Systems thinking: learning or driving?

The ability to foresee how behaviour of a system arises from the interaction of its components over time - i.e. its dynamic complexity – is seen an important ability to take effective decisions in our turbulent world. Dynamic complexity emerges frequently from interrelated simple structures, such as stocks and flows, feedbacks and delays (Forrester, 1961). Common sense assumes an intuitive understanding of their dynamic behaviour. However, recent researches have pointed to a persistent and systematic error in people understanding of those building blocks of complex systems. This paper describes an empirical study concerning the native ability to understand systems thinking concepts. Two different groups - one, academic, the other, professional – submitted to four tasks, proposed by Sweeney and Sterman (2000) and Sterman (2002). The results confirm a poor intuitive understanding of the basic systems concepts, even when subjects have background in mathematics and sciences.

A System Dynamics-Based Simulation Experiment for Testing Mental Model and Performance Effects of Using the Balanced Scorecard

This study develops a theoretical model that explains the effectiveness of the balanced scorecard approach by means of a system dynamics and feedback learning perspective. Presumably, the balanced scorecard leads to a better understanding of context, allowing managers to externalize and improve their mental models. We present a set of hypotheses about the influence of the balanced scorecard approach on mental models and performance. A test based on a simulation experiment that uses a system dynamics model is performed. The experiment included three types of parameters: financial indicators; balanced scorecard indicators; and balanced scorecard indicators with the aid of a strategy map review. Two out of the three hypotheses were confirmed. It was concluded that a strategy map review positively influences mental model similarity, and mental model similarity positively influences performance.

Systems thinking: learning or driving?

The ability to foresee how behaviour of a system arises from the interaction of its components over time - i.e. its dynamic complexity – is seen an important ability to take effective decisions in our turbulent world. Dynamic complexity emerges frequently from interrelated simple structures, such as stocks and flows, feedbacks and delays (Forrester, 1961). Common sense assumes an intuitive understanding of their dynamic behaviour. However, recent researches have pointed to a persistent and systematic error in people understanding of those building blocks of complex systems. This paper describes an empirical study concerning the native ability to understand systems thinking concepts. Two different groups - one, academic, the other, professional – submitted to four tasks, proposed by Sweeney and Sterman (2000) and Sterman (2002). The results confirm a poor intuitive understanding of the basic systems concepts, even when subjects have background in mathematics and sciences.

A system dynamics-based simulation

This study develops a theoretical model that explains the effectiveness of the balanced scorecard approach by means of a system dynamics and feedback learning perspective. Presumably, the balanced scorecard leads to a better understanding of context, allowing managers to externalize and improve their mental models. We present a set of hypotheses about the influence of the balanced scorecard approach on mental models and performance. A test based on a simulation experiment that uses a system dynamics model is performed. The experiment included three types of parameters: financial indicators; balanced scorecard indicators; and balanced scorecard indicators with the aid of a strategy map review. Two out of the three hypotheses were confirmed. It was concluded that a strategy map review positively influences mental model similarity, and mental model similarity positively influences performance.