Systems Thinking and Beyond

Dr Joseph Kasser

The AI team take a deep dive into successful innovative tools, practical and conceptual applications of systems thinking and beyond and systems engineering to various types of problems, summarizing the concepts behind the successes and usually drawing general conclusions for how the concepts may be used in other situations. The opinions expressed by the AI team in each deep dive are their own and have not been edited in any way. While systems thinking provides an understanding of the problematic situation, you need to go beyond systems thinking to create solutions, especially innovative solutions. Join my LinkedIn group (Tackling complex problems) and discuss the content of the podcasts (https://www.linkedin.com/groups/13991392/)

Episodes

  1. 12 JAN

    Extending the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) over the entire system lifecycle

    The AI team takes a deep dive into a technical paper which critiques the traditional Technology Readiness Level (TRL) metric for its inability to predict future progress or address the later stages of a system's life. By applying holistic thinking perspectives, the author argues for a shift from measuring static maturity to evaluating long-term technology availability. This approach introduces the dynamic TRL (dTRL), which utilizes historical data to forecast when a technology will actually be ready for integration. It is similar to the use of Earned Value Analysis which can be used to forecast project cost and schedule. Furthermore, the text proposes the Technology Availability Window of Opportunity (TAWOO) as a comprehensive framework that extends beyond development to include obsolescence and material shortages. Ultimately, the source demonstrates that holistic problem-solving broadens the project manager's scope, ensuring technology is supported from its initial conception through its eventual retirement. These conceptual tools aim to reduce programmatic risk by providing a more complete vision of the entire technology lifecycle. Further details may be found in the technical paper, Kasser, J.E., Applying Holistic Thinking to the Problem of Determining the Future Availability of Technology, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, Volume 46, Number 3, 2016.

    11 min
  2. 03/12/2025

    Whistleblowing in INCOSE

    The AI team takes a hilarious deep dive into the official correspondence and internal memoranda related to a grievance filed by Joe Kasser against several officers of INCOSE, the International Council on Systems Engineering. The initial letters from December 2014 inform Kasser that an informal committee decided to ban him from presenting at the next two symposia (IS 2015-2016) and reject his submitted papers due to past "non-conciliatory" behavior during panel discussions in 2012 and 2014. Kasser's extensive replies protest the ban, alleging that the process was handled by a "kangaroo court" in violation of INCOSE policies. Subsequent communications document the attempts to resolve the grievance, including the President-Elect's initial determination to cancel the sanction and subject Kasser's papers to peer review, which Kasser found unsatisfactory because the "guilty verdict" remained and the issue of policy violations was completely ignored. The final letter, dated December 2015, concludes the formal grievance review, ignored the root cause of the complaint, namely policy violations confirming Kasser's and the named officers' good standing, declining to issue reprimands, and stating that the matter is resolved because one of Kasser's papers was ultimately accepted and presented at IS 2015, a conclusion Kasser deemed unacceptable. If you are an INCOSE member, why not try to find out why the process focused on the actions of the kangaroo court and ignored the violations of the bylaws. Post the question in the official (members only) INCOSE LinkedIn group, or email it to info@incose.net. Please let me know if you get an answer and/or if your posted question is deleted or ignored.

    14 min
  3. 31/07/2025

    Systems Engineering: A Paradigm Shift Analysis

    The AI team takes a deep dive into research that began with the question, “Why do systems engineering textbooks cover such different material while claiming to represent the same discipline?”. The research investigates the evolution of systems engineering over seven decades, hypothesizing a paradigm shift rather than mere topical variation in literature. Utilizing AI-assisted analysis of textbooks from 1950 to 2023, the study identifies three evolutionary phases: an initial engineering science dominance, a subsequent transition period, and a current fragmentation characterized by the predominance of administrative approaches. The paper argues that this shift, from emphasizing analytical problem-solving to focusing on process coordination, has significant implications for education and practice, potentially explaining inconsistencies and challenges in the field. It also highlights how Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) and INCOSE certifications may reinforce the administrative paradigm, calling for further systematic validation of these preliminary findings. The preliminary analysis suggests a fundamental transformation in systems engineering. While the findings require validation through more rigorous research, they offer a framework for understanding disciplinary fragmentation. The paper advocates for "thoughtful integration that preserves the problem-solving capabilities necessary for breakthrough innovation as core professional competence, while maintaining the organizational coordination benefits of formal administrative process frameworks as supporting professional capabilities." This "systematic integration of both paradigms" is seen as the "greatest challenge and the greatest opportunity for the future of systems engineering education and practice."

    18 min

About

The AI team take a deep dive into successful innovative tools, practical and conceptual applications of systems thinking and beyond and systems engineering to various types of problems, summarizing the concepts behind the successes and usually drawing general conclusions for how the concepts may be used in other situations. The opinions expressed by the AI team in each deep dive are their own and have not been edited in any way. While systems thinking provides an understanding of the problematic situation, you need to go beyond systems thinking to create solutions, especially innovative solutions. Join my LinkedIn group (Tackling complex problems) and discuss the content of the podcasts (https://www.linkedin.com/groups/13991392/)