"A complex system can fail in an infinite number of ways."
"A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. The inverse proposition also appears to be true: A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be made to work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system." (John Gall, "General Systemantics: How systems work, and especially how they fail", 1975)
"A system represents someone's solution to a problem. The
system doesn't solve the problem."
"Loose systems last longer and function better." (John Gall, "General Systemantics: How systems work, and especially how they fail", 1975)
"Systems Are Seductive. They promise to do a hard job faster,
better, and more easily than you could do it by yourself. But if you set up a
system, you are likely to find your time and effort now being consumed in the
care and feeding of the system itself. New problems are created by its very
presence. Once set up, it won't go away, it grows and encroaches. It begins to
do strange and wonderful things. Breaks down in ways you never thought
possible. It kicks back, gets in the way, and opposes its own proper function.
Your own perspective becomes distorted by being in the system. You become
anxious and push on it to make it work. Eventually you come to believe that the
misbegotten product it so grudgingly delivers is what you really wanted all the
time. At that point encroachment has become complete. You have become absorbed.
You are now a systems person."
"The following four propositions, which appear to the author to be incapable of formal proof, are presented as Fundamental Postulates upon which the entire superstructure of General Systemantics [...] is based [...] (1) Everything is a system. (2) Everything is part of a larger system. (3) The universe is infinitely systematizable, both upward (larger systems) and downward (smaller systems) (4) All systems are infinitely complex. (The illusion of simplicity comes from focusing attention on one or a few variables.)" (John Gall, "General Systemantics: How systems work, and especially how they fail", 1975)
"The system always kicks back. - Systems get in the way - or, in slightly more elegant language: Systems tend to oppose their own proper functions. Systems tend to malfunction conspicuously just after their greatest triumph." (John Gall, "Systemantics: The underground text of systems lore", 1986)
"Alternating positive and negative feedback produces a special form of stability represented by endless oscillation between two polar states or conditions." (
"[...] the System may be so thoroughly organized around the familiar response strategy that a new response would require extensive restructuring - something that Systems do with the greatest reluctance and difficulty." (
"The function performed by a System is not operationally identical to the function of the same name performed by a person. In general, a function performed by a larger System is not operationally identical to the function of the same name as performed by a smaller System." (
"Systems-people everywhere share certain attributes, but each specific System tends to attract people with specific sets of traits. […] Systems attract not only Systems-people who have qualities making for success within the System; they also attract individuals who possess specialized traits adapted to allow them to thrive at the expense of the System; i.e., persons who parasitize the System." (
"We are accustomed to thinking that a System acts like a machine,
and that if we only knew its mechanism, we could understand, even predict, its
behavior. This is wrong. The correct orientation is: - and if the machine is
large and complex enough, it will act like a large System. We simply have our
metaphors backwards." (
"When a system is set up to accomplish some goal, a new
entity has come into being - the system itself. No matter what the 'goal' of the
system, it immediately begins to exhibit systems-behavior, that is, to act
according to the general laws that govern the operation of all systems." (
"Almost by definition, one is rarely privileged to 'control' a disaster. Yet the activity somewhat loosely referred to by this term is a substantial portion of Management, perhaps the most important part. […] It is the business of a good Manager to ensure, by taking timely action in the real world, that scenarios of disaster remain securely in the realm of Fantasy."
"But the history of large systems demonstrates that, once the hurdle of stability has been cleared, a more subtle challenge appears. It is the challenge of remaining stable when the rules change. Machines, like organizations or organisms, that fail to meet this challenge find that their previous stability is no longer of any use. The responses that once were life-saving now just make things worse. What is needed now is the capacity to re-write the procedure manual on short notice, or even (most radical change of all) to change goals." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"Clearly, total feedback is Not a Good Thing. Too much feedback can over- whelm the response channels, leading to paralysis and inaction. Even in a system designed to accept massive feedback (such as the human brain), if the system is required to accommodate to all incoming data, equilibrium will never be reached. The point of decision will be delayed indefinitely, and no action will be taken."
"[…] even though a System may function very poorly, it can still tend to Expand to Fill the Known Universe, and Positive Feedback only encourages that tendency." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"Experts in the 'Problem' area proceed to elaborate its complexity. They design complex Systems to attack it. This approach guarantees failure, at least for all but the most pedestrian tasks. The problem is a Problem precisely because it is incorrectly conceptualized in the first place, and a large System for studying and attacking the Problem merely locks in the erroneous conceptualization into the minds of everyone concerned. What is required is not a large System, but a different approach. Trying to design a System in the hope that the System will somehow solve the Problem, rather than simply solving the Problem in the first place, is to present oneself with two problems in place of one." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"In point of fact, the System may be so thoroughly organized around the familiar response strategy that a new response would require extensive restructuring - something that Systems do with the greatest reluctance and difficulty." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"Information Theory is a mathematical treatment of what is left after the meanings have been removed from a Communication." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"Not only Nature, but Systems generally, cannot be wise when feedbacks are unduly delayed. Feedback is likely to cause trouble if it is either too slow or too prompt. It must be adjusted to the response rhythms of the system as well as to the tempo of the actual events - a double restriction." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"Nothing is more useless than struggling against a Law of Nature. On the other hand, there are circumstances (highly unusual and narrowly defined, of course) when one’s knowledge of Systems-functions will provide precisely the measure of extra added ability needed to tip the scales of a doubtful operation in one’s favor.
"Pragmatically, it is generally easier to aim at changing one or a few things at a time and then work out the unexpected effects, than to go to the opposite extreme. Attempting to correct everything in one grand design is appropriately designated as Grandiosity. […] A little Grandiosity goes a long way. […] The diagnosis of Grandiosity is quite elegantly and strictly made on a purely quantitative basis: How many features of the present System, and at what level, are to be corrected at once? If more than three, the plan is grandiose and will fail." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"Striving for Perfection produces a kind of tunnel-vision resembling a hypnotic state. Absorbed in the pursuit of perfecting the System at hand, the striver has no energy or attention left over for considering other, possibly better, ways of doing the whole thing." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"Systems are never dealing with the real world that the rest of us have to live in, but instead with a filtered, distorted, and censored version which is all that can get past the sensory organs of the System itself." (John Gall, "The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small"[Systematics 3rd Ed.], 2011)
"[…] the System has its effects on the people within it. It isolates them, feeds them a distorted and partial version of the outside world, and gives them the illusion of power and effectiveness."
No comments:
Post a Comment