Block 3 Part 2: Supporting people in creating viable systems:

Supporting peoples autonomy Supporting people autonomy requires three key communication skills; these from the Interpersonal Action-Learning Cycle (IALC). To e!elop your skills as system practitioner is to make actual use of them in your e!ery ay life an then reflect in your o"n estimation. (listening) an important thing to system con!ersations C# $ Acti!ities % &'( &)( &* Skills that system practitioners use in engaging "ith comple+ity; negotiating "ith clients( inter!ie"ing stakehol ers in system( taking in ifferent perspecti!es an so on. The Interpersonal Action Learning Cycle (IALC) ,- -aking .I/ statements $ 0e goo to eal "ith people &- 1sing .acti!e listening/ 2- Autonomy-supporting con!ersations TASC3I Transformation % "hat input is con!erte into "hat output Actors % "ho is in!ol!e in carrying out the acti!ities entaile 0y the transformation Suppliers% "ho are the suppliers of the inputs to the transformation. Customers% "ho are the once recei!ing the outputs of the transformation 3"ners% "ho has in the system an o!er!ie" of its transformation. Inter!eners % "ho is efining from outsi e the system the conte+t for the transformation.

Part 3 : Reflective Viable System Practice 4eflecti!e systems practice% it can sho"n in t"o meanings% Firstly % 4eflecti!e practice in sense of questioning purpose actions an 0eliefs. This is critically reflecti!e practice. Secondly% 4eflecti!e practice in the sense of taking my o"n purpose( actions an 0eliefs into account. This is personally reflecti!e practice. 4eflecti!e practice "ill "ork in conte+t of the !ia0le system mo el. - 5o" critically reflecti!e practice equates "ith t"o forms of ou0le-loop learning. - 5o" personally reflecti!e practice equates in ealings "ith other people( "ith use of the interpersonal action $ learning cycle (IALC) - 5o" the t"o com0ine into a form of ou0le-loop learning in "hich question my o"n purpose actions an 0eliefs. Critically reflecti!e practice in!ol!es % questioning purpose ("hat is 0eing one) Actions (5o" things are 0eing one) 6uestioning 0eliefs ("hy things are 0eing one that "ay) purpose 7ach of these pairs e+emplifies ou0le-loop learning eneral !ction"#earning $ycle
Transformation process

inputs

output

8oal

#oes the output match the goal

%&e control 'odel

The Comparator.

The output is compare to the goal any ifference 0et"een them is fe into the actuator "hich then mo ifies the input . this goes on until the goal state is a achie!e or reco!ere .

;lanning an Acting

inputs

Transformation process

Sensing

output

8oal

Checking

#oes the output match the goal <

,ames for t&e positions around t&e feedback loop

9igure names 2 positions aroun the fee 0ack loop sensing( checking( an planning:acting (SC;A) inclu e planning "ith acting( in or er to ensure that the action taken is intelligent. This is 8eneral Action $Learning Cycle
-olb: !bstracting and ./perimenting ;lanning an Acting -olb: ./periencing Sensing output

Transformation

./perimenting

inputs

process

!bstracting

./periencing 8oal

Checking
Reflecting
#oes the output match the goal < %&e -olb cycle -olb : Reflecting

S()! cycle from %2*+ is similar to S$P!

% 2*+
Sensing 1n erstan ing #eci ing Acting

% 3*0
Sensing Checking ;lanning Acting

#ifference is that .Checking/ makes it e+plicit same 0efore going on to .#eci ing/ or .;lanning/ ( .1n erstan ing/ is implie as a part of such .Checking/
Resources
oal ac&ievement process ;erformance

8oal

5o" are "e oing <

Single"loop learning: performance alone is 1uestioned

3nly performance is asking here Taking my o"n purpose( actions an 0eliefs into account% It means personally reflecti!e practice in interaction "ith other people this practice is equi!alent to using the Interpersonal Action-Learning Cycle (IALC). So 0y implies (IALC) into personal reflecti!e practice. - 4eflection% I percei!e==.. an I "ill share my o"n !ie"s "ith you - 4eflecti!e recepti!eness % I percei!e you == an your !ie"s are 0eing "elcome - 4eflecti!e( recepti!e un erstan ing I percei!e you as saying =. an your !ie"s are 0eing inclu e .

'aking VS' practice reflective Implementing >S- practice in!ol!es a form of ou0le-loop learning in "hich critically an personally reflecti!e practice com0ine - 5o" the >S- metho s e+emplify the action-learning cycle. - 5o" facilitati!e practice "ith a >S- metho em0e s the >Smetho in the (IALC) - 5o" this em0e ing creates a form of ou0le-loop learning in "hich critically an personally reflecti!e practice com0ine. 5o" the >S- metho s e+emplify the action-learning cycle%Sho"ing ho" the ?7C- components of systemic practice from an actionlearning cycle( onto "hich the >S- metho s can 0e mappe . The ?7C- loop%-

Planning and !cting

Conte+tuali@ing the approach an -anaging the comple+ity

Comple+ity percei!e

Aatural process of con!ergence to"ar s learning "hat/s going on an "hat to o. ?y the 0eneficiaries of the systemic approach

Sensing
?eing systemically a"are

Comple+ity manage

I eal of comple+ity manage

$&ecking
7ngaging "ith the comple+ity
Is the comple+ity 0eing manage "ell enough< %&e courses systemic practice components 2B.$'3 as an action learing loop

The "or The "or The "or The "or

(Sensing) to ?eing systemically a"are (Checking) to 7ngaging "ith the comple+ity (;lanning) to conte+tuali@e the approach (Acting) to -anaging the comple+ity

The >S- Loop%Ta0ular form%Bhen the ?7C- cycle in loop form in the figure is put into ta0ular form an the >S- metho s are then mappe onto it( the result is as sho"n on ta0le C page D2

Planning and !cting %o bring out viability 2 . ;ro ucing a technological mo el. *. -o eling potential impro!ement

Sensing to bring out viability: #e!eloping a statement of purpose for the group as an organi@ation '. 1nfol ing the primary acti!ities to i entify structural le!els Aatural process of con!ergence to !ia0ility 0y an autonomous group "hen it is sho"n ho"

The group as a collection of in i!i uals

The group reali@ing their share !ision of 0ecoming a !ia0le system

In i!i uals in the group sharing un erstan ing in open communication

Checking To 0ring our !ia0ility%

&. 1sing TASC3I to check that the statement of purpose is a equate ). Checking e!olution of primary acti!ities an functioning of -anagement systems at each le!el
5o" am I oing as a practitioner < Am I ena0ling the group to achie!e a share !ision of !ia0ility that has emerge from its mem0ers 0eing in open communication "ith one another<

%&e Viplan VS' met&od mapped onto t&e action learning loop

- The "or (Sensing) to steps , an ' of the >iplan >S- metho - The "or (Checking) to steps & an ) of the >iplan >S- metho - The "or (;lanning an Acting) to steps 2 an * of the >iplan >Smetho . At the lo"er-left that the group are presume to 0e in effecti!e. 3pen communication "ith one another-result of recei!ing the kin of in i!i ual

support for their autonomy that lets them feel safe "ith one another. It requires the IALC as a eeper loop as necessary an sufficient con ition for support for autonomy.

5o" facilitati!e practice em0e s the >S- metho s in the IALC;It first nee to put the IALC into a learning loop format IALC 4ecepti!eness

E
Sensing 3ffering my recepti!eness To in!ite reflection (nderstanding

E
$&ecking 3ffering my un erstan ing To in!ite correction an recepti!eness Reflection

E
Planning and !cting 3ffering my o"n reflections to in!ite un erstan ing - The "or (Sensing) to the phase offering my recepti!eness to in!ite reflection - The "or (Checking to the phrase 3ffering my un erstan ing to in!ite correction an recepti!eness - The "or (;lanning:Acting) to the phrase 3ffering my o"n reflections to in!ite un erstan ing

)eveloping a critically and personally reflective met&odology:" There are se!eral ifferent le!els at "hich you can engage "ith the >S- as a system practitioner. There is no right or "rong "ay to make use of the >S- ifferent practitioners "ill e!elop ifferent styles "hich they are a0le to make "ork effecti!ely. The le!els of engagement that ha!e 0een escri0e in this 0lock are as follo"s% 43 Simple diagnosis 2or design3 This is the 0asic >S- metho (Suma "holefoo s e+ample). The practitioner use kno"le ge of the organi@ation to i entify the fi!e internal systems "ithin the >S-. Bhere any of these fi!e systems "ere a0sent or malfunctioning it "as then possi0le to pro uce proposal for impro!ement. If all fi!e systems are foun to 0e in place- 0ut not functioning "ell-then the ne+t le!el of engagement is require . 23 Recursive diagnosis 2or design3 This is the core of the >iplan >S- metho in or er to un ertake this you ha!e to e!elop etaile recursi!e escriptions of the organi@ation an map functions onto this analysis. This ena0les you to i entify more su0tle failings in the "ay the organi@ation is structure . In e+pert han s this can 0e an e+tremely po"erful approach( an the >iplan material ena0les you to start gaining e+perience at this le!el. 3f the action learning cycles. 33 Variety 'anagement: The complete analysis "ill in!ol!e analysis of ho" !ariety is re uce an amplifie throughout the organi@ation "ith a !ie" to isco!ering 0ottlenecks an areas "here impro!ement is necessary. In some cases the impro!ement iagnose "ill mean e!ol!ing autonomy. 53 Fostering autonomy: This coul follo" on from any of the a0o!e le!els of engagements( or it coul 0e a separate e+ercise in its o"n right. In or er for this to 0e un ertaken "ith a reasona0le chance of success it is essential that you as the practitioner are % A $ a"are of your o"n unconscious po"er ynamics ? $ a0le to act congruently "ith all parties in!ol!e .

C $ a0le to contri0ute( an "here necessary repair autonomysupporting( con!ersations( using acti!e listening an other tools (ta0le ,&:9igure &)) 6ntegrating VS' practice 7it& t&e SS"'et&od and t&e 8S"'et&od:" Se1uencing of met&ods: To compare three systems "hich are po"erful systems of inquiry that procee from ifferent "orl -!ie"s an "hich can yiel quite ifferent in sight in any gi!en situation. They ha!e ifferent omains of application. Their ifferent in sights o not compete They simply are ifferent an complement one another. They are esigne for ifferent conte+ts. Com0ining the SS--etho ( >S- metho s an 5S--etho
8i!en an apparently comple+( unstructure organi@ational situation 8i!en some agree i ea of "hat it might 0e effecti!e ("orth"hile) to o 8i!en an efficacious organi@ation structure The SS--etho can 0e !ery useful for The >S- metho s can 0e !ery useful for The 5S-metho can 0e !ery useful for #etermining "hat/s going on( an "hat it might 0e effecti!e ("orth"hile) to o a0out it. #esigning an efficacious organi@ational structure for oing it "ell. -easuring an impro!ing the structure/s operational efficiency.

- The SS--etho is i eally suite for making sense of unstructure situations( taking multiple perspecti!es an multiple purposes into account. - 3nce the possi0ility of an agree organi@ational purpose emerges( the >S- metho s come into their o"n . They are i eal for etermining an optimum organi@ational structure for carrying out that purpose. The >iplan >S- metho in particular can ensure that no 0ottlenecks or s"amps are 0uilt into the organi@ation( an that the nee s of customers( o"ners etc. are e+plicitly taken into account. - 3nce an accepta0le structure is in place( the 5S-metho is i eal for t"eaking the flo" rates of its acti!ities for ma+imum efficiency. 1sing output from one metho as input for another in!ol!es follo"ing the steps of each metho ( making sure that the output that you get from each

step is a suita0le input for the ne+t step( an that the output that you get from each "hole metho is a suita0le input for the ne+t metho . Since the >S- metho are in the mi le of the sequence( this can 0e calle >S- me iate practice.

$ross"#inking met&ods:" There is sense of similarities among three metho s( It can 0e notice an apparent o!erlap in meaning 0et"een a 4oot #efinition in SS-metho ( a system name in the >iplan >S- metho ( an a Top o0Fecti!e in the 5Smetho . All are statements of purpose. There is meaning 0et"een TASC3I in the >iplan >S- metho CATB37 in the soft system metho . an

Bhen the three metho s are each mappe onto the ?7C- action-learning cycle( their eep similarities 0ecome apparent 4efer to ta0le ( ,') ;ages C* G CH Ta0le (,)) ;age CC