User:Mdd/Systems thinking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Impression of systems thinking about society
Impression of systems thinking about society [1]

Systems thinking is a holistic way of thinking, applied in the systems sciences, by which the observer considers the part of reality, he observes, as a system. Systems thinking resists the breaking down of problems into its component parts for detailed examination. By examining the links and interrelationships of the whole system, patterns and themes emerge which offer insights and new meaning to the initial problem.

Contents

[edit] Overview

Systems thinking is nowadays described in all kinds of different ways, where by every description shows an other sight of systems thinking:

  • the art of seeing the world in terms of “wholes”, and the practice of focusing on the relationships among the parts of a system. By looking at reality through a systems thinking “lens”, you can work with a system (rather than against it) to create enduring solutions to problems that exist.[2]
  • an approach, that encourages the exploration of the relationships between social, environmental and economic interactions. This systems approach resists breaking a problem into its component parts for detailed examination. By examining the links and interrelationships of the whole system, patterns and themes emerge which offer insights and new meaning to the initial problem.[3]
  • a conceptual framework that facilitates the appreciation of the patterns of the complete system [4]
  • a method of formal analysis in which the object of study is viewed as comprising distinct analytical sub-units.[5]
  • a practical tool for making predictions inmany different domains[6]
  • a way of helping a person to view systems from a broad perspective that includes seeing overall structures, patterns and cycles in systems, rather than seeing only specific events in the system.[7]

Systems thinking presumes that you can really understand and tame the complexity of the world. This complexity cannot be wished away, but can be tamed if you look at the world in the right way. The essence of systems thinking is that the complexity of the real world can best be tamed by seeing things in the round, as a whole. Only by taing a broad view we can avoid the dangers of a silo mentality. Talking a broad view, however, is not at the expense of missing the detail. Nor is it a question of broad brush versus detail. Rather it is one of taking a broad view in the context of the right detail.[8]

More advanced definitions of systems thinking are:

  • Systems thinking is a dsciplne for seeking wholes, recognizing patterns and interrelationschips, and learning how to structure those relationschips in more effective, efficient ways.[9]

[edit] Quest against reductionism

Descartes (1622) held that animals could be reductively explained as automata.
Descartes (1622) held that animals could be reductively explained as automata.

A basic assumption of systems thinking is, that there is something missing with the way we think about our lives. What has become the dominant thinking of our time produces only a partial understanding of our reality and relates only to parts of out being, not the whole of it. To overcome this reductionism, a holistic way of thinking is needed to allow us to see through chaos and understand complexity. A thinking of interaction and design can help us to learn a new mode of living by considerations various ways of seeing, doing and being in the world. We can then design new methods of inquiry, new modes of organization, and a way of live that will allow the rational, emotional, and ethical choices for interdependent yet autonomous social beings.[10]

This dominant reductionistic thinking is traced back to the French philosopher Rene Descartes, who tended to segregate the whole and adviced to consider the parts in isolation. This scientific method is called the "analytical approach". The analytical approach is suppose to contributed significantly to modern science and was the conceptual basis of the Industrial Revolution. Systems thinkers stated, that today this is not enough: the world is now more interdependent, organizations are more complex, and so are the problems they face.[11].

[edit] Further characteristics

Senge (1990) described systems thinking as compromising five learning disciplines: personal mastery, meta models, shared vision, team learning, and the overarching discipline of systems thinking. Earlier Capra (1982) identified several key charateristics of systems thinking, including a shift from an emphasis in the parts to the whole; a shift in attending to a single level to going back and forth between systems levels; a shift from analytic thinking to contexual thinking, or explaining things in terms of their context; a shift from seeing objects as being of primary importance to seeing relationships as critical component, or netwerk thinking; a shift from the metaphor of knowledge as a building to that of knowledge as a netwrk; and a shift from objective to epistemic science, in which the method of questioning is integral to the scientific theories.[12]

More recently Ossimitz (2007) summerized, that four characteristic dimensions can be seen as essential for systems thinking:[13]

  1. Thinking in models: explicitly comprehended modeling
  2. Thinking in loops: a thinking in interrelated, systemic structures, recognizing causal loops.
  3. Dynamic thinking: a thinking in dynamic processes (delays, feedback loops, oscillations).
  4. Steering systems: the ability for practical system management and system control

[edit] History

The real origins of systems thinking are still very controversial. Kind of generally accepted is that, systems thinking emerged and established itself as a transdiscipline in the in the 1940s and early 1950s.[14] Systems ideas had emerged, stated Hammond (2003), from a broad range of disciplines: biology, ecology, social psychology and technology. These ideas came together in a General Systems movement, that wanted to replace that analytic approach with a more holistic approach. By focusing on the creation of a General Systems Theory they wanted to create a collaboration and integration between different disciplinary perspectives.[15]

Emerge of theories

Further emerge of interdisciplianiry organisation:

Notable scientists in these movements:

In the following decades Systems thinking developed in interaction with fields as engineering, management, organismic biology, cybernetics, information, ecology and social theory. Among these theories systems theory was the one metaphor according to Hammond that highlights the relationships and interconnections among the biological, ecological, social, psychological, and technological dimensions of our increasingly complex lives.[15]

Early approaches to using systems ideas in an applied manner, such as operation research, systems analysis and systems engineering, were suitable for tackling certain well-defined problems but were found to have limitations when faced with complex problems involving people with a variet of viewpoints and frequently at odds with one anonther. Systems thinkers responded with approaches such as systems dynamics and organizational cybernetics to tackle complexity; soft systems methodology, and interactive planning to handle subjectivity; critical systems heuristics to help the disadvantage in situations involving conflict; and pragmatic pluralism to manage diversity. In theoretical terms, the positivism that had dominated systems thinking untill the 1970s, was supplemented, as a source of support for applied work, by structuralism, interpretivism, radicalism and postmodernism.[16]

Since the 1970s Peter Checkland witnessed a replacement of the old hard paradigm with a new vigorous soft paradigm. The hard pardigm where unable to deal with the anomalies arising when it is applied in complex, human-centred organizational and societal situations. This has given way to a soft paradigm, which both preserves the achievements of the hard in its specialized domain of application and extends the area of succesful operations of systems ideas to the behavioral and social arena.[17]

According to Olsson (2004) the basic systems concepts and ideas from the founding fathers haven't very much over time. There has been a significant new development though since the 1990s in the epistemological "framing"of the established theoretical apparatus and this development constitutes a qualitative improvement of the systems approach in science.[18]

Arbnor and Bjerke detected a further paradigm shift towards the actor approaches...

[edit] Systems thinking concepts

System
The concept of a system is an integrated composite of people, products, and processes, which provide a capability to satisfy a stated need or objective.[19]
Systems approach
A systems thinking approach does not view problems at discrete but sees them as related to all aspects of an organization. Organizations are composed of interrelated systems and processes, and any change in one organizational aspect affects all others. A systems thinker would therefor consider the interrelationship among systems and processes of the organization before implementing the solution. That solution will be evaluated on the basis of all results produced. Further, there is the recognition that not only do circumstances change, requiring new solutions, but solutions require new circumstances.[20]
Systems dimensions
Gharajedaghi (2005) determined five systems dimensions.[10]
  • Throughput, Membership, Conflickt management, Decisions Systems, Learning and Control Systems.
System elements
A system element is a balanced solution to a functional requirement or a set of functional requirements and must satisfy the performance requirements of the associated item. A system element is part of the system [hardware, software, facilities, personnel, data, material, services, and techniques] that, individually or in combination, satisfies a function [task] the system must perform.[19]
Systems hierarchy
Systems language
The systems language by necessity will have two dimensions. The first will be a framework for understanding the nature of the beast, the behavioural characteristics of multiminded systems. The second will be an operational systems methodology, which goes beyond simply declaring the desirability of the systems approach and provides a practical way of define problems and design solutions.[10]
Systems methods
Modelling the behaviour of complex adaptive systems, with the understanding how each componenet links to the next, for strategic decision-making[21]
Systems modelling
Systems perspective
A systems perspective is a perspective emerging from the application of a system approach. For example in Business & Economics; Family & Relationships; Psychology; Social Science; and Technology.[22]
Systems principles
Gharajedaghi (2005) determined five systems principles.[10]
  • Openness, purposefulness, multidimensionality, emeregent property, counterintuitiveness
System specification
A top level set of requirements for a system. A system specification may be a system/sub-system specification, Prime Item Development Specification, or a Critical Item Development Specification.[19]
Systems of systems
A dimensions of the systems language is a framwork for understanding the nature and characteristics of systems. To build such a demention we need to develop a systems of systems concept. In this context Ackoff's On Purposeful systems (1972) is a Herculean work.[10]

[edit] Systems thinking theories

Since the emerge of the General Systems Research in the 1950s systems thinking has been developed into all kinds theoretical frameworks. The following overview will only show the most basic types.

Systems notes of Henk Bikker, TU Delft, 1991.
Systems notes of Henk Bikker, TU Delft, 1991.
Systems analyses
Systems analysis is the interdisciplinary branch of science, dealing with analysis of systems, often prior to their automation as computer systems, and the interactions within those systems. This field is closely related to operations research.
Systems design
In computing systems design is the process or art of defining the hardware and software architecture, components, modules, interfaces, and data for a computer system to satisfy specified requirements. One could see it as the application of systems theory to computing. Some overlap with the discipline of systems analysis appears inevitable.
Systems dynamics
System dynamics is an approach to understanding the behaviour of complex systems over time. It deals with internal feedback loops and time delays that affect the behaviour of the entire system.[23] What makes using system dynamics different from other approaches to studying complex systems is the use of feedback loops and stocks and flows. These elements help describe how even seemingly simple systems display baffling nonlinearity.
Systems engineering
Systems Engineering (SE) is an interdisciplinary field of engineering, that focuses on the development and organization of complex artificial systems. Systems engineer has emerged into all kinds of sciences, and universities nowadays offer all kinds of specialized academic programs.[24]
Systems methodology
Their are more kinds of systems methodology. For example:
  • Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is an approach to organisational process modelling and it can be used both for general problem solving and in the management of change. It was developed in England by academics at the University of Lancaster Systems Department through a ten year Action Research programme.
  • System Development Methodology (SDM) is a general term applied to a variety of structured, organized processes for developing information technology and embedded software systems.
Systems theories
Systems theory is an interdisciplinary field of science. It studies the nature of complex systems in nature, society, and science. More specificially, it is a framework by which one can analyze and/or describe any group of objects that work in concert to produce some result.
Systems science
Systems sciences are scientific disciplines partly based on systems thinking such as Chaos theory, Complex systems, Control theory, Cybernetics, Sociotechnical systems theory, Systems biology, Systems ecology, and the already mentioned Systems dynamincs, Systems engineering and Systems theory.

[edit] Types of systems thinking

In 1981 Checkland was among the first to identify two different paradigm of systems thinking based upon the fundamental ways in which systems ideas are used to understand and intervene in the world: Hard systems thinking and soft systems thinking. [25]

Hard systems thinking
Hard systems thinking is
Soft systems thinking
soft systems thinking.is

In 1995 Lane and Jackson reflected on the breath and diversity of systems thinking. The identified eight strands as: general systems thinking, organisations-as-systems, hard systems thinking, cybernetics, systems dynamics, soft systems thinking, emancipatory systems thinking and critical systems thinking.[26] Later Jackson (2000) determined five types of systems approaches:[16]

Functionalist systems approach
In the first decades of systems science functionalism supplied the philosophical and sociological ground on which systems thinking could grow, and systems thinking provided the concepts and models that enabled functionalism to blossom in the social sciences. From a functionalist point of view, systems apprear as objective aspects of reality independent of us as observers. Using methods of the natural sciences, they are examined in order to discover the laws that govern the relationship between their parts or subsystems.[16] This functionalist systems approach is also refered to as hard systems thinking.[citation needed]
Interpretative systems approach
The interpretive systems approach is frequently referred to as "soft systems thinking", because it gives pride of place to people rather than to technology.[16] When organisations are approached as interpretative systems, then the boundaries are constituted by cognitive limitations. The firm as an interpretative system can be put into perspective by the division of labour and knowledge and the increasing specialisation.[27]
Emancipatory systems approach
Emancipatory systems approached see society as presently constituted as benefiting some groups at the expense of other groups which suffering domination or discrimination. The divieds in scociety which lead to inequality may be along class, race, gender, sexual, oreintation, age, capacity or other lines. Whichever of those are chosen as the main foci of attention, the aim is to emancipate those who are suffering as a result of current socail arrangements. Usally the process of emancipaing the oppressed can balso been seen to have benefits for the oppressors in the new social order.[16]
Postmodern systems approach
The basic thrust of post-structuralist and postmodern thinking is aimed at the totalizing and normalizing tendencies of the discourses that dominate in modernism. All "grand narratives", wheter referring to maximizing the efficiency and effectiveness of systems or to the possibility of universal emancipation, are subject of debunking.[16]
Critical systems thinking
Critical Systems thinking is a break with the functionalist systems approaches of the pioneers of systems thinking. Critical Systems Thinking is focussed on the bigger picture, and has allowed systems thinking to mature as a transdiscipline, and has set out how the variety of methodologies, methods and models now available can be used in a coherent manner to promote succesfull intervention in complex organizational and societal situations.[16]

Other differentiations have been made. Anderson (1999) for example made a differentation in the rational -, natural -, and open - systems perspective.[28]. According to Clayton (1996), in a close systems perspective there are simple definitions, fixed concepts and ultimate solutions. In an open systems perspective both problems and solutions are multi-dimenional, dynamica and evolving.[29]

More applied types of systems approaches
Since the 1950s almost numerous different kinds of systems approaches emerged, in the fields of Business & Economics; Computers; Mathematics; Psychology; and Technology. To name a few: The Comparative Systems Approach[30], the Dynamical systems approach[31], the Existential Systems Approach[32], the Family Systems Approach[33], the Hybrid Systems Approach[34], the Integrated Systems Approach[35], the Intelligent Systems Approach[36], the Open systems approach[37], the Social Systems Approach[38], and the Total systems approach'.[39]

[edit] Applications of systems thinking

New York Stock Exchange.
New York Stock Exchange.
Business, economics and management[40][8]









Rendering of human brain
Rendering of human brain
Cognitive science
Systems theory can be use in the conception of the human mind. The human mind is then no longer seens as a single unit, but as a system of interacting minds. The mind then becomes a human system at one level, embedded within the human systems at many other levels. It can be understood with the same systemic principles and changed with the same systemic techniques. Also, we can more easliy understand how the varoius external systems levels affect and are affected by the mind when view them in the context of systems thinking.[41]
View of a human ecosystem
View of a human ecosystem
Environmental science
With their many natural, economic, political, and technical aspects, environmental problems require a systems approach. Systems thinking has provides modeling concepts, which led to applications that are specifically geared toward the environmental field. System thinking is developed into specific modeling terminology, the uses of models, the model-building process, and the interpretation of output provide the foundation for detailed applications. It's dynamic modeling can be used in the analysis of several environmental problems, including surface-water pollution, matter-cycling disruptions, and global warming.[42]
Knowledge management
Systems thinking is advanced as a tool that enables management to go beyond the surface of discovering the mental modes and behavioral patterns of an organization, that prelude change. Once discovered, they can be dealt with and hence the Knowledge management initiative can be effectively implemented.[43] As a new approach Knowledge management requires highly complex xhanges in organizations. Added to the complexity is the fact that Knowledge Management requires changes in the way the individuals and groups, related to, and interact with, each other in organizational context. the action of one group, or individual in a proup, affects the activity of another in many ways, impacting the ability of the whole organization to change. Change is thus a complex process that needs a systemic apporach to be tackled in the most effective way. Systems thinking could dramatically enhance the ability of knowledge managers and champions in dealing with situations in which change seems impossible.[43]
  • Library and Information Management: [44]
Human heart and lungs, from an older edition of Gray's Anatomy.
Human heart and lungs, from an older edition of Gray's Anatomy.
  • Technology
Systems engineering techniques are used in complex projects: from spacecrafts to chip design, from robotics to creating large software products to building bridges, Systems engineering uses a host of tools that include modeling & simulation, requirements analysis, and scheduling to manage complexity
Systems engineering techniques are used in complex projects: from spacecrafts to chip design, from robotics to creating large software products to building bridges, Systems engineering uses a host of tools that include modeling & simulation, requirements analysis, and scheduling to manage complexity

[edit] Criticism

Hamalainen states (2007) that as far a management is concerned, systems thinking somehow has yet to catch the fire. Many systems thinkers are frustrated, as they preceive the necessity of conceptualizing holistic and dynamic relationships in the functioning of organizations, and the contribution Systems Thinking could make in taht department. As Jeremy Seligman (2006) recently put it, "the benefits of practicing systems thinking ... are incontrovertible. Yet sometimes it seems doubtful that Systems thinking will ever gain the critical mass required to make it an integral part of how major corporations practice stategic thinking".[46]

[edit] See also

[edit] Further reading

  • T. Downing Bowler (1981), General Systems Thinking: Its Scope and Applicability, 234 pp.
  • Fritjof Capra (1982), The Turning Point: Science, Society, and the Rising Culture
  • Peter Checkland (1981), Systems Thinking, Systems Practice.
  • Frederick Edmund Emery (1969), Systems Thinking: Selected Readings, 398 pp.
  • Jamshid Gharajedaghi (2005), Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity : A Platform for Designing Business Architecture, Butterworth-Heinemann, 368 pp.
  • Nic Kramer & Jacob de Smit (1977), Systems Thinking: Concepts and Notions, 148 pp.
  • Peter Senge (1990), The Fifth Discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, Doubleday, New York, 1990.
  • John D. Sterman (2000), Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, 982 pp.
  • Gerald M. Weinberg (2001), An Introduction to General Systems Thinking. Dorset House.

[edit] References

  1. ^ Illustration is made by Marcel Douwe Dekker (2007) based on an own standard and Pierre Malotaux (1985), "Constructieleer van de mensenlijke samenwerking", in BB5 Collegedictaat TU Delft, pp. 120-147.
  2. ^ http://www.csj.london.on.ca/docs/Newsletter%202-jan%202004.pdf.
  3. ^ Related Concepts, Department of Sustainability and Environment, retrieved Oct 2007.
  4. ^ Glossary of Terms as used in Planning, Quality and Review at USQ, based on Peter Senge, retrieved Oct 2007.
  5. ^ Archaeological Glossary, retrieved Oct 2007.
  6. ^ http://forecasting.cwru.edu/MIDS409S07/lectureNotes/SystemsThinking.pdf
  7. ^ http://www.managementhelp.org/misc/defn-systemsthinking.pdf
  8. ^ a b Dennis Sherwood (2002), Seeing the Forest for the Trees: A Manager's Guide to Applying Systems Thinking, 240 pp.
  9. ^ Peter Senge & C. Lannon-Kim, 1991.
  10. ^ a b c d e Jamshid Gharajedaghi (2005), Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity : A Platform for Designing Business Architecture., Butterworth-Heinemann
  11. ^ What is Systemic Thinking, Centro para la Acción y el Pensamiento Sistémicos. retrieved October 2007.
  12. ^ Joseph K.H. Tan (1998), Health Decision Support Systems, p.68.
  13. ^ Günther Ossimitz, Systems Thinking and System Dynamics Modeling:a new perspective for math classes?, Universität Klagenfurt, retrieved at Günther Ossimitz home, Oct 2007.
  14. ^ Michael C. Jackson (2000), Systems Approaches to Management, Springer, p.43.
  15. ^ a b Debora Hammond (2003), The Science of Synthesis: Exploring the Social Implications of General Systems Theory, Colorado: University Press of Colorado.
  16. ^ a b c d e f g Michael C. Jackson (2000), Systems Approaches to Management, Springer, 465 pp.
  17. ^ Michael C. Jackson (1991), Systems Methodology for the Management Sciences, p.268.
  18. ^ Mats-Olov Ollson & Gunnar Sjöstedt (2004), "Systems Approaches And Their Application: Examples From Sweden", p.31.
  19. ^ a b c FHWA glossary, retireved Oct 2007.
  20. ^ Patrick J. Montana & Bruce H. Charnov (2000), Management, Barron's Educational Series, p.92
  21. ^ http://dccps.nci.nih.gov/BRP/scienceteam/SystemsThinking_Leischow_etal.pdf p.10
  22. ^ Publications:
    • W. Robert Beavers (1977), Psychotherapy and Growth: A Family Systems Perspective.
    • Kenneth Knight & Reuben R. McDaniel (1979), Organizations: An Information Systems Perspective, 191 pp.
    • William Lazer (1971), Marketing Management: A Systems Perspective, 720 pp.
    • André Mineau (1999), The Making of the Holocaust: Ideology and Ethics in the Systems Perspective.
    • William A. Pasmore (1988), Designing Effective Organizations: The Sociotechnical Systems Perspective.
    • William F. Roth (1999), Quality Improvement: A Systems Perspective, 241 pp.
    • Terry S. Trepper & Mary Jo Barrett (1986), Treating Incest: A Multiple Systems Perspective.
    • Neil H. E. Weste & Kamran Eshraghian (1985), Principles of CMOS VLSI Design: A Systems Perspective, 531 pp.
    • Richard C. Williams (1974), Effecting Organizational Renewal in Schools: A Social Systems Perspective, 138 pp.
  23. ^ http://sysdyn.clexchange.org
  24. ^ See for further details: Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems/List of systems engineering at universities
  25. ^ Paul Keys (1991), Operational Research and Systems: The Systemic Nature of Operational Research, p. 169.
  26. ^ Anthony Walker (2007), Project Management in Construction, p.40.
  27. ^ Tine Aage, Intro to a seminari, retrieved Oct 2007.
  28. ^ Ralph E. Anderson, Irl E. Carter, Gary Lowe (1999), Human Behavior in the Social Environment: A Social Systems Approach, Aldine Transaction, p.103.
  29. ^ Anthony M. H. Clayton, Nicholas J. Radcliffe (1996), Sustainability: A Systems Approach, Earthscan, p. xiv.
  30. ^ David Carson (1967), International Marketing: A Comparative Systems Approach, 539 pp.
  31. ^ Ciprian Foiaş (1993), the Turbulence in Fluid Flows: A Dynamical Systems Approach, Springer.
    Esther S. Thelen, Linda B. Smith (1994), A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action, 376 pp.
  32. ^ Joe Kelly & Louise Kelly (1998), An Existential-Systems Approach to Managing Organizations, 277 pp.
  33. ^ Sharon L. Foster & Arthur L. Robin (1989), Negotiating Parent-Adolescent Conflict: A Behavioral-Family Systems Approach, 338 pp.
  34. ^ Don Willis (1992), A Hybrid Systems Approach to Preservation of Printed Materials, 72 pp.
  35. ^ Geoffrey Elliott (2004), Global Business Information Technology: An Integrated Systems Approach.
  36. ^ Simon G. Fabri & Visakan Kadirkamanathan (2001), Functional Adaptive Control: An Intelligent Systems Approach, 266 pp.
  37. ^ W. Gordon Lawrence (1999), "Exploring Individual and Organizational Boundaries: A Tavistock Open Systems approach", Karnac Books, 278 pp.
  38. ^ Ralph E. Anderson (1999), Human Behavior in the Social Environment: A Social Systems Approach, 308 pp.
  39. ^ Paul M. Stokes (1968), A Total Systems Approach to Management Control, 160 pp.
  40. ^ Books about Systems thinking, Business and economics:
    • Stephen G. Haines (1998), The Manager's Pocket Guide to Systems Thinking, 250 pp.
    • Stephen G. Haines (2000), The Systems Thinking Approach to Strategic Planning and Management, 448 pp.
    • Michael C. Jackson (2000), Systems Approaches to Management, 465 pp.
    • Michael C. Jackson (2004), Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers, 376 pp.
    • Ronald Lippitt & Gordon L. Lippitt (1981), Systems Thinking: A Resource for Organization Diagnosis and Intervention, International Consultants Foundation, 159 pp.
    • Ralph D. Stacey, Douglas Griffin & Patricia Shaw (2000), Complexity and Management: Fad Or Radical Challenge to Systems Thinking?, 224 pp.
  41. ^ Richard C. Schwartz (1995), Internal Family Systems Therapy, p.17.
  42. ^ Michael L. Deaton & James J. Winebrake (2000), Dynamic Modeling of Environmental Systems, Springer, 194 pp.
  43. ^ a b Nermien Al-Ali (2003), Comprehensive Intellectual Capital Management: Step-by-Step, p.110.
  44. ^ David Smith (1980), Systems Thinking in Library and Information Management.
  45. ^ Barry G. Silverman (2005), Intelligent Paradigms for Healthcare Enterprises: Systems Thinking, 266 pp.
  46. ^ Raimo P. Hamalainen & Esa Saarinen, Systems intelligence in leadership and everyday life, p.8.

[edit] External links


Interesting examples, lacking Wikipedia notability