History of Systems Science

Engineering defines systems science as “the application of scientific principles to practical ends” (Oxford English Dictionary). We would expect engineering disciplines which take a systems approach (such as systems engineering) to be based upon a systems science . The term science implies a well defined branch of knowledge, with a clearly recorded and coherent historical development. This is not the case for systems science, which has a fragmented history. For instance, some fundamental concepts now used in systems science have been present in other disciplines for many centuries, while equally fundamental concepts have independently emerged as recently as 40 or so years ago (Flood and Carson 1993).

Development of the system movement

Many attribute the notion of thinking about the whole to the Greek philosophers, exemplified by the work of Aristotle in examining multiple discipline related aspects in what is termed metaphysics. The explosion of knowledge in the natural and physical sciences during the Enlightenment of the 18th and 19th centuries made the move away from this natural philosophy approach to the creation of specialist disciplines inevitable. The only way for science to advance was for scientists to become expert in a narrow field of study. As disciplines emerged they created their own models and views of reality, which become increasingly specialized and associated with a field of study. The creation of educational structures to pass on this knowledge to the next generation of specialists perpetuates the fragmentation of knowledge into the present day (M’Pherson 1973).

Along with this increasing specialization of knowledge and education, the majority of western scientific study in the 19th century was based upon Descartes' notion of reductionism and closed system , sometimes call Machine Age, thinking (Flood 1999). This approach forms models based on the study of things in isolation and the establishment of rules on how they relate to each other. Unfortunately, this also led to a rational science movement, popularized by Popper (Popper 1972), which rejects any phenomena which do not fit with this rational view as not worthy of study.

While these ideas of specialist knowledge and rational analysis have provided a useful model through which a vast amount of scientific knowledge has been gained, they can also be a barrier to our ability to gain knowledge across disciplines and outside of the closed system view. The systems movement has its roots in two areas of science: the biological-social sciences; and a mathematical-managerial base stemming first from cybernetics and later from organizational theory. Both of which have developed around an open system and systemic thinking approach.

Over the last century and into the current one, systems science practitioners have considered unified theories of systems and sciences; produced hard approaches to optimize system solutions, and produced soft approaches to create systems of problem understanding and critical approaches based on system of system approaches.

The Development of Systems Science

The following overview of the evolution of systems science is broadly chronological, but also follows the evolution of system thinking.

Open Systems and General Systems Theory

Ludwig von Bertalanffy developed a research approach based on Open System Theory (Bertalanffy 1950). He was one of a number of natural scientists who realized that the reductionist closed system approach could not be used to explain the behavior of an organism in its environment.

Open system theory considers an organism as a complex entity composed of many parts with an overall integrity, co-existing in an environment. In an open system the organism's structure is maintained, or adapts, through a continual exchange of energy and information with its environment.

general system theory (GST), attempts to formulate principles relevant to all open systems (Bertalanffy 1968). GST is based on the idea that correspondence relationships (homologies) exist between systems from different disciplines. Thus, knowledge about one system should allow us to reason about other systems. Many of the generic system concepts come from the investigation of GST.

GST also implies a scientific approach, with identified laws and generalized theory to unify all science. Bertalanffy was co-founder, along with Kenneth Boulding (economist), Ralph Gerard (physiologist) and Anatol Rapoport (mathematician), of the Society for General Systems Research in 1957. This group is considered by many to be the founders of System Age Thinking (Flood 1999).

Cybernetics

cybernetics was defined by Wiener, Ashby and others as the study and modeling of communication, regulation and control in systems (Ashby 1956; Wiener 1948). Cybernetics studies the flow of information through a system and how information is used by the system to control itself through feedback mechanisms. Early work in cybernetics in the 1940s was applied to electronic and mechanical networks, and was one of the disciplines used in the formation of early systems theory. It has since been used as a set of founding principles for all of the significant system disciplines.

Operations Research and Organizational Cybernetics

operations research (OR) considers the use of technology by an organization. It is based on mathematical modeling and statistical analysis to optimize decisions on the deployment of the resources under an organization's control. It arises from military planning techniques developed during World War II.

Operations Research and Management Science (ORMS) was formalized in 1950 by Ackoff and Churchman applying the ideas and techniques of OR to organizations and organizational decisions (Churchman et al 1950).

Stafford Beer was one of the first to take a cybernetics approach to organizations (Beer 1959). For Beer the techniques of ORMS are best applied in the context of an understanding of the whole system. Beer also developed a Viable Systems Model (Beer 1972), which encapsulates the effective organization needed for a system to be viable (to survive and adapt in its environment).

Work in cybernetics and ORMS consider the mechanism for communication and control in complex systems, and particularly in organizations and management sciences. They provide useful approaches for dealing with operational and tactical problems within a system, but do not allow consideration of more strategic organizational problems (Flood 1999).

Systems Methodologies

Much of the work of the Systems Science community has been around the creation of System Methodologies. These describe structured approaches to problem understanding and/or resolution making use of some of the concepts of Systems Thinking.

These methodologies are generally associated with a particular System paradigm, or way of thinking, about how Systems Thinking should be applied.

The most widely used groups of methodologies are as follows:

1. hard system methodologies, (Checkland 1978), set out to select an efficient means to achieve a predefined and agreed end.
2. [[Soft System (glossary) methodologies, (Checkland 1999), are interactive and participatory approaches to assist groups of diverse participants to alleviate a complex, problematic situation of common interest.
3. critical systems thinking , Jackson (Jackson 1985), attempts to provide a framework in which appropriate hard and soft methods can be applied as appropriate to the situation under investigation.

Jackson's SOSM framework (Jackson 1990) (see Systems Thinking for more detail) categories the Systems Thinking Paradigms by considering the nature of the type of problem and the relationships between the people involved in solving it..

Hard approaches use systems thinking to ensure complete and viable solutions are created and/or as part of the solution optimization process. These approaches are appropriate to unitary problems, but not when the problem situation or solution technologies are unclear.

Soft approaches use systems thinking to ensure problem situations are fully explored and to guide interventions to resolve them. These approaches are appropriate to pluralist problems in which problems may not be clear but all parties are willing and able to work towards concensus.

Critical Thinking not only allows us to deal with complex combinations of soft problem and hard solutin issues, but also considers the coercive dimension in which differences in power between individuals and social groups impacts the effectiveness of interventions.

More recent thinking (Jackson 2003) also considers postmodernist approaches in which all attempts to look for system solutions to be temporary and ineffective in situations where the power of individuals and groups of people dominate any system structures we create. They advocate an approach encourages diversity, free thinking and creativity of individuals and in the organization's structures. Systems concepts and models can still be used, but notions of problem and solution are rejected.

More detailed discussion of some of the methods most often used in Systems Engineering can be found in the associated System Methodologies topic.

References

Works Cited

Ackoff, R.L. 1981. Creating the Corporate Future. New York, NY, USA: Wiley and Sons.

Ashby, W. R. 1956. Introduction to Cybernetics. London, UK: Methuen.

Beer, S. 1959. Cybernetics and Management. London, UK: English Universities; New York: Wiley and Sons.

Beer, S. 1979. The Heart of the Enterprise. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Bertalanffy, L. von. 1950. "The Theory of Open Systems in Physics and Biology". Science, New Series, 111(2872) (Jan 13): 23-29

Bertalanffy, L. von. 1968. General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, Revised ed. New York, NY, USA: Braziller.

Checkland, P. 1975. "The Origins and Nature of “Hard” Systems Thinking." Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 5(2): 99-110.

Checkland, P. 1999. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Churchman, C.W. 1968. The Systems Approach. New York, NY, USA: Dell Publishing.

Churchman, C.W., R.L. Ackoff. and E.L. Arnoff. 1950. Introduction to Operations Research. New York, NY, USA: Wiley and Sons.

Flood, R.L. 1999. Rethinking the Fifth Discipline: Learning within the Unknowable. London, UK: Routledge.

Flood, R.L. and E.R. Carson. 1993. Dealing with Complexity: An Introduction to the Theory and Application of Systems Science, 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Plenum Press.

Forrester, J. 1961. Industrial Dynamics. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press.

Jackson, M. 1985. "Social Systems Theory and Practice: the Need for a Critical Approach." International Journal of General Systems. 10: 135-151.

Jackson, M. 1989. "Which Systems Methodology When? Initial Results from a Research Program." In: R Flood, M Jackson and P Keys (eds). Systems Prospects: the Next Ten Years of Systems Research. New York, NY, USA: Plenum.

Jackson, M. 2003. Systems Thinking: Creating Holisms for Managers. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Jackson, M.C. and Keys, P. 1984. "Towards a System of Systems Methodologies." The Journal of the Operational Research Society. 35(6) (Jun. 1984): 473-486.

Jenkins, G.M. 1969. The Systems Approach. In Beishon, J. and G. Peters (eds.), Systems Behavior, 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Harper and Row.

Lewin, K. 1958. Group Decision and Social Change. New York, NY, USA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. p. 201.

Mason, R.O. and I.I. Mitroff. 1981. Challenging Strategic Planning Assumptions: Theory, Case and Techniques. New York, NY, USA: Wiley and Sons.

M’Pherson, P, K. 1974. "A Perspective on Systems Science and Systems Philosophy." Futures 6(3) (June 1974): 219-239.

Popper, K. R. 1979. Objective Knowledge, 2nd edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Senge, P. 1990. The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation. London, UK: Century Books.

Wiener, N. 1948. Cybernetics or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Paris, France: Hermann & Cie Editeurs; Cambridge, MA, USA: The Technology Press; New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Primary References

Bertalanffy, L. von. 1968. General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications, Revised ed. New York, NY, USA: Braziller.

Checkland, P. 1999. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Flood, R. L. 1999. Rethinking the Fifth Discipline: Learning within the Unknowable. London, UK: Routledge.

Jackson, M. 1985. "Social Systems Theory and Practice: the Need for a Critical Approach." International Journal of General Systems 10: 135-151.

Additional References

Bowler, D.T. 1981. General Systems Thinking: Its Scope and Applicability. Amsterdam: The Netherlands: Elsevier.

Boulding, K.E. 1996. The World as a Total System. Beverly Hills, CA, USA: Sage Publications.

Laszlo, E. (ed). 1972. The Relevance of General Systems Theory. New York, NY, USA: George Brazillier.

Skyttner, L. 1996. General Systems Theory - An Introduction. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Press.

Warfield, J.N. 2006. An Introduction to Systems Science. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte Ltd.

---

<- Previous Article | Parent Article | Next Article ->