Image via Wikipedia
This is from my handout for the Study Year in December.
Convergent and Divergent Systems
This is adapted from one of my blog posts.
It is important to understand the distinction between convergent and divergent systems. Convergent systems are often thought of as closed systems. They are in some way separated from the wider universe and so it is possible to control their performance. So, for example, it is possible to design an engine to specific tolerances because an engine is a system which can be isolated sufficiently to enable engineers to do the calculations and come up with a solution. A series of designs (over time or by different engineers) will converge upon certain types of engine. There may be more than one solution or there may be better designs yet to be discovered but in principle a single solution or set of solutions will emerge.
Divergent systems are different because they have multiple solutions. Instead of one or a few possible outcomes there are numerous possibilities and the more that is known about the system the more possible outcomes there are. In general human systems are like this, so are many natural systems.
It is easy in a business with a hierarchical management system to believe you are in effect working in a convergent system. But most human systems are not like this and any business with this type of structure today will, if it still survives, find this inflexible structure undermines its long term survival prospects. The problem is that many managers do not understand this and still have a Taylorist model in mind when they attempt to manage an organisation. Churches are not exempt from this.
Human systems are divergent. There is no single model for human systems. Sometimes these are called soft systems. It is possible to analyse and understand them but through a different approach to convergent systems.
Qualitative Analysis
Many people are familiar with quantitative analysis. Statistics is the usual method of analysing convergent systems (or systems believed to behave like convergent systems). However, most human systems are divergent and so quantitative approaches are not adequate.
Qualitative approaches are completely different from quantitative; the differences are not just methodological, the aims of these two approaches to analysis are quite distinct. Statistics aims to converge on a single answer or a small number of answers. Qualitative analysis has a greater subjective content and focuses upon making choices.
The aim is to generate a range of options, choose from them and then generate more options. This enables you to choose from a range of possibilities although there is always the possibility of identifying a better option at a later date. However, the power of this analysis is not only in identifying your own strategy but also in analysing the possibilities open to others. This enables you to understand what motivates others in the choices they make.
One methodology is ‘soft systems’ and I will introduce you to some aspects of this approach during this course. It is a six step approach and at each step it generates a range of new options.
The aim is to take a situation and draw a picture of it from your own perspective. The picture should feature you somewhere in it.
This enables you to engage not only your rational thinking side but also your unconscious perceptions. Some people find this easier to do than others but if you can do it, it is a powerful tool.
Tasks and Issues
The next step is to identify tasks and issues. Use the rich picture and make two lists, using everything you can see in the picture and anything else that comes to mind.
Tasks are actions you could take to change things in the picture. The tasks should take the form: ‘To ... ‘.
Issues are those things which tend to prevent tasks from being implemented. These sentences should begin with something like: ‘Disagreement between ...’ or ‘Conflict between ...’.
The next step will be to choose one item from one of the lists for further work. Whilst it may be tempting to go straight for a task, it might in fact be more important to address one of the issues first.
Recent Comments