In systemic thinking, we often debate whether to start with the “big picture” and then decompose the problem situation into sub-problems (the traditional, decompositional approach to requirements analysis), or whether to start with the detailed problems that stakeholders articulate and analyze how these are related (the bottom-up approach). As a systemic analyst, these have always seemed to be two halves of the same approach, so it was interesting to remember my own confusion in the early days of my career when this was not so obvious … 🙂
Systemic analysis can be related to the learning-cycle. There are many variants of this. Dewey introduced the world to the idea that we learn about how the world works through interactions with that world (experiential learning):
‘An experience is always what it is because of a transaction taking place between the individual and, what at the time, constitutes the environment’ (Dewey, 1938, p. 43)
Lewin suggested a four-stage model of experiential learning, that cycles between the concrete and the abstract – this later became known as the “hermeneutic circle” as an individual cycles around these stages of learning, pondering the meaning of what they experience in each cycle, then using this meaning to construct an increasingly complex mental model of the world.
To engage in systemic thinking, we need approaches to analysis that permit us to cycle around these stages multiple times – especially when we encounter new information. In the pages that follow, I explore some methods and techniques used to support cyclical, systemic analysis.