In 10 slides I will explain above concept map which enables an integrated conceptualization of the logical relationships of the core characteristics of wicked problems with the basic requirements and workings of the systems approach. This will provide the necessary scaffolding for a meaningful understanding of the design principles underlying a 10-step version of the systems approach in ‘Wicked Solutions’, as will be discussed later (follow my blog CSL4D). Sjon van ’t Hof, August 2016

1. In 10 slides I will explain above concept map which enables an integrated
conceptualization of the logical relationships of the core characteristics of
wicked problems with the basic requirements and workings of the systems approach.
This will provide the necessary scaffolding for a meaningful understanding of the
design principles underlying a 10-step version of the systems approach in ‘
Wicked Solutions’, as will be discussed later (follow my blog CSL4D). Sjon van
’t Hof, August 2016

2. The term wicked problem emerged in a context of social planning in the 1960s (Rittel,
Churchman). In contrast with simple or complicated problems, wicked problems are
characterized by complexity, which is due to wicked problems being composed of
systems intertwined with systems. These ‘problematic situations’ are also known as
“messes” (Ackoff, Horn). Most now agree that wicked problems do not only abound in
administration, but also in business, communication, development, and education.

3. As a result of their complexity, wicked problems (or rather ‘problematic situations’)
defy problem definition. This means that, typically, there is disagreement among
stakeholders on what ‘the problem’ is or whether there is a problem or not. Without
such agreement, the search for solutions remains open ended. There will never be a
solution that is right, true and final. So, the first step is to stop looking for a solution
(in sensu stricto), but instead to start thinking in terms of intervention design.

4. Wicked problems typically involve different stakeholder groups with contrasting or
opposing perspectives with different takes on the nature of the problem and how it
should be addressed. This implies that perspectives, problem definition and
intervention design must be considered simultaneously. A good design will also reflect
common ideals. For these principles to be respected it is necessary to adopt a special
approach for systemic intervention design and inquiry.

5. Disparate perspectives may relate to vested or future interests, value conflicts,
various constraints (resources, culture, politics), and ideals. A strong divergence of
perspective does not just complicate matters, but is also bound to give a better
understanding of the problem leading to a better design. Churchman, the Berkeley
management scientist who developed the systems approach, emphasizes that, by first
principle, “the systems approach begins when first you see the world through the
eyes of another.”

6. As you may have guessed, the special approach for systemic intervention design and
inquiry is commonly known as the systems approach (the plural ‘systems’ is an
American habit). The systems approach attempts to consider the ‘system as a whole’,
which in turn may be composed of (sub-)systems intertwined with other systems. The
‘whole system’ produces effects (results and consequences, positive or negative),
which change stakeholder perspectives and ultimately may require design changes,
bold or mild.

7. Planners do not just carry out planning in one way or another. They are also
stakeholders and as such subject to inquiry. They must realize that they are unable to
disentangle the diverse range of perspectives (e.g. of their own roles). This implies
that they must ensure that all perspectives are engaged in the best possible way.
Moreover, planners are liabe for any negative or suboptimal effects, consequences or
results of ‘the system as a whole’. Clearly, the need for adopting an appropriate
systems approach imposes itself.

8. A systems approach must be able to accommodate the main characteristics of wicked
problems in its fundamental planning methodology, including the fact that wicked
problems have multiple intervention points (which is one of the reasons why
problems are wicked) as well as multiple leverage levels, e.g. as relating to efficacy,
efficiency or effectiveness (see also “rules of thumb and leverage points”). Wicked
Solutions is a recent version of the systems approach that adopts a practical, step-
wise approach.

9. A key problem of wicked problems is that they are all unique, and evolving in their
own unique way. This follows from their complexity. This uniqueness or individuality
requires innovation to deal with it properly. A good thing about wicked problems is
that the possible range of problem definitions and intervention designs cannot be
enumerated. This provides the opportunity for endless creativity. Harnessing
divergent perspectives using the systems approach stimulates such creativity.

10. One of the most difficult aspects of systemic intervention design and inquiry is the
absence of a stopping rule: a planner’s job is never done; there are always other
perspectives to consider; one can always sweep more aspects into one’s ‘system as a
whole’, thus effectively expanding it; or one can always continue debating the
boundaries of a ‘system as a whole’ to make it more ‘manageable’. Is the systems
approach any good? Well, the proof of the pudding … is in the detail (of which there is
no lack). Try it, once. SH