In today’s online Economist there is an article titled “Analysis Catalysis – Designers think that they can teach MBA’s and philanthropists a thing or two”.
While design or systems thinkers could try to teach MBA’s and philanthropists a thing or two it is unlikely that they will learn or act on it.
Well, why do we still have so many M&A’s when research shows that more than half of them destroy value? Could it be that the incentives for both CEO’s and Investment bankers reward this sort of short term activity irrespective of its long term efficacy?
We live in a world where the systems that we use to measure the performance of our economy and our institutions is short term focused and reductive. For example, GDP increases when we destroy value. We destroy between $1.5 and $5 Trillion of forestry ecosystem services every year – more than the banks lost in the GFC – but none of this is factored into the way that we measure success.
There is little to no recognition of the inverse relationship between efficiency and resilience. As a result we run down our resilience and destroy our future prospects for short term efficiency gains. And that is what people go to business school to learn how to do – how to extract short term gains out of the system given the prevailing rules. In addition an MBA provides a badge that proves that they are compliant “in-the-box” thinkers that know these rules that define the box.
Systems thinking only really works when we factor in the unmeasured relationships and linkages between things that reductive analysis can’t objectively measure or ignores because it isn’t part of the prevailing “rule system”.
Systems or design thinking is therefore not only a qualitatively more complex and integrative way of seeing the world that of the dominant reductive scientific paradigm – but it also has neural correlates – the brain is wired differently. The neurons have more connections with each other.
Using the Keirsey interpretation of Myers Briggs Type Indicators for example, Designers are “perceptive and Intuitive” types (ENTP or INTPs) who are comfortable with uncertainty and complexity . People who do MBA’s are more likely to be “judgement and intuitive (ENTJ or INTJ) or sensory types (ENSJ)“.
Systems thinkers are relative misfits in our modern world. Their world view is too complex and integrative to be valued by our dominant reductive measurement systems. While they might be able to come up with ways to save humanity from itself, these ideas will wither until society comes up with feedback systems that include the “hidden” linkages and support that the enlightenment world view is ignoring or destroying.
The Economist wrote a great piece titled “How to Change the System – in praise of Russ Ackoff” on the 3rd November 2009.
One of Russell’s key insights is that our schooling system – with its focus on avoiding mistakes – ensures that we minimise our chances of learning and being creative. After all we can’t learn from repeating what we already know. We learn from mistakes. A person or system that avoids making mistakes avoids learning.