Systems Thinking Tools LO5062

Jan Lelie (100730.1213@compuserve.com)
23 Jan 96 04:58:02 EST

Replying to LO4992 --

Hi Diane,

You mailed:

> If anyone is willing to share their experiences about systems-thinking
tools I would appreciate seeing some posts. Some of the things I am
looking for include:

1) Did you find it difficult to comprehend?
2) Did you have formal training or were you able to learn it without?
3) Have you applied the skill at work and how effective did you find it in
communicating your thoughts?
4) Have others expressed an interest in learning the skill after seeing it's
potential.
5) In general, does anyone know how widely used this skill is among
"systems" people?
*** end quote

Sure, here it goes:

> 1) Did you find it difficult to comprehend?

No, i personally didn't think it is difficult to comprehend, but i have a
background in physics and business IT and have been looking into systems
this way all my life. At the end of my MBA-study, in 1983, I described the
process of a technical service department within a big chemical plant
using these kind of descriptions. Also based on the ideas of Weick 'Social
psychology of organizing' . I then noted that nobody else seemed to
understand this way of describing processes and the implications, so i
left it at that. After a few years i started to draw 'process charts', as
i used to call them, again, because problems seems to be 'systemic': build
into the system. I now have about twenty nicely covering almost every
situation in manufacturing logistics.

> 2) Did you have formal training or were you able to learn it without?

I didn't have a formal training, but applying the archetypes did help to
speed up the process of using these tools and develop more accurate
descriptions....

> 3) Have you applied the skill at work and how effective did you find it
in communicating your thoughts?

Yes i have. The effectiveness on the short run is zilch (very low). Most
people want to look at the content in stead of the structure ('why do you
use the word ' lead time' shouldn't it be 'throughput time' or 'delivery
time''. 'Why do you say we have a communication problem; I think we have a
team work problem?' Or: 'no, you're interpretation of delivery reliability
is wrong'. 'No, the fact that now item A is short is for a different
reason that Item B is too late'. And even: 'it cannot be that you can
describe our situation in this way'). I guess people feel insecure, both
because of the strangeness of the tool and the implication of the models.
In many cases the results of the use of the tools say: 'you have created
your own problem' and 'if you're not part of the solution, you're part of
the problem'. On the long run, however, it proves to be very powerful
because once the AHA-erlebnis, the mental switch, has been made, you have
leverage. (is that the right word?). And communication about problems,
solutions, implementation and actions becomes very fast.

There is however a mental barrier which i find difficult to handle,
because it always is so crystal clear to me and managers do feel so
threatened by it. Factory workers, on the other hand, sometimes ask me:
'Right Lelie, nice picture, of course we have delivery problems because of
too much inventory, now tell us something new'. (I don't want to boost but
a friend and colleague of me once said: 'you have the irritating ability
to see what is the problem in a situation whit in an hour').

> 4) Have others expressed an interest in learning the skill after seeing
it's potential.

Yep, but again, most people do seem to have trouble handling the ambiguity
involved. I think, because of this strangeness of the resistance, it might
be a paradigm-shift. Somehow we have learned to cover up the thruth when
it might be threathening. I borrowed that from Argyris.

> 5) In general, does anyone know how widely used this skill is among
"systems" people?

I don't.

If you have more questions, do not hesitate to post them,

--
Jan Lelie
LOGISENS - Sparring partner in logistical development
+31 703243475
100730.1213@compuserve.com