At one with systems

Abstract

A number of contributions in the Special Issue on a Civil Engineering Systems Body of Knowledge (‘Special Issue’ – Dias and Jowitt 2020), refer to education as it relates to systems, and systems thinking. For example, Masterton and Jeffrey (2020), Delatte (2020) and Jowitt (2020). Based on observations over many years, some personal views are expressed here on the topic. The observations have not been processed through the scientific method (Carmichael 2013), but they do have the support of much classroom testing and noting the behaviour of practising engineers. An observation (based on a finite sample) is put forward to generate thought and discussion within the systems community; not everyone may have observed the same or agree with it, while others may think it is self-obvious: Some people naturally think in terms of systems and some people do not naturally think in terms of systems. This has ramifications for systems education, any expectation of systems-type thinking from people, and the place of systems courses in a Civil Engineering programme. It appears that people are either configured or receptive to systems ideas, exampled by the Special Issue papers (even if the detail is not agreed with), or they are not. It also follows in a sort of corollary fashion that those who are not attuned to systems thinking will take issue with the above observation, or not appreciate that there is a difference between systems thinking and non-systems thinking. This is not a nature versus nurture argument. Some people may use the word ‘system’ (often where a more appropriate term should be used) and other system-discipline words, draw block diagrams with links, apply linear programming or some simulation package, etc and generally look and sound as though they are thinking systems, but underneath they are not thinking systems. Some publications may purport to be systems-based but they are not. There may also not be a realisation on the part of authors and reviewers that they are not truly systems people, though they may have a self-belief that they are. People who are not systems people seem not to be able to distinguish genuine systems thinking from non-genuine systems thinking, and people who do not naturally think in terms of systems cannot be successfully taught to be systems people. At best, they can be led in a direction. This viewpoint, of course, is difficult to prove because currently there is no accepted measure for systems thinking; this is expanded upon below. To illustrate, consider a parallel with ‘creativity’. People are either creative or not creative, even allowing for creativity manifesting itself in a variety of ways and pursuits. Oscar