Principles of Systems Thinking

This article forms part of the Systems Thinking Knowledge Area. It identifies systems principles as part of the basic ideas of Systems Thinking.

Some additional concepts more directly associated with Engineered Systems are described and a summary of system principles associated with the concepts aready defiend, is provided. A number of additional “laws” and heuristics are also discussed.

Systems Principles, Laws, and Heuristics

A principle is a general rule of conduct or behavior (Lawson and Martin 2008), or a basic generalization that is accepted as true and that can be used as a basis for reasoning or conduct (WordWeb 2012c). Thus, systems principles can be used as a basis for reasoning about systems (systems thinking) or associated conduct (systems engineering).

Separation of Concerns

In the What is Systems Thinking? article a “systems thinking paradox” is discussed. How can we take a holistic system view while still being able to focus on changing or creating systems? The system principles described in this article are primarily focused on giving guidance on how to deal with this paradox in the application of systems thinking as part of a systems approach.

The Concepts of Systems Thinking article describes concepts which are generally applicable to the understanding of all tpes of systems, be they natural or man made. The additional concepts described below are more focused on Engineered Systems, although some of them have been identified from observation of natural systems.

abstraction is the process of taking away characteristics from something in order to reduce it to a set of essential characteristics (SearchCIO 2012). In attempting to understand complex situations it is easier to focus on bounded problems, whose solutions “still remaining agnostic to the greater problem.” (Erl 2012). This sounds reductionist, but is applied effectively in natural systems and engineered systems. The key is that one of the selected problems needs to be the concerns of the system as a whole. This idea of a balance between using abstraction to focus on specific concerns while ensuring we continue to consider the whole is at the centre of Systems Approaches.

A view is a subset of information observed of one or more entities, such as systems. The physical or conceptual point from which a view is observed is the viewpoint , which can be motivated by one or more observer concerns. Different views of the same target must be both separated, to reflects separation of concerns, and integrated such that all views of a given target are consistent and form a coherent whole (Hybertson 2009). Sample views of a system: internal (what does it consist of?); external (what are its properties and behavior as a whole?); static (parts, structures); dynamic (interactions).

encapsulation is the enclosing of one thing within another or the degree to which it is enclosed. System encapsulation encloses system elements and their interactions from the external environment, and usually involves a system boundary that hides the internal from the external. Encapsulation is associated with modularity the degree to which a system's components may be separated and recombined (Griswold 1995). Modularity applies to systems in many domains, natural, social and engineered. In engineering, encapsulation is the isolation of a system function within a module and providing precise specifications for the module (IEEE Std. 610.12-1990).

dualism is a characteristic of systems in which they exhibit seemingly contradictory characteristics that are important for the system (Hybertson 2009). The yin yang concept in Chinese philosophy emphasizes the interaction between dual elements and their harmonization, ensuring a constant dynamic balance often through a cyclic dominance of one element and then the other, such as day and night (IEP 2006).

From a systems perspective the interaction, harmonization, and balance between system properties is important. (Hybertson 2009) defines Leverage as the duality between:

• Power the extent to which a system solves a specific problem
• Generality the extent to which a system solves a whole class of problems.

While some systems or elements may be optimised for one extreme of such dualities a dynamic balance is needed to be effective in solving complex problems.

Summary of Systems Principles

A set of systems principles is given in Table 1 below.

The names points to concepts underlying the principle (see article on Concepts of Systems Thinking). Following the table, two additional sets of items related to systems principles are noted and briefly discussed: Prerequisite laws for design science, and heuristics and pragmatic principles.

Table 1. A Set of Systems Principles. SEBoK Original.

Name	Statement of Principle
regularity	Systems science should find and capture regularities in systems, because those regularities promote systems understanding and facilitate systems practice. (Bertalanffy 1968)
holism	A system should be considered as a single entity, a whole, not just as a set of parts. (Ackoff 1979; Klir 2001)
Interaction	The properties, capabilities, and behavior of a system derive from its parts, from interactions between those parts, and from interactions with other systems. (Hitchins 2009 p. 60)
Relations	A system is characterized by its relations: the interconnections between the elements. Feedback is a type of relation. The set of relations defines the network of the system. (Odum 1994)
Separation of Concerns	A larger problem is more effectively solved when decomposed into a set of smaller problems or concerns. (Erl 2012; Greer 2008)
abstraction	A focus on essential characteristics is important in problem solving because it allows problem solvers to ignore the nonessential, thus simplifying the problem. (Sci-Tech Encyclopedia 2009; SearchCIO 2012; Pearce 2012)
modularity	Unrelated parts of the system should be separated, and related parts of the system should be grouped together. (Griswold 1995; Wikipedia 2012a)
Encapsulation	Hide internal parts and their interactions from the external environment. (Klerer 1993; IEEE 1990)
boundary	A boundary or membrane separates the system from the external world. It serves to concentrate interactions inside the system while allowing exchange with external systems. (Hoagland, Dodson, and Mauck 2001)
view	Multiple views, each based on a system aspect or concern, are essential to understand a complex system or problem situation. (Edson 2008; Hybertson 2009)
Similarity/ Difference	Both the similarities and differences in systems should be recognized and accepted for what they are. (Bertalanffy 1975 p. 75; Hybertson 2009). Avoid forcing one size fits all, and avoid treating everything as entirely unique.
dualism	Recognize dualities and consider how they are, or can be, harmonized in the context of a larger whole (Hybertson 2009)
leverage	Achieve maximum leverage (Hybertson 2009). Because of the power versus generality tradeoff, leverage can be achieved by a complete solution (power) for a narrow class of problems, or by a partial solution for a broad class of problems (generality.
Change	Change is necessary for growth and adaptation, and should be accepted and planned for as part of the natural order of things, rather than something to be ignored, avoided, or prohibited. (Bertalanffy 1968; Hybertson 2009)
Stability/ Change	Things change at different rates, and entities or concepts at the stable end of the spectrum can and should be used to provide a guiding context for rapidly changing entities at the volatile end of the spectrum (Hybertson 2009). The study of complex adaptive systems can give guidance to system behavior and design in changing environments (Holland 1992).
Equifinality	In open systems, the same final state may be reached from different initial conditions and in different ways. (Bertalanffy 1968). This principle can be exploited especially in systems of purposeful agents.
Parsimony	One should choose the simplest explanation of a phenomenon, the one that requires the fewest assumptions. (Cybernetics 2012). This applies not only to choosing a design, but also operations and requirements.
Layer, hierarchy	The evolution of complex systems is facilitated by their hierarchical structure (including stable intermediate forms), and the understanding of complex systems is facilitated by their hierarchical description. (Pattee 1973; Bertalanffy 1968; Simon 1996)
network	The network is a fundamental topology for systems that forms the basis of togetherness, connection, and dynamic interaction of parts that yield the behavior of complex systems (Lawson 2010; Martin et al. 2004; Sillitto 2010)

The principles are not independent. They have synergies and tradeoffs. Lipson (2007), for example, argued that “Scalability of open-ended evolutionary processes depends on their ability to exploit functional modularity, structural regularity and hierarchy.” He proposed a formal model for examining the properties, dependencies, and tradeoffs among these principles. Edson (2008) related many of the above principles in a structure called the conceptagon, which he modified from (Boardman and Sauser 2008), and also provided guidance on how to apply the principles. Not all principles apply to every system or engineering decision. Judgment, experience, and heuristics (see below) help understand which principles apply in a given situation.

Several principles illustrate the relation of view with the dualism and yin yang principle. An important example is the Holism and Separation of Concerns pair of principles. These look contradictory, but they are dual ways of dealing with complexity. Holism deals with complexity by focusing on the whole system, and Separation of Concerns deals with complexity by dividing a problem or system into smaller more manageable elements that focus on particular concerns. They are reconciled by the fact that both views are needed to understand systems and to engineer systems; focusing on only one or the other does not give sufficient understanding or a good overall solution. This dualism is closely related to the Systems Thinking Paradox described in What is Systems Thinking?. Rosen (1979) discussed “false dualisms” of systems paradigms that are considered incompatible but are in fact different aspects or views of reality. In the present context, they are thus reconcilable through yin yang harmonization. Edson (2008) emphasized viewpoints as an essential principle of systems thinking and specifically as a way to understand opposing concepts.

Guidance on how to apply many of these principles to engineered systems is given in the article Synthesizing Possible Solutions as well as in System Definition and other knowledge areas in Part 3 of this SEBoK.

Prerequisite Laws of Design Science

John Warfield (1994) identified a set of laws of generic design science that are related to systems principles. Three of these laws are stated here.

1. ‘’Law of Requisite Variety’’: A design situation embodies a variety that must be matched by the specifications. The variety includes the diversity of stakeholders. This law is an application to design science of the Ashby (1956) Law of Requisite Variety, which was defined in the context of cybernetics and states that to successfully regulate a system, the variety of the regulator must be at least as large as the variety of the regulated system.
2. ‘’Law of Requisite Parsimony’’: Information must be organized and presented in a way that prevents human information overload. This law derives from Miller’s (1956) findings on the limits of human information processing capacity. Warfield’s structured dialog method is one possible way to help achieve the requisite parsimony.
3. ‘’Law of Gradation’’: Any conceptual body of knowledge can be graded in stages or varying degrees of complexity and scale, ranging from simplest to most comprehensive, and the degree of knowledge applied to any design situation should match the complexity and scale of the situation. A corollary, called the Law of Diminishing Returns, is that a body of knowledge should be applied to a design situation to the stage at which the point of diminishing returns is reached.

Heuristics and Pragmatic Principles

A heuristic is a common sense rule intended to increase the probability of solving some problem (WordWeb 2012b). In the present context it may be regarded as an informal or pragmatic principle. Maier and Rechtin (2000) identified an extensive set of heuristics that are related to systems principles. A few of these heuristics are stated here, and each is related to principles described above.

• Relationships among the elements are what give systems their added value. This is related to the ‘’Interaction’’ principle.
• Efficiency is inversely proportional to universality. This is related to the ‘’Leverage’’ principle.
• The first line of defense against complexity is simplicity of design. This is related to the ‘’Parsimony’’ principle.
• In order to understand anything, you must not try to understand everything (attributed to Aristotle). This is related to the ‘’Abstraction’’ principle.

An INCOSE working group (INCOSE 1993) defined a set of “pragmatic principles” for Systems Engineering. They are essentially best practice heuristics for engineering a system. A large number of heuristics are given. Three examples:

• Know the problem, the customer, and the consumer
• Identify and assess alternatives so as to converge on a solution
• Maintain the integrity of the system

References

Works Cited

Ackoff, R. 1979. The Future of Operational Research is Past, J. Opl. Res. Soc., 30(2): 93–104, Pergamon Press.

Ashby, W.R. 1956. Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems, Cybernetica, 1(2):1–17.

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

Bertalanffy, L. von. 1975. Perspectives on General System Theory. E. Taschdjian, ed. New York: George Braziller.

Boardman, J. and B. Sauser. 2008. Systems Thinking: Coping with 21st Century Problems. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.

Cybernetics (Web Dictionary of Cybernetics and Systems). 2012. Principle of Parsimony or Principle of Simplicity. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASC/PRINCI_SIMPL.html

Edson, R. 2008. Systems Thinking. Applied. A Primer. Arlington, VA, USA: Applied Systems Thinking (ASysT) Institute, Analytic Services Inc.

Erl, T. 2012. SOA Principles: An Introduction to the Service Orientation Paradigm. http://www.soaprinciples.com/p3.php

Greer, D. 2008. The Art of Separation of Concerns. http://aspiringcraftsman.com/tag/separation-of-concerns/

Griswold, W. 1995. Modularity Principle. http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/users/wgg/CSE131B/Design/node1.html

Hitchins, D. 2009. "What are the General Principles Applicable to Systems?" INCOSE Insight. 12(4): 59-63.

Hoagland, M., B. Dodson, and J. Mauck. 2001. Exploring the Way Life Works. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Inc.

Holland, J. 1992. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: An Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hybertson, D. 2009. Model-Oriented Systems Engineering Science: A Unifying Framework for Traditional and Complex Systems. Auerbach/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

IEEE. 1990. IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology. IEEE Std 610.12-1990, IEEE, September 1990.

IEP (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy). 2006. Yinyang (Yin-yang). http://www.iep.utm.edu/yinyang/

INCOSE 1993. An Identification of Pragmatic Principles -Final Report. SE Principles Working Group, January 21, 1993. http://www.incose.org/productspubs/pdf/techdata/pitc/principlespragmaticdefoe_1993-0123_prinwg.pdf

Klerer, S. “System Management Information Modeling,” IEEE Comm, Vol 31:No 5, May 1993, pp 38-44.

Klir, G. 2001. Facets of Systems Science, 2nd ed. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Lawson, H. 2010. A Journey Through the Systems Landscape. London, UK: College Publications, Kings College, UK.

Lawson, H. and J. Martin. 2008. On the Use of Concepts and Principles for Improving Systems Engineering Practice. INCOSE International Symposium 2008, The Netherlands.

Lipson, H. 2007. Principles of modularity, regularity, and hierarchy for scalable systems. Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry 7, 125–128.

Maier, M. and E. Rechtin. 2000. The Art of Systems Architecting, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Martin, R., E. Robertson, and J. Springer. 2004. Architectural Principles for Enterprise Frameworks. Technical Report No. 594, Indiana University, April 2004. http://www.cs.indiana.edu/cgi-bin/techreports/TRNNN.cgi?trnum=TR594.

Miller, G. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.

Odum, H.1994. Ecological and General Systems: An Introduction to Systems Ecology (Revised Edition). University Press of Colorado.

Pattee, H. (ed.) 1973. Hierarchy Theory: The Challenge of Complex Systems. New York: George Braziller.

Pearce, J. 2012. The Abstraction Principle. http://www.cs.sjsu.edu/~pearce/modules/lectures/ood/principles/Abstraction.htm [Posting date unknown; accessed June 2012.]

Rosen, R. 1979. Old trends and new trends in general systems research. Int. J. of General Systems 5(3): 173-184. [Reprinted in Klir 2001]

Sci-Tech Encyclopedia. 2009. Abstract Data Type. McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, Sixth Edition, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. http://www.answers.com/topic/abstract-data-type.

SearchCIO. 2012. Abstraction. http://searchcio-midmarket.techtarget.com/definition/abstraction

Sillitto, H. 2010. Design principles for Ultra-Large-Scale (ULS) Systems. Proceedings of INCOSE International Symposium 2010, Chicago, Ill.

Simon, H. 1996. The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Volk, T., & Bloom, J. W. (2007). The use of metapatterns for research into complex systems of teaching, learning, and schooling. Part I: Metapatterns in nature and culture. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4(1), 25—43 (http://www.complexityandeducation.ualberta.ca/COMPLICITY4/documents/Complicity_41d_Volk_Bloom.pdf).

Warfield, J.N. 1994. A Science of Generic Design. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.

Wikipedia. 2012a. Modularity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modularity

WordWeb. 2012a. Dualism. http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/DUALISM.

WordWeb. 2012b. Heuristic. http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/HEURISTIC.

WordWeb. 2012c. Principle. http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/PRINCIPLE.

Primary References

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

Hybertson, D. 2009. Model-Oriented Systems Engineering Science: A Unifying Framework for Traditional and Complex Systems. Auerbach/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.

Klir, G. 2001. Facets of Systems Science, 2nd ed. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Additional References

Francois, F. (ed.). 2004. International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics, 2nd ed. K. G. Saur.

Meyers, R. (ed.). 2009. Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science (10 vol. set). Springer.

Midgley, G. (ed.). 2003. Systems Thinking (4 Vol. Set). Sage Publications Ltd.

---

< Previous Article | Parent Article | Next Article > SEBoK v. 1.9.1 released 30 September 2018

SEBoK Discussion

Please provide your comments and feedback on the SEBoK below. You will need to log in to DISQUS using an existing account (e.g. Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.) or create a DISQUS account. Simply type your comment in the text field below and DISQUS will guide you through the login or registration steps. Feedback will be archived and used for future updates to the SEBoK. If you provided a comment that is no longer listed, that comment has been adjudicated. You can view adjudication for comments submitted prior to SEBoK v. 1.0 at SEBoK Review and Adjudication. Later comments are addressed and changes are summarized in the Letter from the Editor and Acknowledgements and Release History.

If you would like to provide edits on this article, recommend new content, or make comments on the SEBoK as a whole, please see the SEBoK Sandbox.

blog comments powered by Disqus