"A commonly
accepted principle of systems dynamics is that a quantitative change, beyond a
critical point, results in a qualitative change. Accordingly, a difference in
degree may become a difference in kind. This doesn't mean that an increased
quantity of a given variable will bring a qualitative change in the variable
itself. However, when the state of a system depends on a set of variables, a
quantitative change in one variable beyond the inflection point will result in
a change of phase in the state of the system. This change is a qualitative one,
representing a whole new set of relationships among the variables involved."
"Analyzing the behavior of a nonlinear system is like walking through a maze whose walls rearrange themselves with each step you take (in other words, playing the game changes the game)." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"But one of the major findings of quantum theory is the recognition that the universe is an open system. Open systems are neg-entropic (-S) and exhibit a tendency toward order. This means that according to quantum theory, the universe is a self-organizing system, continuously expanding and moving toward increasing order and complexity. In this context even subatomic particles show open system behavior and self-referencing tendencies." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Complementary to the principle of multidimensionality and parallel to it is the concept of plurality. Plurality of function, structure, and process, as we will see later on, is at the core of systems theory of development. It makes the high/high a possibility and choice a reality. Plurality simply maintains that systems can have multiple structures and multiple functions and be governed by multiple processes; it denies the classical view of a single structure with a single function in a single cause-and-effect relationship." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Complexity is a relative term. It depends on the number and the nature of interactions among the variables involved. Open loop systems with linear, independent variables are considered simpler than interdependent variables forming nonlinear closed loops with a delayed response." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Despite seemingly contradictory requirements for pursuit of opposing ends, there are processes that would make the attainment of both ends feasible. For instance, both freedom and security are attainable by a process called participation, stability and change by adaptation, and order and complexity by organization." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"In the context of
a zero-sum game, opposing tendencies are formulated in two distinct ways.
First, conflicting tendencies are conceptualized as two mutually exclusive,
discrete entities. The conflicts are treated as dichotomies that are usually
expressed as X or NX. If X is right then NX has to be wrong. This represents an
or relationship, a win/lose struggle with a moral obligation to win. The loser,
usually declared wrong, is eliminated. Second, opposing tendencies are
formulated in such a way that they can be represented by a continuum. Between
black and white are a thousand shades of gray."
"Laws of complexity hold universally across hierarchical scales (scalar, self-similarity) and are not influenced by the detailed behavior of constituent parts." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Natural science has discovered 'chaos'. Social science has encountered 'complexity'. But chaos and complexity are not characteristics of our new reality; they are features of our perceptions and understanding. We see the world as increasingly more complex and chaotic because we use inadequate concepts to explain it. When we understand something, we no longer see it as chaotic or complex. Maybe playing the new game requires learning a new language." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Nature's tendency for iteration, pattern formation, and creation of order out of chaos creates expectations of predictability. It seems, however, that nature, because of varying degrees of interaction between chance and choice, and the nonlinearity of systems, escapes the boredom of predictability." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Operational thinking is about mapping relationships. It is about capturing interactions, interconnections, the sequence and flow of activities, and the rules of the game. It is about how systems do what they do, or the dynamic process of using elements of the structure to produce the desired functions. In a nutshell, it is about unlocking the black box that lies between system input and system output." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Remember that to map the dynamic behavior of a system is to capture the interaction of positive and negative feedback loops. These interactions, in essence, define the interdependencies, which in turn are responsible for nonlinearity in the system. It is the interdependency that poses the major challenge to our cognitive abilities. It is this challenge that we need to overcome by using operational modeling. Pattern recognition is critical for understanding and changing undesirable behavior. This leads us to the need for development of interactive operational representation of the phenomenon under investigation." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"Understanding interdependency requires a way of thinking different from analysis. It requires systems thinking. And analytical thinking and systems thinking are quite distinct. [...] Systems thinking is the art of simplifying complexity. It is about seeing through chaos, managing interdependency, and understanding choice. We see the world as increasingly more complex and chaotic because we use inadequate concepts to explain it. When we understand something, we no longer see it as chaotic or complex." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"The real challenge to building a viable social system is the ability to create unity in diversity, meeting the varying interests of independent members operating in an interdependent whole. […] In the long run, the society and the individual either stand together or fall separately. A win/win relationship is achieved not through zero-sum or even compromise. For both of them to win requires reconceptualization of the nature and the relationship of the whole and the parts." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
"The second law states that a general tendency in the universe (as a closed system) is toward elimination of all differences. Thus, the ultimate state is sameness and randomness, a chaotic simplicity. Entropy (S), the measure of randomness, will therefore always increase. However, we know that living systems are neg-entropic (–S). They are able not only to negate this formidable process by differentiation, but also to move toward a predefined order, an organized complexity. Using the formula I = –S, which indicates that a neg-entropic system must have information, one might conclude that movement toward complexity and order is only possible if the system has a means of knowing and an internal image of what it wants to be." (Jamshid Gharajedaghi, "Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity A Platform for Designing Business Architecture" 3rd Ed., 2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment