IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v36y2019i5p621-634.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A vision for advancing systems science as a foundation for the systems engineering and systems practice of the future

Author

Listed:
  • David Rousseau

Abstract

In this paper, I argue that the fragmented state and uneven maturity of current systems science will render it increasingly inadequate for meeting the future needs of the engineering and practice disciplines depending on it. I explain that it is not the case that System Science is a holistic discipline in contrast with the reductionism of classical science, but that Systems Science has both reductionistic and holistic dimensions, dealt with respectively by two “movements” within systems science, which I will designate as “Complexity Science” and “Systems Research”. I argue that in many situations the internal workings of a system can be satisfactorily addressed with the mainly reductionistic methods of Complexity Science, whereas when external factors play a significant role, the mainly holistic methods of Systems Research are brought to the fore. This suggest that Complexity Science and Systems Research are not really as disjunct as often portrayed, but represent special cases under a wider conception that would hold across a spectrum of ratios between ‘internal complexity’ and ‘external complexity’ of the system of interest, and that would entail a differential emphasis on reductionistic and holistic methods based on contextual factors. Such a wider conception could not only help to unify systems science, but would also support analysis and intervention in the ‘middle ground’ between these polar types. This is relevant for Systems Engineering and Practice because as the world's complexity grows engineers and practitioners will increasingly have to deal with situations that are complex both internally and externally. This suggests an increasingly urgent need for the development of the envisioned ‘wider conception’ of systems in which we can deal in an elegant and principled way with shifts in the balance between internal and external complexity. In this paper I propose that a scientific general theory of systems could provide such a wider conception, and that it could serve as a basis for the unification of systems science, provide support for the scientific maturation of the discipline, and extend the capability and utility of systems science in important ways. I present approaches and frameworks that would support the development of such a theory, present wide‐ranging evidence suggesting that we are in a favourable position for developing one, and indicate important areas to focus on in future research.

Suggested Citation

  • David Rousseau, 2019. "A vision for advancing systems science as a foundation for the systems engineering and systems practice of the future," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 621-634, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:36:y:2019:i:5:p:621-634
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.2629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2629
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.2629?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Rousseau, 2020. "The Theoretical Foundation(s) for Systems Engineering? Response to Yearworth," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 188-191, January.
    2. Mike Yearworth, 2020. "The theoretical foundation(s) for Systems Engineering?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 184-187, January.
    3. Alejandro Salado, 2021. "A systems‐theoretic articulation of stakeholder needs and system requirements," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 83-99, March.
    4. Miguel A. Rodenas & Michael C. Jackson, 2021. "Lessons for systems engineering from the Segura River reclamation project: A critical systems thinking analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 368-376, May.
    5. Christian Hoyer & Indra Gunawan & Carmen Haule Reaiche, 2020. "The Implementation of Industry 4.0 – A Systematic Literature Review of the Key Factors," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 557-578, July.
    6. Kelley E. Dugan & Erika A. Mosyjowski & Shanna R. Daly & Lisa R. Lattuca, 2022. "Systems thinking assessments in engineering: A systematic literature review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 840-866, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:36:y:2019:i:5:p:621-634. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.