In addition to identifying the relevant stakeholders it is essential to understand which elements of the situation are relevant to which stakeholders. Often this is quite apparent and at times it's not so obvious. 

It is now appropriate to investigate the possible leverage points for the current situation in an attempt to understand the most appropriate components for the strategy.

There are four relevant boundaries associated with the Network Magic situation.

Video

SystemsWiki's Musings

Network Magic can be considered to have four primary stakeholders, the company, Support, Other Organizations, and Customers.

Video

SystemsWiki's Musings

Assumptions to this point need to be challenged to ensure we are on solid ground before moving forward.

Video

SystemsWiki's Musings

Identification of the leverage points within the Network Magic Structure is essential to developing a strategy.

Video

SystemsWiki's Musings

As the symptomatic solution is applied to the apparent problem it actually increases the legitimacy of the problem making the apparent problem even worse. This was adopted from the Waters Center for Systems Thinking Archetypes Course # 9: Repression and Revolution. See also Archetypes.

Aapted from The Dynamics of Identity Theft: A Comparison of Symptomatic and Systemic Solutions by Mary Lou G. Bourne and Michael L. Deaton

The limits to growth structure is based on the basic growth structure. And, as should be obvious, nothing grows forever as growth requires resources. Those required resources become a limits to growth.

A shifting the burden structure occurs when there are different ways to address a situation. With one approach being easier, faster, and requiring fewer resources, which do you think gets pursued? The problem is that taking the easier path ensures one will have to take the easier path repeatedly, and makes it harder to pursue the long-term better solution.

This is the demo project used for the 19.05.21 introduction to Insight Maker Simulation internet session.

The Accidental Adversaries structure represents a situation where two interacting entities which should produce growth unwittingly limit the growth of each other because of their actions to promote their own growth.

A Growth and Underinvestment structure is simply an elaborated Limits to Growth structure where the growth inhibitor is part of another Balancing Loop with an external standard and some delay. The real nasty thing about this structure is that the two Balancing Loops form a single Reinforcing Loop which inhibits growth.

Video * Context

LinkedIn, Twitter, YouTube

You may also request to join the SystemsWiki Slack group by sending an email to SystemsWiki@gmail.com.

A shifting the burden structure occurs when there are different ways to address a situation. With one approach being easier, faster, and requiring fewer resources, which do you think gets pursued? The problem is that taking the easier path ensures one will have to take the easier path repeatedly, and makes it harder to pursue the long-term better solution.

This is a reconstruction of the SIMM model presented in Chapter 2 of Feedback Economics (Contemporary Systems Thinking)

The Exponential Growth Archetype is a reinforcing structure which promotes exponential growth. This is one of the two foundation archetypes. The other being the goal seeking structure.

An escalation structure results from two or more competing entities with the competition taking them to somewhere none of them want to be.

Video * Context

LinkedIn, YouTube

This is a template which one might use as a basis for creating Insight Maker Relationship Models. Links have a default style of the blue ones in the diagram. The easiest way to get the red dashed links is to CTRL+d to duplicate them and then connect where appropriate.

There are about fifteen known archetypes with an interesting set of relationships among them.

LinkedIn, YouTube

.

Two goal seeking structures attempting to resolve and based on the delay one may tend to settle for less.