4 minutes
Definitions of system related concepts
The different definitions of a system are:
“A system, in general, is any part of the universe which may be defined by a boundary which distinguishes it from the rest of the universe.” (https://nptel.ac.in/courses/103101004/2, 2018)
“system (NOUN)
1. set of things working together as parts of a mechanism or an interconnecting network; a complex whole.
2. set of principles or procedures according to which something is done; an organized scheme or method.” (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/system, 2018)
We can observe that the first definition, from the field of physics, is too generic, and it englobes from a nuclear reactor enclosed in a dome to a peanut enclosed in a jar. The second definition is more suitable according to the module material; there, a system is defined not only as the elements that form it, but also the connections between the constituent parts. Last, it introduces a definition that can be applied to not material objects, as it defines a system as a list of procedures, for example, the system to elaborate this assignment could be defined as a succession of steps such as reading the material, draft the main ideas that answer the formulated questions, write organized paragraphs and last review the whole document.
A search of the concept of reflexivity returns:
“the fact of someone being able to examine his or her own feelings, reactions, and motives (= reasons for acting) and how these influence what he or she does or thinks in a situation.” (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/reflexivity, 2018)
“Reflexivity is the theory that a two-way feedback loop exists in which investors’ perceptions affect that environment, which in turn changes investor perceptions. The theory of reflexivity has its roots in social science, but in the world of economics and finance, its primary proponent is George Soros.” (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reflexivity.asp, 2018)
We can observe that the Cambridge definition is limited to a single person, while the second definition, in the context of economics, introduces into the definition several people (the investors). Also, it introduces the concept of the two-way feedback loop, which comes from a concept of control theory. In short, we could say that the first definition is limited to the “act” of reflexivity, while in the second definition it is defined as an “attribute” of a system (or part of a system)
The course materials (Ison and Blackmore, 2010) in Box 1.6 states that while reflection is pausing to consider what is being done, reflexion is a higher order, that concerns about the “what” and the “why” of an action. In this context, we find the definition of Cambridge more in-line with the course materials, as it introduces the “reasons for acting” as part of the concept, which have parallelism with the “why” component explained in the material.
Last, we can find the following definitions of systemic change online:
“systemic change occurs when change reaches all or most parts of a system, thus affecting the general behaviour of the entire system.” (Connolly, 2017)
“…an intentional process designed to alter the status quo by shifting the function or structure of an identified system with purposeful interventions…Systems change aims to bring about lasting change by altering underlying structures and supporting mechanisms which make the system operate in a particular way. These can include policies, routines, relationships, resources, power structures and values.” (Taylor, 2016)
From both definitions we can infer that systemic change occurs once the complete system is modified, not only an element but several elements and the relationships between those elements, resulting in a new whole system. This concept is more specific that innovation, that englobes any new ideas of products, systems or processed, but more alike disruptive innovation, which is often accompanied by new elements and relationships. For example, the introduction of first minicomputers is a clear example of disruptive innovation (Donohue, 2005), that change profoundly systems in all companies and how their existing systems communicate which each other, offering an example of systemic change.