Improving the Systems Thinking Skills of the Systems Architect via Aesthetic Interpretation of Art

McDermott, Tom; Salado, Alejandro

doi:10.1002/j.2334-5837.2017.00432.x

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But poor communications ability is not considered an essential failure in these competencies. In a previous paper we asked, “If architectures are so useful, why are they so seldom used?” (McDermott & Salado, ). We contend that this is a failure of the systems architecture process to produce artefacts that effectively communicate the design to the observer and the disciplines' continued acceptance of that failure.…”

Section: Similarities In Artistic Creations and Systems Engineering Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A perspective on systems thinking, architecting, and art

McDermott

Salado

2019

Syst Res Behav Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systems architecture has been considered as both an art and a science. The systems architect uses heuristics, stories, and models to communicate complex architectural concepts to stakeholders. Since the earliest times, master building architects have developed their skills broadly across the technical, business, and fine art domains. Why should engineering be different? Principles and practices of systems architecture are exhibited in the creation of film scores, fine arts, and building architecture. Why not teach art as a core skill of the systems architect? In this work, we explore a formal competency model linking art, systems thinking, and systems architecture. We associate competencies across these domains with the concept of elegant design. We explore formal education in the arts as a way to bridge the communication problems that technical architects have with their stakeholders. The goal is to improve the competencies of systems architects and systems thinkers by bringing the methods of the art studio class to systems education.

show abstract

Section: Similarities In Artistic Creations and Systems Engineering Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A knowledge framework for a well‐rounded systems architect (McDermott & Salado, ) [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A perspective on systems thinking, architecting, and art

McDermott

Salado

2019

Syst Res Behav Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…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

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

“…We did make some progress, but more needs to be done to refine existing terms and define adequate virtues under categories not yet well developed in the engineering literature, as shown under the “gracefulness” category in Figure . Recent work by Tom McDermott and Alejandro Salado is relevant to this concern (McDermott & Salado, , ). Also, we found that some terms could not be uniquely classified, and some dependencies created links across the hierarchy.…”

Section: In Search Of Principles and Laws For Design Elegancementioning

confidence: 99%

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

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent discussion and research in systems engineering have highlighted the need for a principled approach to attaining elegance in engineered systems, in order to enhance product value and reduce life cycle risks. In this paper, we analyse the “elegance factors” pertaining to designed systems from the perspective of the philosophy of value (axiology) and characterize the elegance factors as “systemic virtues,” analogous to philosophical models of the factors pertaining to the “goodness” of persons and scientific theories. We defend the possibility of the existence and discovery of general systems laws that could ground a general theory of design elegance, and report on our strategy and progress in developing methods for discovering such laws and for developing such a theory.

show abstract

Improving the Systems Thinking Skills of the Systems Architect via Aesthetic Interpretation of Art

Cited by 18 publications

References 12 publications

A perspective on systems thinking, architecting, and art

A perspective on systems thinking, architecting, and art

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

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About