Dear Peter,
Great post! I wish I could have described things so well. Thanks.
I agree on almost all. One thing. What you describe of 'wicked problems' is
a snapshot view, fixed in time - same as most others describe it.
Taking the long view, it's obvious that some things that were wicked
problems in the past are now routine to address. As humans we have got
better at addressing wicked problems and new methods have emerged. The
boundary of what is seen as wicked is continually moving.
That suggests 'wickedness' depends on our abilities. This aligns with the
rest of your post. It indicates there is nothing specifically intrinsic to
the attributes of a problem that makes it a wicked problem. It suggests
Rittel and Weber's attributes need a strong rider: that they apply subject
to the knowledge and skills of the time, place and people.
Second, I get a little concerned about the idea of uncritically using
variety enhancement as a means of addressing complex problem situations.
Increasing variety enhancement drives a system towards potential
Nyquist-like instability. An example being the variety enhancement effect of
the numbers of proposed responses to the Malaysian Airlines flight MH 370
incident that wasted energy and attention in many directions.
I look forward to reading the complete version on your blog.
Best wishes ,
Terry
---
Dr Terence Love
PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
Honorary Fellow
IEED, Management School
Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
ORCID 0000-0002-2436-7566
Director,
Love Services Pty Ltd
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks
Western Australia 6030
Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848
Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629
[log in to unmask]
--
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Jones | Redesign
Sent: Friday, 28 March 2014 8:24 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Wicked Problems
I see the discussion has returned to wicked problems again! One of my
favorite topics in teaching, if explored well, opens up all kinds of
possibilities for rethinking and reframing.
I just included a summary of wicked problems for an article recently
published in a Springer book on Social Systems and Design. It's an article
on the shared space between systems thinking and design thinking, the focus
area of our annual RSD symposium at AHO: http://systemic-design.net which
has a call for abstracts running out soon, for the October symposium:
http://systemic-design.net/rsd3-2014/call-for-abstracts/
Jones, P.H. (2014). Systemic design principles for complex social systems.
In G. Metcalf (ed.), Social Systems and Design, Volume 1 of the
Translational Systems Science Series, Springer Tokyo. Preprint:
https://www.academia.edu/5063638/Jones_P.H._Systemic_design_principles_for_c
omplex_social_systems
2. The Wickedness of Problem Systems
The concept of wicked problems (Rittel and Webber, 1973) is shared by
systems and design theory, as a complex situation that cannot be reduced and
analyzed with the techniques of classical problem solving and decision
making. Wicked problems include most persistent social and environmental
issues, such as the continuous global problems that have evolved over time.
"Problems," as we naively designate them, are essentially social agreements
to name a salient concern shared within a culture. The designation of
concern (Latour, 2008) reflects a thoughtful presentation of the social
value of the meaning ascribed to problems as experienced. Latour
distinguishes between matters of fact (problems as objectively determined)
versus matters of concern (about which we experience care, entanglement, and
share associated values with). Matters of concern are problems found
relevant to the motivation for design for social betterment. Design
theorists often prefer "fuzzy" or "ill-formed situation" as a rhetorical
means to distanciate the social concerns embedded in the situation that
could inhibit generative ideation or creative resolution. I will adhere to
the common meaning of problem as a perceived deficiency or negative value
state sufficiently significant to compel social agreement to repair or
restore.
Significant societal or global problems (such as global poverty, hunger,
sociopolitical violence, climate change) originally emerge from multiple
root causes and become interconnected over time. As with designed systems,
"problems" are situations that favor some constituents and cause unforeseen
consequences to others. Problems are maintained by social agreement and
tend to reinforce conditions over time, and they begin to resemble
autonomous, complex adaptive systems. These co-occurring problematic
manifestations can be termed problem systems. Problem systems demonstrate
the whole-part identity of a system of systems, the interdependency of
component systems, and the endurance of ultra-stable systems.
Problems Exist in Language
It is incorrect to speak of solving wicked problems, as there are no agreed
or effective evaluation measures that would justify the claim. The idea of
dissolving wicked problems by design thinking has a popular resonance, but
little empirical meaning. According to social systems theorists, the
so-called wicked problem does not exist in the world with definable
boundaries. Warfield (2001) asserted that all problems we define, as human
constructs, can be described as problem sets, with each distinct problem
merely a component of a set or problem system.
Warfield (2001) stated that all complexity exists in the minds of
perceivers, not in the system believed to be the subject of description. The
frustration that occurs when observers find themselves unable to define and
understand a situation leads to the explanation that the system is
inherently complex. Stakeholders are unable to recognize that their own
cognitive limitations explain the majority of the complexity. Also, most
socially complex problem constructions contain objectively complex
subsystems, multiple relationships and feedback interactions that require
analysis and domain expertise to unravel. Likewise, in any problem
definition stakeholders underconceptualize the factors and therefore the
field of designable options (or possibilities for innovation).
While this feature of complexity has been considered an argument for systems
thinking, the necessity for variety and multiple reasoning pathways
strengthens the argument for a strong design approach instead. Warfield's
axiom, taken seriously, reveals the flaws of a hard systems analysis for
optimization and problem definition. Design, or effective intervention, in
complex systems requires deliberate variety enhancement and refraining from
early closure. System designers identify and reconfigure boundaries as ways
of sensemaking with others, to evaluate design strategies, and to produce
descriptive scenarios.
(There's more ... I'll post this section on my blog at
http://designdialogues.com if anyone is interested.)
Yours, Peter Jones
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD
studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|