating the role of systems thinking in global and local sustainability challenges. Systems thinking has played an important role not just in local but in global challenges as well and has now play a central role in global environmental assessments including those aimed at understanding climate change. A “wicked problem” that tests the limits of traditional decision making and policy analysis in particular is climate change. Due to inertial influences in the natural climate and human political systems, collective policy and infrastructural decisions of today have the potential to profoundly affect communities in excess of one century from now (Lenton et al., 2008). Hence, this wicked problem is worth researching and exploring not just for local and more so for global sustainability. To put things into its proper perspective, I would like to define first the “wicked problem” and the concepts of system thinking and sustainability. According to Bush (2009), climate change is a transboundary issue that requires comprehensive global solutions. Senge (2006) stated that systems thinking is a discipline and a language for seeing wholes and interrelationships rather than isolated things. Systems thinking offers a way for people to communicate about dynamic complexities and interdependencies. It enables people in knowledge-intensive organizations to see “the world in new, more dynamic and holistic ways, which is really the most powerful advantage that systems thinking offers” (Richmond, 2000, p. 3). Furthermore, according to Richmond (2000), “systems thinking can provide a valuable capability for people to more effectively deal with complex problems” (p. 265). Sustainability on the other hand, according to the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), sustainability is meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability for future generations to meet their own needs (Gail, 2010; King, 2008). On the other hand, sustainability education refers to informal education that is intended to increase people’s awareness and knowledge of the environment and the challenges it faces with the goal of fostering people’s attitudes, motivations, and commitments in order for them to make informed decisions and take responsible action towards global sustainability (Clarke, 2011) "To a large degree, sustainability is a challenge to think about the long-range future and, in so doing, to rethink the present" (Rankin et al., 2005, p. 37). The aim/purpose of this research essay is to discuss the topic comprehensively with emphasis on the evaluation of the role and criticality of systems thinking in developing global sustainability to climate change challenges. I would specifically explore the influence of systems thinking as a critical solution to climate change for local and global sustainability challenges and the reasons why the use of systems thinking is especially important in the effort to lead complex, hyper-dynamic, and globally-oriented environmental organizations of the 21st century. Hence, published works by accredited scholars and researchers were evaluated and discussed in terms of the extent to which they have contributed to knowledge in global sustainability and sustainability challenges. Body of the Essay I totally agree with the topic of this research essay which is ‘Systems thinking is critical in developing solutions to sustainability challenges,’ since it has greatly influenced social systems, particularly environmental organizational leadership and management. This body of the research essay focuses on scholarly research related to systems thinking in influencing social systems, particularly environmental organization’s leadership and management. Hence, I would like to build my arguments with recent key figures: W.E. Deming and Peter Senge, two individuals who used systems thinking in their consulting with top CEOs and environmental organization leaders, influencing both leadership and management thinking for sustainability challenges. W. Edwards Deming’s most notable contributions were the utilization of systems thinking as an important component of good management practices, including his 14 points of management (1986, pp. 23-24) and seven deadly sins of business (1986, pp. 97- 98). By providing management with an innovative approach to business, he saved the post WWII nation of Japan from economic ruin and put the United States on the fast track to business success. His life, work, philosophy, and methods remain some of the greatest business innovations. Systems thinking is a major component of the “system of profound knowledge” used extensively by Deming (2000). This way of thinking addressed the need for the transformation needed in industry, education, and government. Deming and other systems thinkers “focus on the whole, paying attention to the interactions between the parts rather than the parts themselves” (Prevette, 2003, p. 33). Systems thinking has evolved over the past 50 years as systems thinkers continue to build upon the work of others. Systems thinking has been utilized in many ways. In terms of leadership and management, there is an emphasis on “increasing the autonomy of workers, reducing hierarchical relationships, increasing feedback throughout the production process, having good relationships with customers and suppliers, measuring results, and testing innovations on a small scale” (Umpleby & Dent, 1999, p. 91). In terms of organizational quality performance, the focus is with a holistic attitude, working to guarantee the success of the organization by concentrating on quality, productivity, profit, and how these components work together. According to Senge (2006), “systems thinking is a conceptual framework, a body of knowledge and tools to make the full patterns clearer, for seeing interrelationships rather than seeing components separately” (p. 7). The use of systems thinking in the leadership and management of organizations “is characterized by long-term vision and achievement of long-term profits” (Prevette, 2003, p. 33). It requires organizations to focus on the long-term and the life-cycle costs of a product. A system is made up of a set of parts and systems thinkers realize that each part can affect the system and each part has an effect on other parts. Systems thinkers operate under the principle that “no part can have an independent effect on the whole” (Prevette, 2003, p. 33). In Out of the Crisis (1986), Deming introduced the 14 points for management which relate to the leadership and management of an organization from a systems perspective in several ways. Deming believed that “the job of management is not supervision, but leadership” (1986, p. 54). Deming believed that success was only possible through a leader who does not treat every fault as a special case; rather, the entire system must be understood. Furthermore, leaders must create and foster a secure environment. “No one can put in his best performance unless he feels secure” (Deming, 1986, p. 59). Most importantly, organizations with a systems perspective cannot fear knowledge. “There is widespread resistance of knowledge. . . . A better outlook is of course to embrace new knowledge because it might help us to do a better job” (Deming, 1986, p. 60). According to Deming (2000), a system “is a network of interdependent components that work together to try to accomplish the aim of the system” (p. 50). A system must have an aim, and this “aim must be clear to everyone in the system and include plans for the future” (Deming, 2000, p. 40). However, the components of the system need not all be clearly defined or documented as “people may merely do what needs to be done” (Deming, 2000, p. 50). The system must be managed though because the components are naturally competitive. Cooperation is the key, and it is leadership’s and management’s job “to direct the efforts of all components toward the aim of the system” (Deming, 2000, p. 50). Perhaps the most profound result of systems thinking is that complexity is reduced and an overwhelming number of intangible benefits are gained. These intangible benefits “were what brought about the unexpectedly larger increases in productivity, on top of what could have been expected in gains out of what was worked on directly” (Delavigne & Robertson, 1994, p. 89). In other words, by focusing upon improving the system as a whole, systems thinkers gain a ripple effect and a compounding effect of benefits through the interaction of improved parts with one another and with the whole. Another important figure, Peter Senge, extensively wrote about what he and others learned from pioneering consulting work with Ford, Chrysler, Shell, AT&T, Hannover Insurance, and Harley Davidson. He first achieved notoriety in the 1990s when he emerged as a major figure in organizational development with his book, The Fifth Discipline. In the book, he further developed the idea of the “learning organization,” which is dependent for success upon the fifth discipline of the learning organization, viz., systems thinking. In this book, Senge thought of organizations as dynamic systems in a state of continuous improvement. Senge (2006) determined that “systems thinking is a conceptual framework, a body of knowledge and tools that has been developed over the past fifty years, to make the full patterns clearer, and to help us see how to change them effectively” (p. 7). Senge (2006) claimed that “the prevailing system of management is, at its core, dedicated to mediocrity” (p. xviii). The learning organization is one that is able to pull itself away from mediocrity and instead focus on several core ideas as outlined in The Fifth Discipline. First, Senge thought “working together is more satisfying and more productive than the prevailing system of management” (2006, p. xviii). Second, organizations work on the basis of how their members think and interact, and at the heart of successful organizational change is its people. Finally “in building learning organizations, there is no ultimate destination or end state, only a lifelong journey” (Senge, 2006, p. xviii). Senge concluded that “systems thinking” is a management paradigm that is desperately needed because people love to put together a puzzle and see the whole emerge. He argues that “the unhealthiness of our world today is in direct proportion to our inability to see it as a whole” (Senge, 2006, p. 68). Senge (2006) further noted of systems thinking, “it is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing patterns of change rather than static ‘snapshots’” (p. 68). By viewing knowledge, people, and organizations as living systems, Senge showed it is possible to get people to work together to create value. Along these same lines, Senge determined that successful systems thinkers are able to impact the core of the organization. By impacting the core, change comes from the inside out. Programs that work from the top down or from the outside in cause “many in the organization to feel threatened or manipulated” (Senge, 1999, p. 14). Senge has chosen to focus on the internal leaders to avoid these feelings of mistrust induced from outside. This does not mean top managers, it means “leadership as the capacity of a human community to shape its future, and specifically to sustain the significant processes of change required to do so” (Senge, 1999, p. 16). Overall, he views systems thinking as sensible and claims it is needed now more than ever because our society is overwhelmed by complexity. It “is the antidote to this sense of helplessness that many feel as we enter the ‘age of interdependence’” (Senge, 2006, p. 69). In his work, The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge (2006) posited systems thinking to be the cornerstone of his five learning disciplines of how learning organizations think about their world. Real systems thinking does not allow people to fight complexity with complexity or devise complex solutions to increasingly complex problems. Systems thinking will ultimately simplify life “by helping us see the deeper patterns lying behind the events and the details” (Senge, 2006, p. 73). Systems thinking all starts with an understanding of feedback. By understanding feedback, systems thinkers can begin to build learning and recognize when things recur again and again. “Reinforcing and balancing feedback loops and delays are the building blocks of systems thinking” (Senge, 2006, p. 79). In the past, many situations required no more than a simple linear description. However, feedback processes are essential when dealing with the dynamic and complex problems in today’s environment. Senge (2006) states “the systems viewpoint is geared toward the long-term view. This is why feedback loops are so important” (p. 91). In the short term, delays and feedback can be ignored, but they always catch up. “That’s one of the lessons of balancing loops with delays: that aggressive action often produces exactly the opposite of what is intended” (Senge, 2006, p. 91). Systems thinking, using feedback loops and delays, teaches us again and again that certain patterns of structure keep returning. Conclusion Based on the discussion above, I would like to conclude that systems thinking can and should be part of any climate change initiatives and challenges, so that future generations find this way of thinking to be second nature. Until that time when the schools of thought developed by these important figures becomes second nature, it is important to continue developing, understanding, and implementing a systems mind-set wherever possible. Environmentalists by nature are trained systems thinkers and key players in this process of systems thinking. Because of systems thinking, Ion Georgiou (2007) said he gained “a lifelong motivation which propels one to continue to learn, to write, to exchange the most intangible human product of them all and yet one with profoundly tangible consequences: ideas” (p. xi). Georgiou (2007) wrote that contrary to the seemingly scapegoating use of the word, “systemic” problems really can exist with the system as a whole. No one part can be blamed for failure or praised for success. However, this goes against the grain of the innate desire to “point the finger,” “quelch the anger,” and “take the blame” (Georgiou, 2007, p. 6). Instead of handing out blame, systems thinking attempts to redesign the situation so that “blame takes a back seat in systemic problem resolution—if it has any at all—and the demanding search for systemic causes begins” (Georgiou, 2007,p. 6). Systems thinking allows the system thinker to step back from the situation and consider the very real possibility that the situation itself enabled the problem to arise. There is surely much value to be gained by employing systems thinking. Perhaps most importantly, “the systems approach reveals how a system causes its own behaviour and thus points the way towards resolving undesirable consequences stemming from this self-induced cause” (Georgiou, 2007, p. 11). By gaining an understanding of the system, the systems thinker can model and solve problems by mapping out the interrelationships of a situation, inviting consensus, and demanding more of those affected by the system. Finally, a holistic, or systemic, approach to evaluating the role of systems thinking in climate change issues can have dramatic and lasting effects, and therefore a critical solution to local and global sustainability challenges. References Bush, B. J. (2009) Democracy, autocracy, and hybridity: A cross-national analysis of political regimes, environmental sustainability, and performance (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3370612) Clarke, S. E. (2011) Assessing the rehabilitative potential of science and sustainability education in prisons: A study of the sustainable prisons project. (Master’s thesis). Retrieved from http://blogs.evergreen.edu/sustainableprisons/files/2011/06/Clarke_SMESthesis2011.pdf Delavigne, K.T., & Robertson, J.D. (1994) Deming’s profound changes. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Deming, W.E. (2000) The new economics for industry, government, education. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study. Gail, W. B. (2010) Achieving climate sustainability. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 91(2), 197-208. Georgiou, I. (2007) Thinking through systems thinking. New York, NY: Routledge. King, M. C. (2008) What sustainability should mean. Challenge, 51(2), 27-39. Prevette, S.S. (2003) Systems thinking: An uncommon answer. Quality Progress, 36(7), 32-35. Rankin, A. M. (2010) Sustainability strategies in agribusiness: Understanding key drivers, objectives, and actions (Master’s thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 1482973) Richmond, B. (2000) The “Thinking” in systems thinking: Seven essential skills. Cambridge, MA: Pegasus Communications. Senge, P. (1999) The dance of change: The challenges to sustaining momentum in learning organizations. New York, NY: Doubleday. Senge, P. (2006) The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Currency Doubleday. Umpleby, S., & Dent, E. (1999) The origins and purposes of several traditions in systems theory and cybernetics. Cybernetics and Systems, 30, 79-103. Read More