Jon,

This notion of Systems thinking has extended beyond the Cold War.  The US
military (mainly the Air Force) has been developing new doctrine with its
foundations in Systems Thinking known as Effects Based Operations
(EBO).  Historically the entire focus of air campaigns has been on picking
targets and bombing them to oblivion.  By using a systems approach that
links military action more tightly to the campaign objectives, the same
goals can be achieved without bombing things into oblivion.  One of the
ways this was used in Operation Allied Force in the Baltics was the use of
a precision guided chunk of concrete to knock down a Serbia broadcast tower
in Belgrade to impact communications.  If conventional means were used,
then the entire city block would have been destroyed with unknown civilian
casualties.  The idea behind EBO is to utilize Systems Thinking to improve
the efficiency and effectiveness of military campaigns with the overall
goal of reducing casualties, resources, and time to achieve the objectives.

Not all applications of systems thinking to government or military
applications result in death.  In fact, with rare exception, all the
military personnel I have interacted with over the years, ranging from the
lowest to the highest ranking, work very hard to avoid conflict and casualty.

Now, I should actually answer your question. [sorry about the delay]
Systems theory had significant roots in the development of defense systems
and has moved from engineering into public policy as well.  Early IEEE
journals on Cybernetics and Systems are a mix of academics, representatives
of government agencies, etc.  The complexity of systems being developed at
the time demand fresh approaches that were collected into the discipline of
Systems Engineering.  I believe all the US military academies offer some
form of undergraduate degree in Systems Engineering, with the Air Force
Academy being the most recent entrant into the domain.  The curriculum
looks an amazing amount like a design curriculum!  The programs are crafted
to product what IDEO's CEO Tim Brown calls T-type people, individuals with
a wide breadth of experience and awareness coupled with the ability to
execute deeply in one domain.

I just read Harold's response to you and he does a great job of exploring
the history of the systems approach.

For a great popular press account of the use of Systems Theory in the Cold
War, read "Blind Man's Bluff."  It is the story of the cat and mouse games
between the nuclear submarines during the Cold War.  One account in
particular is of the loss of a US sub.  Through the use of Systems Theory,
analysts were about to locate the sub in the vast Atlantic Ocean with
little data from the sub itself.

Back to my dissertation data....

John

At 09:27 AM 12/5/03 -0700, Jon Nelson wrote:
>I have heard it said (mostly anecdotally) that the systems approach generally
>and more specifically systems thinking, were to some degree and in some
>fashion, influenced by the political and philosophical climate of the Cold
>War.
>
>This has been characterized as a bad thing. I am trying to get an
>understanding of the line of reasoning for this position. I am also trying to
>understand the implications--the "So What?" factor: If it is a valid position
>what are/were the negative effects upon systems thinking?
>
>Specifically, I am looking for:
>
>1) References to writings that articulate this (or a similar) point of view
>2) Thoughts and comments about the Cold War roots to systems theory and
>systems thinking
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jon Nelson