A cloud masses, the sky darkens, leaves twist upward, and we know that it will rain. We also know that after the storm, the runoff will feed into groundwater miles away, and the sky will grow clear by tomorrow. All these events are distant in time and space, and yet they are all connected within the same pattern. Each has an influence on the rest, an influence that is usually hidden from view. You can only understand the system of a rainstorm by contemplating the whole, not any individual part of the pattern. (Senge, 1990 pp. 6-7)

While we intuitively know that rainstorms and other facets of our lives function as systems we generally do not view the world in this way. From an early age we are taught to break problems apart, to fragment the world. This apparently makes complex tasks and subjects more manageable, but we pay a hidden, enormous price. We can no longer see the consequences of our actions; we lose our intrinsic sense of connection to the larger whole. (Senge, 1990, p. 3)

Today we are ever more cognizant of the complexity and dynamism of the situations we face in communities and around the globe. We are becoming more conscious of the complex inter-connections of natural, biological and social systems. Examples of systems include biological organisms, the atmosphere, diseases, ecological niches, factories, chemical reactions, political entities, communities, industries, families, teams and organizations. The idea of a system is an organizing metaphor providing a way of organizing our thoughts about the world. Peter Senge defines a system as "a perceived whole whose elements hang together because they continually affect each other over time and operate toward a common purpose" (Senge, 1994, p. 90). Issues in communities are usually nested within many inter-connected systems. Bronfenbenner sees the development of individuals as embedded in ever larger systems beginning with family, peers and neighborhood and expanding out to include work, government, culture and environment. (Santrock, 1997, 46-48)

We are also coming to understand that systems follow a dynamic and creative process of growth and change. Drawing from studies of cellular life, animal evolution and evolution of ecological systems three distinct phases have been identified. They are needs-based bonding, commonality-based bonds, and potential-based bonds across differences, the latter being the mature phase of development. Transitions between phases are called break-points because processes leading to success in the past begin causing failure and require adoption of new processes. Breakpoint periods are turbulent times of struggle and crisis. Today, as we face crises in our localities whole systems thinking invites us to develop communities that draw on all the diverse potentials that exist in our environments thus moving to the mature phase of our community systems (Jarman & Land, 1995, pp. 24-28).

As we have paid more attention to the social dimensions of complex problems we have also begun to shift away from hard systems thinking that emphasizes rational selection of efficient means of achieving desired outcomes and where learning is not a concern. We are shifting toward soft systems thinking in order to address fuzzy, ill defined problems, where process is as important as product and where learning is emphasized (Walker, G. & Daniels, S., undated) The view of wholism goes yet further and views systems as organic living entities, where a wholeness and connectedness between all beings and things is perceived. (Gozdz, 1995, pp. 63-64)

Flood and Jackson (1991) elaborate on the implications of the soft system concept for intelligent communal action. According to a soft systems view problem situations arise when people have contrasting views on the same situation. To address soft systems the people involved in the system engage in a learning cycle where participants reflect on and dialogue about their perceptions of the real world, constructing and considering a variety of systemic models and selecting and acting on those that yield improvements in mutually desired outcomes. Inquiry and problem-solving are both logic and culture driven. With a plurality of viewpoints many legitimate problems and goals emerge for consideration.

Thus, along with recognizing the complexity and interdependence of systems we are seeing a need to adjust our learning, decision-making and action processes to better account for this complexity. Accordingly on the community level approaches that emphasize collaboration of various actors who have knowledge of different aspects of complex systems have become common and on the large organization level approaches under the title of learning organization are proliferating. These approaches promote a systemic and ongoing learning process in which a temporarily shared culture is created that allows understandings to be shared and mutually developed, conflicts resolved and actions taken. These processes can be called collaborative learning. Successful collaborative learning sustains quality discourse, including constructive discussion of ideas, and collaborative argument by following interaction guidelines that emphasize listening, questioning, clarification, feedback, modeling and collective meaning making through framing and reframing (Daniels, et. al., 1996).

As we come to see the incredibly complex interactions of any single system, let alone interacting systems we come to realize that any explanation will be inherently incomplete. You realize that any answer you have is at best an approximation - always subject to improvement, never final (Senge, 1990, p. 282)

Localization goes hand in hand with systems thinking. Local actors have more current information of events, trends and inter-connections in their situation than do distant actors. In addition when persons have responsibility for influencing the conditions that affect their lives they have more incentive to try out their own ideas and to learn from the consequences (Senge, 1990).

Systems thinking also calls for processes that are highly participatory. Such processes engage as a broad and complete a human representation of the facets of the system being addressed as possible. Each participant brings a piece of the Atruth@. Participants strive to understand and accept the legitimacy of each others point of view. They seek to develop innovative ideas that incorporate everyone=s point of view. And they develop a sense of shared responsibility for implementing proposals they endorse. (Kaner, 1996, p. 25)

A participatory learning group can nurture its capability to create experiences of interconnectedness through authentic communication, that paradoxically acknowledges differences. When participants face the reality of multiple viewpoints together they develop a sense of true connectedness. They then have the potential of translating that experience into collective intelligence through collective learning and action. (Gozdz, 1995, p. 60)

Sources:

Daniels, S,. Walker, G., Carroll, M., & Blatner, K. (1996) Using Collaborative Learning in Fire Recovery Planning. Journal of Forestry 94 (8) pp. 4-9.

Flood, R. & Jackson, M. (1991) Creative Problem-solving: Total Systems Intervention. New York: John Wiley

Gozdz, K. (1995) ACreating Learning Organizations Through Core Competence in Community Building@ in K. Gozdz (Ed.) Community Building. San Francisco, CA: Sterling and Stone.

Jarman, B. & Land, G. (1995) ABeyond Breakpoint: Possibilities for New Community.@ in K. Gozdz (Ed.) Community Building. San Francisco, CA: Sterling and Stone. pp. 21-33.

Kaner, S. et. al. (1996) Facilitator=s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday.

Senge, P. et. al. (1994) The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. New York: Doubleday.

Santrock, J. (1997) Life-Span Development. Chicago: Brown & Benchmark

Walker, G. & Daniels, S., (undated) Soft Systems Methodology: A Primer, Oregon State University.

Prepared by Boyd Rossing, Community Development Specialist, School of Human Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison October, 1998.