I know we preach that systems thinking is a great set of concepts and tools to solve problems, but that statement hasn't sat comfortably with me for some reason. Today, it dawned on me why this is so, leading to this post. What follows comes from the experience and observation of helping others see the benefit of using systems thinking, or, for that matter, anything different from what they are using.One of the biggest assumptions I think we make as systems thinking afficionados, including gurus such as Peter Senge and Daniel Kim, is that everyone else naturally sees the problems the way we see them, and therefore can easily switch to using our viewpoint (tools and concepts) to address the problem.Maybe this is why systems thinking has taken off in the education field - young students have fewer pre-conceived notions of the world and can see new perspectives earlier. If you are in that crowd, please chime in via the comments.I am directing this post mostly at those of us dealing with mature organizations where complexity has created dynamic problems that haunt the company's leadership.So here are my top 3 ways to fail at using systems thinking tools and concepts to properly solve those dynamic problems:Use the same words, keep the same mindset - When we use the phrase "problem solving", more often than not, the picture that comes to mind is one of solving for the right answer to the problem.Instead of looking at it as a" problem to fix", let's look at it as a "new opportunity to be discovered" around our desired outcome.I don't know about you, but the picture in my head when I hear those two phrases differs drastically. To try to sum up the different pictures, the former is a pinpoint focus and the latter is a wider search pattern. This leads me to the next way to fail:Assume that the orignal problem statement was useful - Sometimes systems thinking will be called in "off the bench" for a problem because a previous player such as six sigma or Kepner-Tregoe only took it so far. Thus, it's very natural to carry forward the definition and framework of the problem into the systems thinking application.We like to use the phrase "This analysis tells the story of..." when creating problem statements for systems thinking.This gets away from the pinpoint focus (usually on the symptom) to describing a situation that may have multiple factors interacting to produce the unwanted results. Over the course of working with a team, this story changes as we dive deeper into the situation.Make systems thinking the "flavor-of-the-day" program that replaces a previous flavor - This rule can be applied to any new change/improvement effort, but it's especially important to those who are implenting the use of systems thinking tools and concepts.Just as a matter of inegrity, we can't say that there is only one approach to addressing problems. Systems thinking has to work together with all current and future formal problem-solving programs. Finding ways to connect them all together (see Battle Royale: Systems Thinking VS Six Sigma) will only strenghthen your organization's ability to know what kind of issue they are facing and how to best address it.In re-reading those 3 reasons for myself, I realize there is a lot of focus on words, semantics and mental images. These are where our assumptions are constructed and hidden (unintentionally). This post was an exercise for me to take an honest look at words I've been using related to systems thinking to see what assumptions may be lurking there that prevent me from fully helping others gain maximum benefit from systems thinking.What about you? Where has systems thinking let you down? How has it been helpful to you? What assumptions did you have to overcome in order to use it more effectively?
