Systems Thinking - innate or learned? Recent study findings

Kordova, Sigal; Frank, Moti

doi:10.1109/ieem.2015.7385895

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results were first presented at IEEM 2015 [28] and are in line with previous studies such as [27,31,32,38].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

“…This means that people with an innate systems thinking approach will prefer a profession that is systems-oriented, such as industrial engineering and management, while those whose natural tendency is to see details will choose a profession that requires paying attention to the small details. Similar findings to these results were also presented is Kordova's previous study [28,36]. …”

supporting

confidence: 81%

“…Among these factors, there is also the notion of innate potential-which seems to be an inseparable part of those candidates who received a high CEST score, even though they had little work experience (in years) [28].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Formal education in systems thinking has become essential. Many efforts are being put into ways to "infiltrate" the traditional teaching of disciplines as isolated units and to apply the systems approach in schools, universities and informal teaching programs (e.g., [25][26][27][28][29][30]). These programs can contribute significantly to the efforts of the systems community in making systems thinking and systems education become integrated into society.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Systems Thinking Education—Seeing the Forest through the Trees

Kordova

Frank

Miller

2018

Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systems thinking is an indispensable tool in comprehending and analyzing real-world phenomena. Observed processes are naturally composed of many interconnected components which ought to be studied jointly rather than individually. Engineering systems thinking is a very valuable skill, which helps to successfully execute multi-disciplinary projects. In high-tech companies that deal with complex and dynamic systems projects, the need for engineers with high systems thinking skills is growing. Engineers with high systems thinking skills are able to understand the big picture and the project in its entirety, both functionally and conceptually, without necessarily knowing all of the small details. Systems thinking enables understanding the entire system beyond its components, and clarifies the importance of the isolated component as part of the system as a whole. Systems thinking helps understand how sub-systems connect to one whole system, and provides solutions for the client's specifications and requirements. In addition, systems thinking enables perceiving the inter-relationships and mutual influence among the system's components and other systems. The current study examined the development of systems thinking among engineers and engineering students. In addition, the personality traits of engineers with high systems thinking skills were examined by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality type test. This article also presents the initial results of the development of a new systems thinking study course, taught as a pilot course to industrial and management engineering students. It seems that engineers with certain personality traits can acquire or improve their systems thinking capabilities through a gradual, long-term learning process and by acquiring the necessary tools. Additionally, the study includes recommendations for the continuation of ongoing research on developing systems thinking.

show abstract

“…These results were first presented at IEEM 2015 [28] and are in line with previous studies such as [27,31,32,38].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

supporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systems Thinking Education—Seeing the Forest through the Trees

Kordova

Frank

Miller

2018

Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, consider and use of multiple perspectives means understanding the systems from diverse and several points of view. Kordova & Frank (2015) has propounded the systems thinking of engineering professionals with fourth layer approach right from thinking assessment to its decomposing to successful systems thinkers. The findings of the study has classified System Thinking into competencies, abilities, traits and dealing with multidisciplinary knowledge and experience.…”

Section: Systems Thinking Traits and Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling systems thinking in action among higher education leaders with fuzzy multi-criteria decision making

Shukla

2018

Management &Amp; Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The college and university systems are more complex and required persistent approach towards adoption and transformation. Highly vulnerable environment portrays the need to visualize the regular and strategic issues with the larger perspectives as a whole and develop a model which is more focused towards sustainability and reformation. The current study has attempted to conceptualize systems thinking in action model which consists of four stages of action cycle; diagnosis and analysis, modeling, intervention and review and lessons learned. This is attempting to evaluate the systems thinking among the educational leaders in higher education in Thailand through the fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method. The study has found that leaders are adopting systems thinking in the moderate level, however, the first three stages are found less in practice and more in perceived importance. The study found that there is higher need of calling for collaborative, cooperative and participation of stakeholders’ involvement. The study has further given managerial implications.

show abstract

Group conflict handling under moderate evaluative partial mediation using entropic decision framework

Anjaria

2022

Conflict Resolution Qtrly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present paper aims to present entropy and fuzzy degrees of the truth‐based framework to handle the group conflict under moderate evaluative, partial mediation. For group conflict handling, the present work considers Thomas and Kilmann's five conflict‐handling modes: competing, collaborating, avoiding, accommodating, and compromising. A methodology proposed in the current work systemically formalizes decision‐making on deploying a conflict‐handling method with mediators' opinions. The formalization of decision‐making elucidated in the present work involves measurements based on entropy and fuzzy degrees of truth. The current work applies the developed formal quantitative framework to a well‐known case of group conflict that involves conflict among a group of engineering students. The case supports the proposed formal framework. Behavioral, psychological, and cognitive facts about engineers come in handy for validation of the proposed framework. The case shows that the proposed approach can be highly generalized, interpretable, and replicable.

show abstract

Systems Thinking - innate or learned? Recent study findings

Cited by 9 publications

References 9 publications

Systems Thinking Education—Seeing the Forest through the Trees

Systems Thinking Education—Seeing the Forest through the Trees

Modeling systems thinking in action among higher education leaders with fuzzy multi-criteria decision making

Group conflict handling under moderate evaluative partial mediation using entropic decision framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About