GASTOS DERIVADOS DE LA EJECUCIÓN DEL URBANISMO IMPORTE

Balle‘s (1994) work, Managing with Systems Thinking, gives a general overview of the systems thinking process and the ways in which it can be applied in a real situation. He introduced three activities for systems thinking:

a. Focus on the relationships rather than parts, b. Detect patterns not just events,

c. The use of circular causality (archetypes)

6.3.1.1 Focus on the relationships rather than parts

Systems thinking seeks to answer the question of how structures influence behaviour, critically encouraging a consideration of interrelationships (Senge, 1990). In the regional development and innovation management fields, systems methods are evident in the Triple Helix system of innovation and the Porter‘s Diamond Model (1990). According to Porter (1990) if the constructs from the Diamond model are correctly applied in a specific country it can promote interrelationships between different elements in and around the environment.

106 Researchers on government policy for innovative cluster development recently have called for a new approach to policy making using systems thinking to be able to cope with ambiguity of this phenomenon (Mulgan, 2001). Systems which do not behave in linear way have limited predictability of the outcomes from policy intervention. Therefore, systematic understanding allows policy makers to better comprehend structural weaknesses and also provides opportunity for developing innovative networks and relationships, which is impossible to achieve when using the traditional model (Chapman, 2004).

Brown and Smith (2009) developed a basic framework using systems thinking to understand the dynamics within clusters: ―this basic model attempts to explain how a

successful cluster might develop and the changes in cluster behaviour and company interaction that might be seen at each stage‖ (Brown and Smith 2009, p3). Figure 6.2

depicts the main components of this model consisting of several loops, used to build different stages of the cluster‘s development and impact on the performance of both individual firms and all firms in the cluster. ―For the purposes of describing the model

the loops should be viewed as a sequential process from 1 to 5, though it is likely that, especially for the later stages (3, 4, and 5) they potentially develop in non-sequential ways‖ (Brown and Smith 2009, p3). Figure 6.2 also shows the inter-related nature of the

loops and illustrates that each part of the system is connected to other parts within the overall environment.

Application of systematic analysis and considering interrelationships is also crucial in terms of Triple Helix interactions. As noted by Hakansson and Snehota (1995) (see Section 3.3.2) one of the important subjects in guaranteeing the success of the triple helix system of innovation is the task of developing mechanisms to coordinate the complex interactions among university, industry, and government.

107 Figure 6.2: The Cluster Dynamic Model: Adapted from Brown and Smith, 2009.

6.3.1.2 Detect patterns not just events

―Structures of which we are unaware hold us prisoner. Conversely, learning to see the

structures within which we operate begins a process of freeing ourselves from previously unseen forces and ultimately mastering the ability to work with them and change them‖ (Senge, 1990, p90). In the macroeconomic environment, systems

thinking can help stakeholders and policy makers to observe underlying trends and patterns in order to understand the forces underlying these events. Both the pattern and the event should be seen by systems thinkers, as he puts it, the generic and the specific – keeping one eye on the woods and one eye on the trees (Richmond, 1994).

6.3.1.3 System archetypes

An important aspect of systems thinking is that certain patterns of structure are repeated. These ―system archetypes‖ are very important in prompting us to learn to see

The Principal Dynamic Loops

COLLABORATIVE ADVANTAGE LOOP

(L3) Competitive level of platform for innovation

DISTINCTIVENESS GENERATION LOOP (L5) Stimulation of relevant research and development Sharing of critical sectoral knowledge Extent of collaborative initiatives Type of cultural context = very strong

INTER-FIRM CO-OPERATION LOOP (L2) Intensity of differentiated competitive threat Overall performance

of all firms in the zone Performance of individual firms VENTURE ATTRACTIVENESS LOOP (L4) Degree of enhancement of competitive innovation Motivation for competitive innovation

Global competition and external market pressure

Competitive power of cluster INTER-FIRM RIVALRY LOOP (L1) Extent of shared response to common challenges

108 structures in our lives. ―The systems archetypes suggest that not all management

problems are unique, something that experienced managers know intuitively‖ (Senge,

1990, p90). When the archetypes arise in one specific subject you can feel them rather than see them, due to their subtlety. Although experienced managers know many of these plot lines intuitively, it is very difficult to explain them. Therefore, the systems archetype can provide that language and make it explicit. Understanding systems archetypes gives an opportunity to the organization putting systems perspective into practice (Senge, 1990).

Senge‘s archetypes are illustrated by causal loop diagrams depicting types of behaviour and their related components. He defines two different loops, which combine to produce a complete archetype. The first of these is a reinforcing loop which is depicted by a snowball going down a hill, and the other is a balancing loop depicted by a balance beam (Senge et al., 1997). Several archetype have been identified, including, but are not limited to; Limits to Growth; Shifting the Burden; Eroding Goals; Escalation; Success to the Successful; Tragedy of the Commons; Fixes that Fail; and Growth and Underinvestment (Senge, 1990). Two of Senge‘s archetypes (1990), ‗limits to growth‘ and ‗shifting the burden are illustrated in Figures 6.3 and 6.4. These two occur more frequently, and are also the preliminary stages in the progression of understanding other archetypes and more complex situations. All of the archetypes have common features in their structure. All of them are made up of systems building blocks, reinforcing loops, balancing loops and delays.

109

Figure 6.3: Limits to Growth Figure 6.4: Shifting the Burden Source: Senge, 1990

Table 6.1 and Table 6.2 summarize Senge‘s Archetype characteristics.

Type of Archetype

Definition Management Principle

Limits to Growth

―A reinforcing (amplifying) process is set in motion to produce a desired result. It creates a spiral of success but also creates inadvertent secondary effects (manifested in a balancing process) which eventually slow down the success.‖ (Senge, 1990, p95).

―Don‟t push growth; remove the factors limiting growth‖ (Senge, 1990, p 95)

Shifting the Burden

The underlying problem occurs and generates symptoms that need attention. But people are searching for other solutions to the problem rather than focusing on fundamental one. This seems efficient temporarily, but leads to fundamental problem being left unaltered and then leads to worsening of the underlying problem, because the symptoms have apparently been removed, and the system have no abilities to solve the underlying problem.

People should be aware of the symptomatic

solution. Solutions which focus on

symptoms of a problem and do not consider fundamental causes have a short term benefit, as sometimes the main problem may occur again and there will be a greater tendency for a symptomatic response. This situation leads to a decreasing the capability for fundamental solution.

Table 6.1: Definition and management principle related to Limits to Growth and Shifting the Burden Archetypes

Type of Archetype

Pattern of Behaviour How to Achieve

Leverage

Limits to Growth

In this structure, there is a limit which gradually increases and leads to slowing down the growth rate after its boom. After sometimes the growth may slow so much that the reinforcing loop may turn around and activated in reverse (Senge, 1990).

The limiting factors should be identified and changed as soon as possible.

Shifting the Burden

―Shifting the burden structures tend to produce periodic crises, when the problem symptoms surface. The crises are usually resolved with more of the symptomatic solution, causing the symptoms to temporarily improve. What is less evident is a slow, long- term drift to produce a side effect,...The problem symptom grows worse and worse…..The longer the deterioration goes unnoticed,…the more difficult it can be reverse the situation. While the fundamental response lose power, the symptomatic response grows stronger and stronger‖ (Senge, 1990, p110).

The fundamental response should be strengthened and the symptomatic response should be weakened at the same time

Table 6.2: Pattern of behaviour and ways of achieving leverage related to Limits to Growth and Shifting the Burden Archetypes

110 The list of archetypes are ―tools for inquiry not advocacy” (Senge et al., 1997, p139) which means that we should not consider the archetypes as a solution but they should help in discerning our way to find a solution (Senge et al, 1997). Archetypes may also interact with each other to construct other archetypes (Goodman and Kliener, 1994).