The loop
Recall that many systems are structured with several levels (known as hierarchy). This implies that our thinking and models will improve if they are extended both inwards and outwards from the level they are at. There are many ways to do this. One direction is towards more structure, the other is towards less. Let us illustrate this with an example.
Imagine that you are thinking about your kitchen. You have an unsettled feeling when you think about it. Something is concerning you. What is it? This unsettled or frustrated feeling may return several times before you can sense what is underlying the feeling. The space is too small. It is hard to work there, and the utensils and tools are not laid out in an efficient manner. When this first becomes clear it just seems that you are mad about cooking there and want to feel better about it. As time goes on you may have a vision of a new kitchen (less structure), draw a diagram of your current kitchen (a form or representation, has more structure), or start re-arranging your kitchen (direct experience of the world). You will probably start with one approach and move to the next.
As you move between the vision, representation, and real world you are describing a loop. The loop is a fundamental systems process, and several loops of thought and action have been described. Some steps in a loop are decision processes. Other steps represent input (perceive the world) or output (take action or change the world). One common loop is the Shewhart Cycle (Plan-Do-Study-Act) promoted by Edward Deming.
Another example of a loop is from Senge and is called the learning cycle (Doing-Reflecting-Connecting-Deciding). The loop is a system with inputs (perceptions of the world), outputs (actions that you make), feedback (how each step relates to each other, how the process works for you), and inter-relations (the parts relate to each other, the structure relates to the user, the inputs and outputs relate to the real world that you and the loop are embedded in). As an example, at the Plan/Decide stage of a loop you are deciding, dependent on goals or visions and the representation you have made, guided by the output of the Act/Doing stage.
Each time we make a change in the world we are engaged in a systemic process. We may bring our actions into congruence with natural loops (sustainable farming), or take actions that are rejected by systems we are embedded in (unsuccessfully propose a project). The more aware we are of the process, and the oftener we repeat (or iterate it) the better we become. Compare the kitchen designers view of the kitchen. She has seen many more kitchens and representations of kitchens and has a larger space of possible arrangements or solutions. However, all of us can gain from viewing our actions as a looping process. Our representations become particularly clear (or difficult) when the decision process is shared with another (for example the partner that shares that kitchen!). In this case more concrete representations of your vision will help communications. Unfortunately it seems to be a corollary that the more concrete your representation, the more work you have put into it and the more "attached" you will be to it (which can interfere with your willingness to make changes to it).
In this example we see that from the level of representation (diagram) we can move up (vision) or down (moving things around in the actual kitchen). It can also be quite useful to look one level slower and faster in time when you use a tool. For example, one level slower in time reveals that the kitchen was designed before multiple counter-top appliances were common, and that in the future your use of the kitchen will change. One level faster in time may be the level of perception (as opposed to action in the kitchen). So changes to our perceptual models or needs (what do I really use this appliance for; what if I prepared food in this way) could effect your solution. This technique acknowledges the system that your tool (or form or representation) is embedded in, and enables you to see what effects the use of it will have.
We can extend this approach to the other systems fundamentals. For example, using duality will prompt us to look at the boundary between the system under examination and the rest of the world (for another view of this see the idea of via negativa in Moore). This is looking at boundary one level up. Looking one level down will show internal boundaries and distinctions.
If we map the Senge loop to our tetrahedral system, we get a picture like the following.
We now have two representations of the wheel, one two-dimensional and the other three-dimensional. The 3-D tetrahedral representation shows us that each element connects to each other element, and that there is flow (of energy or ideas) between each element. It also shows us that the direction implicit in the two-dimensional representation is only one of many that are possible. Fuller called this tetrahedral model 4-D, with each vertex or side representing an axis of the system. Also note that while I have shown arrows indicating the circuit illustrated by the 2-D model, this is only one of the possible circuits.
You can easily make a 3-D tetrahedral model using straws. Masking tape can be used for the connections at the vertexes, or string can be threaded through the straws. Highlight the vertexes with circles of colored paper labeled with an element of the system. If one vertex seems to have many possibilities, link it to another tetrahedron where it is the theme. Use this technique to model hierarchies. If complexity is high enough, use polyhedra with more links at each vertex (like the octahedron).
Go Back < TFTCAP.HTM >
Forward < TFTTOOL.HTM >