Jason Smith writes:
> You make some interesting remarks about open systems and complexity. Of
> course, in practice, one doesn't have to model every relationship of
> affect to have a model of system behaviour that is effective in supporting
> the identification of leveraged actions that result in sustained change.
> One would be at it for quite some time, building what I call "the dynamics
> model that swallowed Toronto." Variables both external and internal to an
> organization play a role in explaining the behaviour of an organization as
> a system. One needs to be open to both kinds, of course. However, a
> model isn't necessarily any less useful if external variables aren't
> modelled. Like all analysis, one has to hold an understanding of the
> context in which the work is done, and the desired outcomes for the work.
I remember some words of advice in a Systems Dynamics textbook I browsed
many years ago: "model problems, not systems". The basic point was a
warning about the kind of thing you mention. Having a specific problem in
mind helps keep the model focused on a concrete purpose and allows you to
make the needed tradeoffs between completeness and tractability.
Regards,
--Don Dwiggins "All models are false, SEI Information Technology but some are useful" d.l.dwiggins@computer.org -- George Box, "Statistics for Experiments"
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>