To build on this discussion, what are some highlights in that book that you found useful?
I ask because I've read some systems thinking books (e.g. Systemantics) that were difficult to apply in real life. I come from the perspective of someone with a systems/theory builder personality. The only systems thinking book that I found remotely practical was The Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge.
The most useful piece of short writing on systems thinking that I've come across is "How Complex Systems Fail" [1, 2], which talks about designing systems for resiliency, and not for rigid notions of reliability.
I agree that both of them were not very rigorous, e.g. in terms of making predictions or presenting falsifiable claims. But I enjoyed parts of both.
From Thinking in Systems, I got 2 main things out of it:
- Many systems can be modelled in terms of resources and flows.
- If you want to affect a system, find the leverage points.
But both claims could have been justified more. It feels like the author states them as a given.
Specifically, she doesn't talk much about modelling error. OK, so I came up with a set of resources and flows to model a system. How do I know if it's good? Will it work in some cases and wildly mispredict in others?
I think they just did computer simulations? How did you check it against the real world? I think that was entirely missing from the book. I'd be happy for a correction.
Overall, the book felt like it was incomplete (which is not surprising, given the back story of its publication).
I think I read this book because Bill Gates recommended it. I can understand why he would have liked it. I'm not sure there is much that's actionable for a programmer or software designer, though.
I'd be interested in other takes on it too. Did I miss something? I also wonder why it's so highly thought of. I think it does have a unique point of view, and raises interesting questions, but it also made me wonder if that view is true! It's perhaps too vague to be true or false.
----
I enjoyed Systemantics, to a point. The negative view of systems tends to be the more accurate one in my experience ;-)
If you found Peter Senge's book practical you would probably like Thinking in Systems. It takes a few systems archetypes and explores them in reasonable detail and has charts of simulations. I browse through my copy every once in a while when thinking about a problem, and it often sheds some light on the problem.
Before reading this book, I did not think much about delays but now I try to identify them as soon as possible.
(On mobile) If I grabbed the right link that’s chapter 6 (maybe edited a bit?) of Thinking in Systems. If it interests you you’ll probably like the rest of the book.
I really enjoyed "Business Dynamics: Thinking and Modelling for a Complex World" by John Sterman. It's an older book, but it answers all of the questions that you ask. The book starts out by giving a high level overview of how systems modelling (and iteration on these models) occurs in practice, along with case studies and models that represent those case studies. The book talks about stocks and flows and real life examples on how stocks and flows work. While I wouldn't say this book is as rigorous as an engineering math text, it has a section on nonlinear dynamical systems and the math that these models represent in some sparse detail, so you can try to apply rigor to the models presented.
I know "me too" kind of comments are frowned upon in HN, but to anyone thinking "Should I read that book?" I want to add another "it's one of my favourite books", is a book I recommend to almost anyone.
It's actually _hard_ to explain why, I have tried several times (IRL) and it's really hard to get to the point. Funnily enough, soon after reading it I happened to be at an unconference where there was a Thinking in Systems session. And the speaker likewise tried his best to get us (I was in the audience, and tried to give a hand as well when I saw issues) to get the point, but didn't succeed either. I suspect I would need to read it 4 or 5 times before I can get to that point, but it's a book I'm actually looking forward to re-reading soon.
There's a way to the analysis of a system or a model that you can get on an intuitive level (or even, on a formal level, given where most of the HN readership works or has interests), but the exposition in TiS goes further, and tries to make you think not only on all the sources acting on a system, but how you could get to build or adapt a system for a specific objective.
See? What I wrote above makes just marginal sense. It's not a complicated book, it's an enjoyable read but the concepts inside go deeper than what I could get into something that makes much sense.
Cheers! I hope you didn't take my original comment as a criticism, which wasn't at all it's intent. I meant it as a prompt or prod, and at a general audience, rather than you specifically.
No, I didn't at all, it encouraged me to figure out something to prod people to read the book, which I was a tad too lazy in my previous comment :) Appreciated!
Could you describe what makes this book your favourite? I read it this year because it was recommended in another thread. I didn't find anything interesting in it but maybe I missed something obvious.
If you already have a decent foundation in systems dynamics and thinking, the most valuable part of the book is Chapter 6 (Leverage Points) which is about how to change systems (not control them, but actually drive changes to their structure).
The value of the book, beyond that, is that it's a good introduction to systems dynamics and thinking for people who aren't systems thinkers yet (or nascent systems thinkers who don't have the vocabulary yet). Trying to explain systems thinking to others is hard, surprisingly so. This book serves either as something to give them to read (for those who are motivated to better themselves, surprisingly few in my office) or provides a good set of examples when trying to discuss system dynamics and thinking with those who don't want to (either ever or yet) read something themselves.
The examples aren't esoteric or abstract, they're things that most people can relate to. Which is very helpful. A high level system dynamics book might try and talk too much about the math or structure but using labels like A and B, rather than Oil Reserve or Car Inventory. Leaving out the math (or enough of it) also makes this approachable even to the most math-phobic (and the equations behind the models are all available in an appendix so they're not missing, just shifted to let people focus on the structure and nature rather than formulas and numbers).
I added a comment below, but I find it very hard to describe. Some of the points in the book, and the way of analysing/deconstructing systems was different to how I approach problems (I'm a "trained mathematician"), and that was enough to make me see the world in a very slightly different shade. That's enough for me to make it a great book.
I ask because I've read some systems thinking books (e.g. Systemantics) that were difficult to apply in real life. I come from the perspective of someone with a systems/theory builder personality. The only systems thinking book that I found remotely practical was The Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge.
The most useful piece of short writing on systems thinking that I've come across is "How Complex Systems Fail" [1, 2], which talks about designing systems for resiliency, and not for rigid notions of reliability.
[1] "How Complex Systems Fail" https://web.mit.edu/2.75/resources/random/How%20Complex%20Sy...
[2] Its accompanying O'Reilly conference talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2S0k12uZR14