FW: Challenges to systems thinking

["Mack, Wayne" <wayne.mack@pec.com>]

Let me provide some background on my previous comments.  

For several months, I have been trying to resolve the meaning of "A System
of Profound Knowledge" with the diagram "A Process Viewed As A System."  My
first step was to replace "Process" with "Profound Knowledge."  Then I hit
my first stumbling block.  How was I going to replace customers, suppliers,
etc?  I found that items like "Appreciation for a system" just did not fit.
This has led to my conclusion that the 4 components of Profound Knowledge,
important as they  are, are not the higher level components surrounding
Profound Knowledge in a system of Profound Knowledge.

My comment that "people were left out of Profound Knowledge" was referring
to identifiable, named groups of people to fill the roles of customers and
suppliers in "Profound Knowledge viewed as a system."  I am asking who is
applying profound knowledge and upon whom are they applying it?  This has
led me in the direction of trying to define a sample aim for a system of
Profound Knowledge.

If a system of Profound Knowledge is to provide a lens for transformation of
another system, then perhaps that other system becomes the "customer" in my
diagram.  Since a system cannot understand itself, then perhaps the
"supplier" is someone outside of the system of interest.  This has led to my
second stumbling block.  How does one system influence another?

"A system of Profound Knowledge" is not a synonym for "Profound Knowledge."
The system is a higher level concept containing Profound Knowledge as a
component, but also containing other human organizations also as components.
I am not sure where this is leading, but it has highlighted to me that I
still don't quite understand what a "system" of Profound Knowledge would be.