It's just been International Women's Day. Jess Philips MP has stood and read out 118 names of women killed by men last year and we're in the midst of a schism around male violence (say her name - 'Sarah Everard'). It's a horrendously triggering time for me as it is for so many women, as well as observing interactions and engaging in tough conversations with loved ones about personal safety strategies so routine I usually haven't got time to talk about them at the same time as 'deploying' them. I guess it's this 'tenderness' right now (like a scab being picked off) that's informing my systems thinking and prepping for the submission of my assignment. From the outset, I observed very few women academics and even less Black academics in the 'lineages' (although Margaret Mead may 'outweigh' many - still white though). And in my interactions with learned colleagues in the field (white, middle aged men typically) I've been assessing those interactions and dynamics with this current heightened sensitivity.
0 Comments
Signals - deep listening into action What on earth is a ‘design turn’? I struggled with this idea that was part of my last assignment twiddling with it for weeks until I ‘got it.’ (Blog 7 – 'Pinning Butterflies' was a dive into that). And now I understand that, to use a nautical analogy, ‘adjusting your sails’ is a response to the ‘signals’ being sent. The ‘design turn’ is a purposeful adjustment in direction that is sensitive to context, not a single-minded, pre-determined trajectory that pays little attention to what is useful, helpful, wished for. Giving space to adjust/re-calibrate ‘[T]he problems which humans try to solve are set by their own appreciative judgements’ (Vickers, 1970, p. 20). What sex workers (and other marginalised folk) taught me was to question deeply ingrained prejudices instilled in us, setting me on a path of questioning : constant re-calibrations in thinking generated through (inter)actions (with people, theories and experiences). And that questioning has generated shifts to act and be in a way that’s not dissonant with my values. The relinquishing of positional power to have a different and more liberated perspective - not caught in the expectations and constraints of ‘leadership’. Freedom from ownership and rejection of land inequality – a purposeful move to a nomadic life. And ‘with humility comes wisdom’ (Proverbs 11:2). All of these ‘design turns’ enabled by purposeful action. Today’s challenge as we negotiate profound and urgent issues such as COVID and climate change seem to be: how do we achieve as much congruence as possible, actively create space for exploring/emergence and facilitate our own ability to abstract to learn in the midst of chaos and uncertainty……….? Interaction & epiphanies ‘When the seedling appears , it carries with it the complete pattern for it’s growth’ (Ming Dao, 1992, p. 6). It also interacts with the elements that sustain and support it – air, light, nutrients, animals, plants. All connected. And so the determination of growth is interaction. And to expand on that, if we only interact with that which is familiar (discipline/sector, gender, culture, ethnicity, etc.) then our opportunity to transform our thinking is constrained. Traditional (somewhat linear) accumulation or ‘deepenings’ of knowledge……at what point does that become an ‘entrenched’ view? Debilitating to understanding and blind to the ever changing complex nature of our world? How are ‘epiphanies’ or ‘synergies’ discovered? How are injustices and inequalities recognised? Particularly those ‘hidden in plain sight’. How can actions for change be identified and ‘turns designed’ if we’re talking into an ‘echo chamber’ or glossing over ‘dissonance’? So what.....? And, I guess, lovely as it is to wander and muse about these issues, what does it matter? This is my reasoning: We exist in an inter-connected world, vibrant with complexity. And if we want to create sustainable change with some of the most complex issues we need to know how to do that. Systemically. And thinking and acting systemically needs a different perspective. Purposeful adaptation. Time is of the essence. Inequality and injustice abound. A quote from nearly 20 years ago spoken by a senior local authority officer on receipt of a report, which has stuck with me: ‘I don’t want to know how busy things are, I want to see what’s been achieved’. Thinking systemically is not an indulgence. Theory and action combine into ‘praxis’ and will enable us to confront and change the most serious challenges we face, directing time and energy into those things that will generate changes that will ‘stick’ (Ison, 2017). Germination, emergence & nurturing And what is being reinforced for me in this learning? That we need spaces for ideas to ‘germinate without encountering massive defences’ that characterise the ‘state of our (S)state’ currently (Schon, 1973). Self organisation and emergence. Authentic and true connections based upon honesty and trust. And in this perpetual cycle of learning, expression and action I commit to nurturing relationships and connections, treasuring them wherever I find them :-) I’ve been mulling over the situation that sparked my trajectory onto a different path and into systems thinking. Frustration (a great motivator) that led me to explore more effective ways of change (Bateson, N., 2019). A very brief explanation is; a controversial and sensitive field of work, opposing and multiple perspectives, passionately held beliefs and real-life harm and (structural) violence and oppression. The very definition of a ‘wicked problem’ (Churchman, 1967). As I approach this as a ‘systems thinker’, it caused me to pause, re-frame and step back to try to imagine what an approach would look like that was grounded in an ‘emotion of hope’ (Ison, 2017, p. 85). How could we possibly reach across the divide and achieve transformation with a shared sense of purpose? What approaches would enable stakeholders to navigate extremely choppy waters that potentially cause the boat to capsize? And what role could I, should I play (if any)? For all those questions, the answer, as I see it, is yet to emerge in conversation and as I learn. It’s a grand and hopeful ambition and one that needs an ethical and responsible approach. To experiment with my own thinking, the requirement to acknowledge my particular perspective (carrying biases and prejudices) became clear. Seeing the potential to effect change across disciplines and approaches (trans-contextually) means ‘lifting your eyes’ to discern the dynamics at play, as well as reaching for a method or tool that can turn ideas/theories into practice. And having experienced systems change that largely imposed approaches that slightly jarred with reality, I’ve obsessed over the ethical approach to deploying the latest new idea I’ve found! There are so many elements to engaging in systems thinking and so with this in mind I’m limiting myself in this instance to that of boundaries. What resonated so clearly for me in viewing some policy developments was the very real feelings from ‘communities’ (stakeholders) of being excluded (‘done to, not done with’). That someone had taken a decision to either not involve or limit involvement. Or……..to challenge my own filter on oppression: was it a purposeful decision or a ‘blind-spot’? The outcomes from those programmes that lead to (un)intended consequences in communities are felt acutely and as I see it, potentially compound experiences of injustice/inequality. And so the method that resonated most for me in thinking about this was the work done by Werner Ulrich on ‘boundaries’ ‘as a source of discovery’ (Ulrich, 1983, p. 83) To give a bit of context, this concept starts with a ‘situation’ (positive or negative). In describing the situation, it’s then pretty easy to identify those players who relate to it. At that point, getting the pens and paper out to note them down and sticking them each in a bubble (a ‘sub-system’) is the development of an imagined ‘system map’ (‘system of interest’) that they all ‘sit in’ (Ison, 2017, p. 24). And the bit I’m referring to in this blog is the boundary that’s drawn around who’s in it – and who’s not (for whatever reason). To illustrate. The diagram (very much simplified) below sets out the ‘boundary’ around responses to sex work as I see it – not consistently, but to a greater or lesser degree it’s a feature of policy making related specifically to this example in the UK and a ‘wicked problem’. Scenario 1 excludes ‘sex workers’ as stakeholders. This can be for any number of reasons, practical or ideological. Even the language is contested and so to define stakeholders in such terms brings it’s own challenges. When stakeholders are situated outside of the boundary, as peripheral, then issues of power surface with the centring of one group over another. I puzzle also over the following:
I’m yet to experiment with these - the potential to use these approaches to embed approaches that can liberate is seriously appealing, so I’ll explore (and share) further as I dive in. As ever, the thoughts of those puzzling over the same challenges are very welcome. In the spirit of shared learning and the will to improve, hearing from any who read this, feel a reaction and offer their view is very much appreciated. References Bateson, N., 2019, Small Arcs of Larger Circles, New York, Triarchy Press Churchman, C. W., 1967. Guest editorial: Wicked Problems. Management Science, 14(4), p. B141–B142. Ison, R., 2017. Systems Practice - How to Act. London: Springer. Jackson, M. C., 1991. Systems methodology for the management sciences.. New York: Plenum Press. Reynolds, M., 2004. Churchman and Maturana: Enriching the notion of self-organization for social design. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 17(6), p. 539–556. Ulrich, W., 1983. Critical heuristics of social planning: A new approach to practical philosophy.. Bern: Haupt. So my challenge is to design a 'learning system' that sets out all the core elements of my current module, how they relate to the past and the future. And link to all the other concepts that we've been learning about. Easy right? Let me tell you, I am persisting. Version 6 now, trying to capture something that I'm not entirely sure is going to submit to my will. (If anyone's tried to get coat-hangers into a bag then you know exactly what I mean (coat-hangers = the Devil's invention!)). And by the way, look at that, brackets means a sentence nested in a sentence......with a metaphor nested into that (bad systems thinker joke ;-)).
What occurs to me is that whenever I try to: 'pin it down', describe it, draw it, visualise it, it flutters off. Or more accurately morphs into something else as a new thought emerges, 'a tiny shift in aperture' (Bateson, N., 2016, p.55). Perhaps think of the nemesis of the Terminator who shape-shifts, adapting to the new context. Yep....like that. And so my challenge is to STOP and capture, just for a moment, what the 'system' looks like in order to understand it and, as I see it, spring board off it into change. In response to this, the concept of 'pinning' butterflies came to mind. Yes, beautiful to look at, but have they not lost so much of their beauty in an attempt to 'keep hold' of them? Wasn't their dynamism what constituted them? Isn't that beauty that's left just one dimension of what their beauty is - flight, landing on a flowed, mating displays, the movement of their wings? Something essential is lost and the butterfly becomes what? Part of a project? Something to be observed rather than connected with. And at this point, I feel able to hop back into my answer. Perhaps writing this has been cathartic, giving myself permission to have an imperfect answer. Or offering an apology for removing the essence of things as I seek to understand them. Nora Bateson said this (I'm holding onto this for now): 'We cannot know the systems, but we can know more. We cannot perfect the systems, but we can do better.' (Bateson, N., 2016, p141) I'm sitting here just about to get going again during Twixmas with 'refining my systemic inquiry'. And, I have to say, feeling very happy with myself about the results of my last assignment :-). Far from disappearing 'up the garden path', it seems my balance of the systematic and systemic and my developing literacy around systems thinking is A.OK. Happy days!
I have to confess, I am a lover of structure, planning and process (my dad used to joke about my 'itineraries') and had some reservations about how to achieve balance in integrating those with systems thinking. However, clearly those things can, do and have supported some pretty effective study - I landed pretty well in this Masters after 20 years out of academia! (No doubt whatsoever that this is also due to the brilliant structuring of the OU Systems Thinking in Practice materials.) So, no 'babies out with the bathwater' here - project management is not the evil nemesis of systems thinking. However, a reflexive approach ensures 'bureaucracy' doesn't undermine or stifle the desired change - being wedded to my old manual on 'Delivering Successful Change' is out! Ray Ison's description of the approach taken to working with stakeholders on complex issues was a real eye-opener and provided a helpful frame for the design of an inquiry that 'stayed with the known language' (Ison, R, 2017, p263). Given the complex situations we are called to engage with, challenges to common practice that occur within systems thinking approaches need to be bounded by familiarity for stakeholders it seems. Understood. I reflect on how in blog 4 I articulated a sense of dissonance that can and does prevent engagement with systems change and co-design, not something I want to fall foul of. So, I can relax knowing that the project management toolkit I have is entirely useful (you bet I have a Gantt chart for TB872 module!) and that the methods at my disposal are grounded in the world of those I hope to work with and for. Systems thinking can't and shouldn't be detached from existing mental models as that's where change may occur and the systematic and systemic entwine to facilitate that change. (Which now leads me off on a series of thoughts about how to shift paradigms.) And on that note I'm off to explore that with wise folk who I know have pondered on that alot..... you know who you are ;-) This blog was inspired by Nora Bateson's 'Leadership within the Paradox of Agency' chapter in 'Small Arcs of Larger Circles'. I return to this introduction having re-read my thoughts and wishing to give some foothold into the content.....
Doubt....only in relation am I affirmed. Only when my ideas make sense to someone else do I rest easier. The process of my last assignment with the OU showed me that. My work is only meaningful when it's meaningful to someone else too. Valued, helpful, useful, enriching to them. (This seems also to link to blog 4). Why is this related to my thoughts on leadership sparked by Nora? Perhaps here '...there is no aspect of that entity that is uninfluenced, uninformed, or unbound to the larger contextual interactions' (Bateson, N., 2016, p.86). As a child I'd cry at older people's loneliness. Always struggled with boundaries. I feel the best work comes at the periphery of these false distinctions between people: care, trust and humanity. Emotional intelligence. Not othering. Distracted, perplexed and uncomfortable with hierarchy. But..... understanding of the burden of 'leadership' and effect on those good people who take that on and work holistically and in communion with others. Support, recognise and empathise. Name it and acknowledge it to value those doing good work in difficult paradigms and with hindering models. I was selected for Cranwell Officer training with RAF reserves, but declined. Something wasn't right. (I have no qualms with military folks and very much appreciate their service). What is does display to me reflecting on Nora's writing is my perception of that model of heroic leadership. However, there are quite possibly those out there who can describe very well the deeply relational nature of connection between those who serve. Outside of, or complementary to, 'command and control'. My last 'leadership' role was borne our of circumstance and history. I always felt the importance of history and the need to recognise those interconnections through time as well as the here and now. Work with a historian (the inspiring and hilarious Dr Kate Lister) on the stories of women who suffered throughout the history of Leeds. Including those more recent actors painted and positioned as oppositional - an ecosystem of those involved systemically. The vibrancy of passionately held beliefs that fall into the dominant narrative of heroic leader(s) 'pioneering innovation'. My position as one who responded to a culmination of events and energies, 'chiming the bells that were ready to ring anyway' (Bateson, N., 2016, p.86). The confluence of those circumstances and actors leads me to reflect on the skill of people who can work relationally and who do it with authenticity to create sustained change. And more specifically the role of clergy, people of faith and faith communities in that, which is something that interests me deeply having experienced and enacted love and social action from a place of faith. Like the proverbial sandwich, I return to the purpose of this blog. And it is no more or less than reflections and a wish to move away from linearity. Perhaps a counterpoint to structured writing, but with an eye on 'unfettered holism' that might make texts inaccessible. And recognising that 'living in language' brings with it limitations as well as opportunities for expression (Ison, R, 2017, p.9). Self-indulgent. Solipsistic (thanks to Emma Bearman for the resonance!). And for me to read back in a future incarnation of myself. My position as of now.......the relinquishing of positional power in order to discern better. Abstracting and observing to make sense. Systems thinking in practice perhaps? ;-) References: Bateson, N. (2016) 'Small Arcs of Larger Circles - framing through other patterns', Axminster, Triarchy Press Ison, R. (2017) 'Systems Practice: How to Act', London, Springer Press Right folks, I’m normally an optimistic and positive person, but I’m going to share something that’s making me feel a tad uncomfortable and a wee bit cynical in the world of systems thinking……... and how it’s put into practice. HEALTH WARNING - this discipline is new to me, so these thoughts are right at the start of the journey. You may be able to help me see a different perspective, tell me to stop being paranoid or empathise. Whatever it is, hit me with it…...I’m here to learn :-) Most of this will not flow as proper paragraphs and so you’ll get bullet points or some scrawled stream of consciousness, as well as a diagram or two and a randomly applied quote. This isn’t perfection or completeness (how can it be when there’s so much to discover or remain happily oblivious to). Here’s three words to kick off that I’ve got lodged my brain and filter what I’m learning................... So, we’re asked to think about our ‘tradition of understanding’, those thoughts, ideas, mental models that we bring with us to systems thinking . And I recognise that I've a framework of co-production (amongst other things) that’s influencing my thoughts and engagement with the materials (‘doing with’ and not ‘doing to’). I’m also sensitive to ethics and power dynamics. And so here’s where my discomfort starts and leads me to these musings:
So what’s the tea (as Mama Ru would say)? One of the elements of the STiP course at the OU is to ‘situate’ your practice, identifying when you may have had experience of systems thinking in your previous incarnation (whatever that was) and so I’ve thought carefully and systematically about this for the past few weeks. And what I recall are situations where, on reflection, I’ve been ‘subject to’ systems practice. And the results were a distinct impression of not knowing what was really going on (under the surface), a dissonance that I couldn’t describe and feelings of disorientation within those environments. I guess what was happening (now I know a little about STiP) was that someone else had defined what the ‘situation of concern’ was that I was invited to remedy (that means choosing who’s in/out*, selecting what the problem was, etc. etc - I’m sure you get the picture). And in the best traditions of collaboration, you better have your ‘positive pants’ on and not spoil the party with anything other than solution-focussed, constructive contributions! One of the most interesting sessions (which I might add was 'soaked' in dysfunctional power dynamics) was one where a colleague resolutely refused through body language and verbalisation to be 'harnessed' into 'that version' of systems change. All I can say is that my recollections of systems approaches is that they were WEIRD and on reflection that the facilitation was enacted as some kind of ‘hocus pocus’! My impression is that it detracted from what I can only deduce was some kind of change endeavour and without exception, any dalliance with systems thinking that I’ve had has left that enduring impression with me…… So to take us back to the 3 words I started with, I’ve got to be honest and say that for me, this was the result: WITH-HOLDING // DISCONNECTION // INAUTHENTICITY So with what I think is a healthy dollop of realism, but also excitement for what can be achieved with STiP (I can’t help but be inspired when I listen to or read Nora Bateson** -and so many others-) I’m going to continue to challenge myself to think about how I engage with folk on systems thinking to create change. And if I’m not mindful of that (which I will continue to reflect on) then there's the potential to fall into the trap of command and control and disempowerment within our efforts in which we’re supposed to be exploring freely, enthusiastically and curiously. As a last reflection on my ponderings, I started off not knowing where this would go other than a series of inter-connected thoughts, experiences and some new learning. Not sure I’ve cleared up anything for myself in writing this, but keen to invite you to give me your thoughts. And whatever you share then will become part of this story, adding insight - perhaps even for me AND you! Thanks for reading and and even greater gratitude if you feel the urge to share your perspective :-) * Helen Wilding and Martin Reynolds expand on the crucial need for critiquing boundaries in this article - http://oro.open.ac.uk/51569/ ** Nore Bateson on Warm Data and the potential to ‘solve everything at once’ - https://soundcloud.com/regennarration/037-solve-everything-at-once-nora-bateson-on-systems-thinking-warm-data-singing-out-loud?ref=clipboard&p=a&c=0 Thanks to john a. powell and Stephen Menendian for their article 'The Problem of Othering: Towards Inclusiveness and Belonging' - http://www.otheringandbelonging.org/ n M Reflective practice is a ubiquitous term and one that many folk are familiar with. One of the challenges for those working on seemingly entrenched social issues (so -called ‘wicked problems’) is a) the time to devote to the art of reflection and b) an accurate and effective way of doing it. The investment of time needs to deliver results over and above enabling practitioners to maintain resilience in the face of ever increasing demands and deliver change to practice and processes that stop the ‘hamster-wheel’ of reactive responses. There are far more experienced professionals out there who practice, apply and teach on reflective practice and reflexivity out there, so I’ll ‘stay in my (novice) lane’ and limit comment to that which applies to my developing practice on systems thinking. Always curious about how we are where we are, I took a dive into the history and development of reflexivity, given the emphasis that’s placed on this as a key skill for Systems Practitioners. Systems Thinking is a discipline that has multiple origins (see the map at the bottom of the article) and a firm basis in the scientific method and includes ‘cybernetics’, which is of real interest to me (and if anyone’s read my foray into AI then you’ll understand why!). I would guess though, that what might spring to mind with that phrase is some kind of robot or Terminator-type image. Well folks, let me tell you, that is not actually the case and this is where ‘thinking about thinking’ comes in. As a practitioner (you, me and many others across different disciplines and sectors) engage in ‘reflective practice’ or possibly more accurately ‘beating oneself up about something that one should have (or not) said or done’. (Which, by the way is not really reflective practice, but more common!). Back to the point – here is a little algorithm to illustrate the point: X -> RE -> X[X] (Muller, K., 2015, p.75) If ‘X’ is the original situation, the ‘RE’ (re-entry) into the situation allows you to review and analyse ‘X’ and develop insight and new discovery/learnings that result in ‘X[X]’. Easy right?! (Believe me, this would have triggered huge anxiety before my ‘de-sensitisation programme’ of coding with Python over the Summer, so if your brain’s switched off I get it!). This example allows a more helicopter view of how we can approach those things we do and engage in reflective practice to develop new insights. And that directly relates also to the practice of Systems Thinking and it’s application by practitioners – their(our) role is to step outside of the situation and apply methods and tools to a system that’s been identified as ‘interesting’ for exploration. So this is where it gets more intense – and risks the activists out there shouting ‘stop gazing at your navel and GET ON WITH IT’! (I know this, can you tell I was the one doing the shouting/taking a deep sigh internally!). However, this quote from the OECD presents the new conditions of our world starkly: ‘Complexity and uncertainty are now the norm—they are contexts—not just risks. The world seems to operate by a new set of rules that are difficult to observe directly. The defense and intelligence communities have called this the VUCA world, which originally described the Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity’ left behind by the end of the ordering function provided by the Cold War’ (OECD, 2017, p. 10) Given the complexity described here, thinking about thinking about thinking is what STiP folk are challenged to do, it’s part and parcel of the role (as it is for researchers, scientists, therapists, etc.). The key to this type of thinking is that it should result in action, in practice (theory -> practice = praxis), allowing participants in inquiry to better navigate complexity and identify change that will be effective and ‘sticky’. The ‘reflexivity revolution’ defined by Muller, not only describes the evolution of thinking about thinking) needed in the era of complexity:
This ‘reflexivity revolution’ also describes the role of the practitioner and the move from ‘objective to observer-dependent research’ i.e. you can’t separate the practitioner or researcher from the situation being explored (Muller, K, 2015, p.76). Now, this is a concept that’s come up repeatedly recently, and has some commonality with feminist thinking* (more on that in a later blog I reckon). Not only is there a need to engage with complexity in the situation being scrutinised, but also of our own ‘standpoint’ and ‘tradition of understanding’ that we bring (our complexity) (Ison, R, 2017). If we don’t engage in this type of reflexivity, then we endanger not only our ability to connect with the people we’ll be working collaboratively with (and so many of us have been/are or have worked with someone oblivious to a bias/preference), but also the outcome and impact of the change project that we’re involved in. Key for any STiP practitioner is developing the capabilities around ‘thinking about thinking about thinking’, but this doesn’t rest solely with them as some sort of guru. In future musings I’m keen to explore with folk how the joint venture of change is navigated with all the above in mind. For now, my ramblings (I hope) serve to help me form thoughts/learn/explore, but also to connect, share and demystify some of the jiggery- pokery that STiP may seem to involve. *Also, decolonisation and intersectional thinking that are concerned with racism and oppression Sources: ‘Working with Change. Systems approaches to public sector challenges’, OECD, 2017 http://www.oecd.org/publications/systems-approaches-to-public-sector-challenges-9789264279865-en.htm Karl H. MÜLLER, ‘A Silent Revolution in Reflexivity’, SYSTEMICS, CYBERNETICS AND INFORMATICS VOL. 13, No. 6, 2015 http://www.iiisci.org/Journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/SA285KE15.pdf#:~:text=The%20current%20reflexivity%20revolution%20manifests%20itself%2C%20above%20all%2C,new%20research%20problems%20and%20large%20opportunities%20for%20innovations. Ison, R., 2017, ‘Systems Practice: How to Act’, Springer Press, OU For more on Systems Thinking in Practice - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQKCkIEVKQU To explore the OU MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice : http://www.open.ac.uk/postgraduate/qualifications/f47 ‘Inquiry is a form of practice as well as a disposition and it is enhanced by acknowledging uncertainty from the start i.e. an attitude of avoiding the hubris of certainty.’ OU, ‘The Nature of Systemic Inquiry’, 2020 I’m sitting here chuckling about myself and my seeming (no, ACTUAL), volte-face from Artificial Intelligence and into Systems Thinking. See the above quote? I purposefully left the third sector and the particular field I was in for the comfort of algorithms and coding where you could see exactly where you started and where you finished. Job done. Nice little graph when I’ve finished and some beautiful, specific and finalised code. Yet, I couldn’t settle into the discipline, despite a whole 6 months of coding, Summer School, Artificial Intelligence books read until my eyes were bleeding in prep (not quite that dramatic, but you get my drift). Decision time then hey? Yes. And I’m nothing if not decisive. So ditch the current path and find another. And that I did. So…..given the Open University are the experts in distance learning, well equipped to enable students in the COVID world we exist in at moment, I went for it. An MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice – importantly, not just theory but how we apply it to the world we’re in to effect change. With scientific rigour (many of the lineages of Systems Thinking derive from engineering and computing with a nice helping of sociology and philosophy) and a purposeful and reflective approach, STiP enables folk to navigate the complex world we live in, shining a light and bringing a focus to those messy and complex situations we find ourselves in. Beginning the systems thinking module is like ‘coming home’ or ‘finding flow’ (for anyone that’s familiar with that term). I find myself full on, head first, swimming in the theory and practice of complex systems. And it’s such a joy. Ison explains: Humans are born imbued with systemic sensibility that arises from our evolutionary past, our biology and, for the fortunate, their manners of living experienced as children. Some retain this sensibility. Others lose it over time when subjected to the prevailing paradigms, practices and institutions of Western civilisation. Asking ‘Why?’ is an essence of systemic sensibility. Ison, R, 2020, OU For anyone inquisitive, questioning and potentially disruptive because of that, STiP is a channel for that ‘systemic sensibility’, facilitating your growth through ‘literacy’ to ‘capability’ where I believe you achieve a Zen-like aura, crack open the incense and assume your position on a cloud😉. Systems thinking and the articulation of concepts/methods by great thinkers such as Donnella (Dana) Meadows, Ray Ison and Magnus Rammage allows freedom and creativity for those who ask ‘why’ (frequently and perhaps irritatingly for those around us!). In all seriousness though, as a practitioner in the third sector who experienced, at times, utter frustration with the systems that seem to disable much effort by good people situated cross-sector, but also having the privilege of participating in significant shifts in those systems, I see the practice of STiP and it’s evidence based approach as critical to achieving change in an optimised and effective way. I feel like I’ve found an intellectual home in STiP and so very excited to learn, adapt, reflect, (eat, sleep, repeat) and share the capabilities that I’m fortunate to be able to grow as I study. So as a final point, it’s been really interesting to introspect on me, my practice and what I bring (my ‘traditions of understanding’). What led to me being here? What are my motivations? How does that interact with the ‘Community of Practice’ that are my fellow students? And potentially the connections I already have with some exceptional folk in and around the sector? How can I be ‘of use’? In what way can my contributions be helpful? And on that note I leave my musings. Lots of uncertainty. Bounded by uncertainty. But I’m more than ok with that………😉 'The Nature of Systemic Inquiry' - https://learn2.open.ac.uk/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=1695426§ion=1.4.1 Well, well. I didn't expect to be embarking on this academic and intellectual trip 6 weeks ago! As for all of us right now, rolling with the punches and and adapting is the new normal. So, from Artificial Intelligence to Systems Thinking. Really? Yep. And very excited I am too (although for most who know me, that's my usual state). This pathway is already feeling like I've arrived......the concepts that are up for study and the excellent material from the Open University who are experts at this discipline are fascinating. And suit my leanings towards the 'why' of things! My mum jokes about my constant 'whys'. That child-like curiosity that so many of us have, and which sadly can be lost on our educational and life journey. However, who knew that I do indeed have a 'systems sensibility'?! I'm having that. And perhaps even some 'systems literacy' ;-) Shorthand, I can sense and know a system and identify and interpret elements of that system that I feel require some tweaking! This may be all too familiar to many in the third sector, and one of my frustrations was how to most effectively leverage change in those systems that all to frequently produce 'unintended consequences' (the cynic in me would say sometimes those consequences are entirely 'intended') that harm and marginalise. So......let's get to it. The techniques I learn through my studies are capital that I will share. And what's clear with systems thinking from the outset is that I can only learn 'in community' with others. My hope is that reciprocity will abound! I'll be looking for different ways to contribute, effect change and learn, prototyping and experimenting along the way 'open source'. So here's to synergies, epiphanies and illumination ;-) |
Who Am I?Curious and questioning. Purposefully and optimistically disruptive. Lover of justice and compassion. Disliker of convention ;-) ArchivesCategories |