Systemic virtues as a foundation for a general theory of design elegance

Rousseau, David; Billingham, Julie; Calvo‐Amodio, Javier

doi:10.1002/sres.2627

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…SEs have developed or distilled general system definitions (Sillitto et al, 2018), general system concepts (Boehm & Kukreja, 2015), scientific general system principles (Schindel, 2018(Schindel, , 2019), a minimal system meta-model (Schindel, 2011), and general concepts and principles on system compositionality (Natarajan, Kumar, & Chaudhuri, 2019). This sits alongside advances by others on scientific general systems principles (Rousseau, 2018f), strategies towards discovering general systems laws (Rousseau, Billingham, & Calvo-Amodio, 2019), a general systems mapping relationship model (Rosen, 2005), and further noteworthy contributions as listed in my paper. In this work, we can see the emergence of a converging perspective on, and progress towards, GST* as a scientific framework comprising scientific but general definitions, concepts, principles, laws, models, and theories that can be operationalized in methods from which SE could benefit.…”

mentioning

confidence: 63%

The Theoretical Foundation(s) for Systems Engineering? Response to Yearworth

Rousseau

2020

Syst Res Behav Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 63%

The Theoretical Foundation(s) for Systems Engineering? Response to Yearworth

Rousseau

2020

Syst Res Behav Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…To assess that, we require not only a more comprehensive inventory of relevant knowledge assets but also an assessment of their quality and completeness relative to the specific goals each aspect of the theory must fulfil, such that when they are integrated they jointly carry the meaning and value expected of a fully fledged GST*. As mentioned earlier, the expectation is that a GST* would explain how and why systems arise, change, complexify, and evolve into new kinds, predict the unfolding of system lifecycles and the occurrence of unexpected or unobserved systemic Salado, 2017Salado, , 2019Salado, Iandoli, & Zollo, 2016) x x x x c. Introduction of the concept of systemic virtues and a strategy for developing a general theory of design elegance (Rousseau, Billingham, & Calvo-Amodio, 2019) x x x x F. Learning a.…”

Section: The Current Incompleteness and Future Utility Of A Gst *mentioning

confidence: 99%

A vision for advancing systems science as a foundation for the systems engineering and systems practice of the future

Rousseau

2019

Syst Res Behav Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I argue that the fragmented state and uneven maturity of current systems science will render it increasingly inadequate for meeting the future needs of the engineering and practice disciplines depending on it. I explain that it is not the case that System Science is a holistic discipline in contrast with the reductionism of classical science, but that Systems Science has both reductionistic and holistic dimensions, dealt with respectively by two “movements” within systems science, which I will designate as “Complexity Science” and “Systems Research”. I argue that in many situations the internal workings of a system can be satisfactorily addressed with the mainly reductionistic methods of Complexity Science, whereas when external factors play a significant role, the mainly holistic methods of Systems Research are brought to the fore. This suggest that Complexity Science and Systems Research are not really as disjunct as often portrayed, but represent special cases under a wider conception that would hold across a spectrum of ratios between ‘internal complexity’ and ‘external complexity’ of the system of interest, and that would entail a differential emphasis on reductionistic and holistic methods based on contextual factors. Such a wider conception could not only help to unify systems science, but would also support analysis and intervention in the ‘middle ground’ between these polar types. This is relevant for Systems Engineering and Practice because as the world's complexity grows engineers and practitioners will increasingly have to deal with situations that are complex both internally and externally. This suggests an increasingly urgent need for the development of the envisioned ‘wider conception’ of systems in which we can deal in an elegant and principled way with shifts in the balance between internal and external complexity. In this paper I propose that a scientific general theory of systems could provide such a wider conception, and that it could serve as a basis for the unification of systems science, provide support for the scientific maturation of the discipline, and extend the capability and utility of systems science in important ways. I present approaches and frameworks that would support the development of such a theory, present wide‐ranging evidence suggesting that we are in a favourable position for developing one, and indicate important areas to focus on in future research.

show abstract

“…Instances of what are now classifiable as systemic virtues have already been identified in the systems engineering community as the factors involved in rendering a design elegant (Griffin, ; Watson et al, ). This connection is used to lay the groundwork for a general theory of how elegance in systems might be obtained, both in specific designs and in the transition from one form to another (Rousseau, Billingham, & Calvo‐Amodio, ).…”

Section: Research Papersmentioning

confidence: 99%