Synthesis maps: Systemic design pedagogy, …openresearch.ocadu.ca/id/eprint/1932/1/RSD5...

Post on 16-Jun-2018

220 views 0 download

transcript

OCAD University Open Research RepositoryFaculty of Design

2016

Synthesis maps: Systemic design pedagogy,

narrative, and interventionBowes, Jeremy and Jones, Peter

Suggested citation:

Bowes, Jeremy and Jones, Peter (2016) Synthesis maps: Systemic design pedagogy, narrative, and

intervention. In: Relating Systems Thinking and Design Symposium (RSD), 13-15 Oct 2016,

Toronto, Canada. Available at http://openresearch.ocadu.ca/id/eprint/1932/

Open Research is a publicly accessible, curated repository for the preservation and dissemination of

scholarly and creative output of the OCAD University community. Material in Open Research is open

access and made available via the consent of the author and/or rights holder on a non-exclusive basis.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Sy thesis Maps: Syste i  Desig  Pedagogy, Na ati e, a d I te e tio   Peter Jo es a d Jere y Bo es, OCAD U i ersity, Toro to, Ca ada A st a t   Thispaperpresentsaframeworkandprocessforavisuallanguagethatisdevelopingasasystemicvisualmethod,andtointegrateandoutlineaspectsofthissyntheticmapformulationasthesynthesismap bothwithreferencetocontributingauthors,butalsoasacomparisontodesignprinciplesandthemethodofvisualdesignlanguage.)nthiswaythetechnique’spurposeasanemergentandcreativetool‐methodcanbeillustrated,incontrasttotheapproachesofinfographics,andothervisualmapmakingassociatedwithdesignideation,anddesignschemarepresentation.Synthesismapsintegrateevidenceandexpertiseinavisualnarrativeforknowledgetranslationandcommunication.Key o ds  G)GAmap,Synthesismap,Socialsystems,Systemsthinking,Systemicdesign,VisualizationI t odu tio   Designresearchandeducationhavesearchedformoreeffectivemeansofenablingmultidisciplinarystudyanddesignteamstoscanandframe,communicateproposals,anddevelopresponsestothemorecomplexchallengesthatdesigndisciplinesarecalledupontoaddress Norman&Stappers,.Normanmakestheobservationthatdesignersmustlearnandcollaboratewitharangeofdiversedisciplinesnownecessarytoformulateanddeveloptheproducts,servicesandsystemsinacomplex,increasinglyinstrumentedsociety.Today’shighlyintegratedplatformsanddata‐drivensystemsdemandawiderrangeofdesign,research,facilitationandcraftskillsandknowledge.Systemicdesign,asmostdesigndisciplines,requiresarangeofdesignrolesandtypicallymultipleareasofexpertisetoeffectivelyinformcomplexsystemsprojectsinserviceplatforms,healthcare,large)Tsystemsinsociotechnicalsystems,architecture,andurbandesign.Whilemanydesignprogramshaveadvancedtheirskilldevelopmentingraduateandemergingdesigndisciplines,toolsandmethodsforeffectivedesignandcommunicationofsystemsandsocialpolicyarrangementshavenotkeptpace.Fromadesignresearchperspective,disciplinesadvancinginthecorporatemarketplace,suchasservicedesign,havenurturedthedevelopmentofinstrumentsfordesignandcommunicationofcomplexartefacts.Systemsdesign,policyinnovation,integrateddesignandtransitiondesignhavedevelopedtheircontributionstotheory,stakeholderengagement,anddesignframeworkssignificantly.Therearefewergenerallyacceptedmethodstoolkits–similarinapplicationtotheserviceblueprintorjourneymap–generallyacceptedinsystemsandsystemicdesign.TheG)GAmap Sevaldson, andsynthesismaparethetwotypesofsystemmapsbeingdevelopedinthecontextofcomplexproblempracticeresearch.Theyhavedifferentprocessesandevenintendeduseswhicharehelpfultoarticulate.Thegeneral systemsmap mightbeconsideredabaselineartefactforarticulatingsystem‐leveldesignconceptsandframes.(owever,vastdifferencesofform,meaning,articulationandusagedefinethegapbetweensystemstheory‐basedmapsandthevisualmodelsofsystemicdesign.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

ThispaperpresentsaninitialframeworkandprocessesadoptedbytheToronto‐basedStrategicForesightand)nnovationprogramforteachingandpracticingsystemdesignmappingforcomplexsocialsystems.DevelopedfromthebasisofSevaldson’s G)GAmaps,theOCADUniversitymethoddiffersinitsalignmenttosystemicdesigntheory Jones, anditssuitabilityforintegratingevidenceandmultipleontologies.Desig  Ratio ale (istoricallyinthedisciplinesofdesign,architecture,andurbanplanning,visualcompositionsofasystemicnature,andvisuallanguagehasdevelopedtoillustrateandsolvecomplexproblemsofasystemicnature.Mappingdesignmethodshavebeendevelopedfromamyriadofvisualdesigntoolsandrepresentationframeworksforcomplexproblemunderstanding,visualanalysis,andsolutionfinding.Synthesismapsareformulatedbymixed‐disciplinedesignteamsasaconstructivistapproachtovisualsensemakingforhypercomplex,orwickedproblems.Synthesismapsaredevelopedfromavaryingmixofprimaryresearchandliteratureevidence,yetarehighlyconstructivistartefactsasthesynthesisprocessdevelopsnarrativesthatre‐interprettherelationsandmeaningsofevidencewithinthesystem.Themapsareproductsofsynthesis,astheyrepresentthechoicesmadebymultiplesynthesispropositionsandconfigurationsthatresultinavisualintegrationofmultiplerepresentationsandsystemformalisms.Theserepresentationsarechosenbydesignerstofacilitatesensemakingbythe contentstakeholders ordecisionparticipantsoftheproblemspace.Diffe e tiatio  of Sy thesis Maps  SynthesismappingwasdevelopedoverseveralyearsofstudioeducationandformativeprocessenhancementatOCADUniversity’sStrategicForesightand)nnovation SF) graduateprogram.TheSF)programadaptedtheG)GAmapprocessinitsSystemicDesigncourseoveratwo‐yearperiodofdevelopmentandteaching,incollaborationwithOsloSchoolofArchitectureandDesign.Theauthorsco‐teachtheSF)SystemicDesigncourseusingamixed‐studioandseminarpedagogy.UnliketheA(OG)GAmapstudioprocess,theSF)programdoesnothavesponsoredstudios,andthesystemmapsaredevelopedforcourse‐basedproblems.Thisconstraintontheprogram,aswellasthefairlyshortcourseperiod,limitstheextenttowhichstudentscandevelopmapsasarichsolutiondesignspaceforconstructive,realproblems.FollowingtheA(Omethodascloselyasfeasible,givendifferencesinpurposeandpedagogy,thefirsttwocohortsdevelopedeffectiveG)GAmapsforsocialsystemsdesigncontextssuchasurbantransportation,citywideinfectiousdiseasemanagement,urban‐ruralwildecosystemmanagement,andchildhoodobesity.Themapswereconstructedinsixweeks’timebyteamsof typically fourmixed‐disciplinegraduatestudentsself‐selectingtoprojectteamsbasedonmutualinterestinaselected wickedproblem topic.Subsequentcohorts upto moresince havebeentaughtwithanadaptedmethodologythattakesintoaccounttheSF)programobjectives,theone‐termduration,andthefittoconcurrentcourses,thatalsodemandintensiveteamprojects.Thesynthesismapmethodologyhasemergedfromtheseconstraintsandrequirementsasmuchasitreflectsadifferentmethodology.Forone,theSF)programpromotestheintegrationoflearningacrossdisciplinesforcomplexproblemswithsocietalbenefitaswellasanengagedlearningprocess.Toactivelysupportstudentlearningacrosscourses,theSystemicDesigncoursehasbeenpairedwiththemostsuitable,synergisticothercourseinitscurrentterm.Formostyearsoftheprogram,thishaseventuatedinstudentsmaintainingconsistentdesignteamsbetweenSystemicDesignandthe)nnovationResearchMethodscourse.Forsomecohorts,the

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

pairedcoursewastheStrategicForesightStudio.)ntheintheResearchMethodscoursesynthesismapshavebeenconstructedtorevealsocialsystemsanddynamicsreflectingprimaryfieldresearchoftenconductedinthatcourse.Asteamsworkfromtheirownresearchevidencecollectedandanalysedintheresearchcourse,theirvisualinterpretationsofsimilarfindingsinthesynthesismapsaccruebothinternalcoherencetoareal‐worldsituationandexternalvalidityperceivedbystakeholdersinthedomainsofinterest.Becausethemapsaresynthesizedfromdesignresearchandsocialscienceresearch,theyareuniquelyresponsivetothefieldresearchcontext,yetdevelopedwithinacontinuousinteractivestudioprocess bothstudentteamorganizedandguidedbyaseriesoftutorialandadvisingsessionswithfaculty .TheSF)programisinclusiveofmultipledisciplinesina ‐personcohort,andit’stypicalthateachmapteammighthaveonlyasingleclassically‐trainedvisualorindustrialdesigner.Themixofbusiness,socialscience,arts,andscienceswithinadesigncourseenablesawideintersectionofproblemsandinterventions,whichisfurtherstrengthenedbyacoursethatteachesarangeofsystemsthinkingmappingformalismsandsystemstheoryinthefirsthalfoftheterm.Thesevisualformalisms,discussedbelow,havebecomeanessentialbridgebetweentheprogressively‐developedsystemspedagogyandthevisually‐informeddesignpractice.Webelievethat,forafirstcourseinsystemsthinkingthatproducessystemsmapsasoutcomes,thesynthesismapapproachprovidesuniquevalueofamapartefactthatcapturesandrepresentsthequalityofteamlearningandthereasoningpracticesofsystemsthinkingappliedtocomplexsocialorpolicycontexts. Figure1.Studentteamsketchingearly‐stagesystemmap.)nthisarticleweproposethatthesynthesismapdifferssignificantlyenoughfromtheG)GAmap,evenifbyprocessmorethanartefact,towarrantasupportedexplanation.Whilesimilarmaptypesaredevelopedbystudiopracticesusingbothmethods,keyprocessdistinctionsmightbesummarizedasfollowsinTable .

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Table1.CriteriadescribingGIGAmapsandSynthesisMaps

CRITERIA     /    Model  GIGAMap  Sy thesis Map Size a d scale  Large  aps,  ultis aled,  a ro‐ i ro  Large,  a   e  ultis aled. Well‐ ou ded. Visual  odels  Highl   aried, ofte  ar hite tural,  D 

Ofte  used to  reate desig  la guages T pi all   D,  lear fra e, ofte  grid‐ ased Ca   e  isuall  si plisti , if  arrati e‐led 

Theoretical  odels  Not stro gl  theoreti al, More pro ess  S ste s  odels e pli itl  stru ture  arrati es Approach to Evide ce  Dire tl  rele a t to a desig  pro le   Ofte  de eloped fro  resear h e ide e 

ithout e te si e stakeholders or solutio  spa e  

Approach to Narrative  Separates pro ess a d  o u i atio . Ca   e used o l  i  desig  thi ki g. 

Ofte  stro gl   arrati e‐ ased. Narrati es sele ted earl  i   appi g pro ess. 

Stakeholder Role   Ofte  stakeholder led i  studio / resear h 

Stakeholders ofte  dis o ered after resear h a d  appi g, allo i g for post‐i tera tio   

 

Syste s Theo y Visual Models  Systemstheoryandsystemsengineeringhavedevelopedanumberofwell‐knownvisualmodellingformalismstypicallyusedfordistinctfunctionalrepresentation.Visualformalismsalsoconveytheirepistemologicalframesintheconstraintandexpressivepowerofthechosenmodality.Wehaveseenanumberofvisualtoolsdevelopedtoillustrateandaidintheunderstandingofcomplexsystems,mostofwhichhaveemergedfromthedomainofsystemsthinking.Visualformalmodelshavebeendevelopedasmethodologiesforsystemsanalysisand/orproblemstructuring.FollowingJackson’s typology,mostvisualformalismshaverepresentedmethodsfrombothhardsystems systemdynamics andsoftsystems e.g.,Checkland, .(ardsystemsmodelssuchascausalloopdiagramsforsystemsdynamics,requirereductionistapproachesthatrestrictvariablesandfollowwell‐definedrules.Softsystemsmethodsdrawfromaninterpretiveepistemologythatrecognizesthatacommonunderstandingofaproblemareaisenabledbyanintegratedmultimethodology Midgely,etal, andanexplicitmotiveoflearningandactionplanning.Softsystemsmethodsencourageflexible,organicrepresentationsthatfacilitateproblemunderstandingandstructuring.(ardsystemsmethodsaregenerallyutilizedastechnicalmodellingtechniquesforanalysisandsystemrepresentation.Systemsthinkingandtheoryhasnotledthedesignofnovelvisualsensemakingmethods.Few,ifanysystemdesignmodelshaveemergedfromsystemssciencesorsystemsthinking,includingtheschoolsofcriticalsystemsorevencomplexitytheory.Cyclicandnestedmodelsthatabstractnaturalsystemsprocesseshavebeendefinedasecologicalsystemmodels.Theseincludethepanarchyadaptivecycle Gunderson&(olling, ,Bronfenbrenner’s socioecologicalsystem,andothers.Othercommonlyusedformalismsordesignmodelsincludeinfographics (orn, ,conceptmaps NovakandCanas, ,processflowdiagrams,journeymaps,andotherdesignartefactsdrawnfrominformationdesign,informationarchitecture,graphicdesign,servicedesign,architectureandplanningdisciplines.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Ha d Syste  Visual Fo alis s Whatwerefertoashardsystemsmodelsincludethecausalloopdiagrams Braun, ,Senge,,stockandflow Meadows&Wright, ,systemigrams Blair,Boardman&Sauser, ,andstructural/influencemaps Warfield&Staley, .Thehardsystemmodelsoftenfunctionasstandaloneanalyticalrepresentationsthatdefineasystemicpatternreferencedinalargerstudy.Theseformalismsareoftenincludedwithinsynthesismapsasdiscretemodelsthatdescribesubsystemorarchetypalbehaviourswithinanentailedboundedsocialsystem.Asignificantdifferencebetweenhardsystemmodelsandthesoftsystemsschoolisthathardsystemsdevelopamodelofcausalitydevelopedfromanalysisofcurrentsystemdynamics.Thepurposeofsystemarchetypes Braun, istoidentifyandcapturerecurrentpatternscommonlyfoundinsocialsystemsandorganizationsthataredefinedascausal,reinforcingandbalancingloops.)nsynthesismapssuchmodelsareoftenincorporatedintolargersynthesesofmultipleprocesseswithinamuchmoreencompassingsystemboundary.Thecausallooporsystemigrambecomesaninset,andservesasamicro‐modelrepresentingacurrentfunction, oftenadysfunction ,withinsocialsystemsnarratedbyasoftsystemoridealizedapproach.ThefollowingfigureshowstheShiftingtheBurden archetypewherebythelongerterm,difficultgoalofbalancinghealthcarecostswithinaninstitutionalbudgetbycreatingpopulationcarenetworksisoffsetbyshiftingtheburdentoashorttermsolution increasingvolumeofchargeabletestsandprocedures thataddressesshorttermcostsbutshiftstheultimatecoststothelong‐term,exacerbatingtheoriginalproblem.Otherhardsystemorprocessmodelsareusedwithinsynthesismapsfornarrativeconstructionanddiscursivepurposes.Theintentionofadoptingmixedmethodsistwofold: toidentifyandportraydiscoveredpatternswithinthecomplexdynamicsofasocialsystemand toconveythesenseofcomplexityinthe actual socialsystembyincreasingillustrationdensitywhilenotsacrificingreadability.Thecasestudypresentedinthisarticleshowstheuseofcausalloopsandprocessdiagramswithinalargesynthesismap,specificallytoconveyrelationshipswhereinterventionsmightbelocatedinacomplexsystem.  Figure3.ShiftingtheBurdenArchetype.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

The Soft Syste  Ri h Pi tu e    Theotherschoolofsystemicreasoning,softsystems,recommendsmoreinterpretiveandfigurativemodels.ThebestknownrepresentativeapproachisCheckland’sSoftSystemMethodology SSM ,knownfortherichpicture Checkland, ,ChecklandandPoulter, .Theclassicalrichpictureapproachsketchesavisualmodelofthesystemasaparalleltotherealworldsituation asdepicted andisintentionallymeanttobeaprovisionalmodel,subjecttochangeiniterativeinteractions.TheChecklandrichpicturepresentsanidealizedmodelofthepreferredsystemasawaytoconstructinterventionsandcompare,inasingleimage,withtherealworldsystemasperceived.Atypicalintentiondescribedbytherichpictureistofacilitateanongoinglearningcontextasacontinuingprocessfordiscovery,throughthecreationofacommonlanguagewithstakeholders,intext,imageandrelationship.Thesynthesismapadoptsthisprocessexplicitlyinitsiterativestudiodevelopmentandengagementwithsystemstakeholders.Synthesismapssignificantlyextendtherichpicture.TheconventionalSSMmodeldevelopsahand‐sketchedarticulationofrelationshipsbetweenadepictionofsystembehavioursintheworld,theactorsandworldviewsparticipatinginthesystem,andanabstractedsystemmodelthatreferencestherealworldandindicatesitsboundariesandbehaviourtrajectory.Ascribedmeaningsdrawnfromthesysteminterpretationarevisuallydepictedbysymbolism,metaphor,andrepresentationofsite,context,structure,function,processes,andnarrative‐oftencreativelyjuxtaposedorintegratedasacreativedocumentation.Theissues,meaninganddirectionsofacomplexproblemarereferencedinreferentialsketchesandvisualstoillustrateelements,relationships,andinfluentialdynamicproperties.Thispromotesideation,andfacilitatesacomplexproblemsystemicview‐point.)tisthisintegrativedesignprocessandlanguagethatcanbeintegratedintoasystemicvisualmethodthatbuildsonsuccessiveinterpretationandjuxtapositionofsalientsystemelements.De elopi g a Syste i  Na ati e Fromantiquitytothepresent,andwithanexponentialrateofexpansiveness,humanshavebeenobsessedwithsystematicallycollectingandreorganizingwhatineffectalreadyexists,initsownkindoforder,ordisorder.Thisdesireforcontrolandcentralisationofourenvironment,hasnodoubtaidedusinthepastandpresent.Nevertheless,manybelieveourinstitutionalizedsystemshavereachedsuchepidemicproportionsthat,notonlyhasthedigitalrevolutionnotbeenabletosolvesystemicproblems,butithasclearlyaggravateditwithacombinatorialexplosionoffragmentedinformation.Allofthesesystems,thedigitalnotwithstanding,occupyanincreasinglyhugeamountofspaceandpullresourcesfromtheworld.Asystemicviewpointisafoundationformanyofthecomplexproblemswhichourstudentspursue.Thebasicactionsofanysynthesismappingincludedefiningsystemboundariesandunpackingsystemelementsandsubsystems,followingabasicanalysisofsystemprocesses,structures,functionsandgoals.Tounderstandthecomplexityofaproblemsystem,wehighlightcausalandinfluencingrelationsinearlysystemsketches,anddefinestakeholdersandtheirorganizationsandnetworkswithinthesystem.ThisapproachissupportedbyGharajedaghi’s iterativesystemicanalysis,employedintheOCADUcourse.Thisinformationallowstheconstructionofinitialmapswhichhighlightelements,andsubsystemrelations,andprovideinsightintosystemicbehaviour.Theiterativeinquirytypicallydefinestheinitialsystemlevelsandboundaries,andstudentteamsidentifythesystemlevelfordefinitionfromthesemultiplelevelsorperspectives,Beforeinitiatingthesynthesismap,thissystemsanalysisprocessofmultiplemappingmethodsisextendedwithcausalloopsandarchetypes,stockandflowdiagrams,systemigramsandothersystemicvisualformalisms.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

The Sy thesis Map Thesynthesismapapproachencouragestheselectionofvisualformalismsappropriatetothescaleandfunctionoftheproblemsystem,aprocessthatbecomesiterativethroughseminar,teaching,studioapplication,andinthecritiquingprocess.Thesynthesismapbecomesanintegrationofmuchofthefindingsfromvariousunpacking,map‐makingandanalysisprocesses.Asaproductoftheprocessitintegratestheinformation,findings,andkeyissuesrelatedtothecomplexsystem,withacontextualnarrativeasasynthesisoftheissuesandinformation,presentedasadesignproblem.Thismethodofsensemakingprovidesawayofvisualizingthesystemicstory,andexploresthepossibilitiesfordesigninterventionandchange‐making,withafocusonkeychangedriversinthesolutionspace.Thesynthesismap,likeSevaldson’sG)GAmapisanartefactthatattemptstodocumentandorganizeapictureofthecomplexproblem.)nthesynthesismapthesystemicportrayalofsystembehaviours,andsystemicrelationstendstobemorehighlighted.Theappliedinterpretativeanalysisgeneratesacombinationoffocalandfiguralelementsprovidinganarrativepictureofthesystemicdesignproblem.Becausethesemapsarequiteoftenutilizedinthecontextofstrategicforesightandinnovationprojects,thesynthesismapsquiteoftenincludeaviewtofuturescenarios,andhorizonsofpossiblechangeandoutcomes.Thefinalformatofthecompletedmapisavisualnarrativewithorganizedandsynthesizedinformationaboutthesubjectdomain,supportedbyprimaryandinterpretedresearch,statistics,facts,archivalinformationandrepresentedbyvisualmetaphors.P i iples a d F a e o k  Synthesismapsareusedinsteadofothermodesofsystemmappinginordertodescribeacomplexsocialsystemsufficienttothecomplexityofthedomainofinterest.Weadapttheprincipleofrequisitevarietywheretheproblemrepresentationinthemapmustcorrespond ifnot control tothecomplexityinthesocio‐culturalsystemasunderstoodbystakeholders.)ncoursepedagogyweembracethewickedproblemasacontextfordefinitionandsufficientcomplexity.Theseprincipleshelpseparatethesynthesismapasagenrefrominfographicsorstructuredandsimplifiedsystemsmaps,wheretheintentisfornarrativereadabilityandclarityofdefinition.Theaimofthesynthesisapproachistobebothasvisuallycomplexasthedomainitrepresents,andasunderstandableaspossibletointendedaudiences,whichareoftenstakeholdersnotinvolvedinthemappingprocess.Multiplepurposescanbeembracedbyamappingproject.Communicationofthesocialsystemproblemareaasresearchedandunderstoodisastartingpoint.Anotherpurposeistobeabletoeffectivelyidentifycyclesandprocessinsocialsystemsthatmightrepresentproductiveareasforinterventionorforsystemandservicedesign.Course‐basedsynthesismapsdonotusuallyventureintosystemredesignasthesearetypicallycreatedwithoutthebenefitofextensivesystemstakeholdersontheteam.Thenecessityofstakeholderinclusionbecomesclarifiedwhenstudentprojectsattempttoproposeinterventionanddesignchangeswithouttheiraccesstotheteam.Courseprojectstypicallydescribefirststepstowardfutureredesignproposalsbasedonprinciplesandanalysis,andwherepossible,onadeepunderstandingoftheproblemdomain.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Sy thesis Map Te h i ue Throughreflectivestudioandteachingpracticeaswellassponsoredresearch,wehavedevelopedadistinctiveprocesswithpreferredtechniquesforrapidteamconstructionofsynthesismaps.Whatfollowsisanoutlineofaspectsofthissyntheticmapformulation,highlightingtheapproaches,process,andelementsthroughapplicationexamples.  Te h i ues  ithi  the Basi  Method Studiopracticesemphasizeanumberofdifferentactivitiesthatcanbeproposedasstartingpointsinthesynthesismapprocess.Thefollowingtechniquesareinrelativeorderoftheirsignificancetothereasoningandearlyproductionofiterativesystemmappingforsynthesismapconstruction. . Synthesismapsareofteninitiatedasprojectsbasedonawickedproblemoftopicofauthenticconcerntothegroupthatproceeds,withorwithoutaccesstostakeholders.)nstudios,teamsconductandaggregateappropriateresearch,performanalysisandsummarizeknowledge.Thisisoftenbasedontheevidencefromstakeholderanalysis.)terationsofstakeholderanalysisofprimary direct ,indirect,institutional,andsocial community stakeholdersareconductedtoidentifythesocialactorsinthesocialsystem.. )ncourseworkweoftenlinkthesynthesismapprojecttoanother,research‐basedcoursethataffordsaccesstostakeholdersandparticipantsforinterviews,observations,experts,andrigorousinquiryintotheproblemdomain.Aresearchquestionorproblemstatementmightdrivethemappingprocessinthiscase.Thishelpsdefinetheprojectscopeandsystemboundariesofthesocialsystemorservice.. Therefollowsaniterativeunpackingofbundledsubsystemsandrelationships.Mapsoftendevelopaconfigurationofthefunctions,structuresandprocesseswithinadefinedsystemboundary.Clarificationofthesystempurposeandcontextsistypicallyformedasanemergentprocessinsuccessivemappingiterations.Thesystemboundaryisinterrogatedinstudiobaseddiscussionstoidentifythebestframingforcontinuingwithsystemmapping.. Preferredsystemmappingformalismsareoftenintroducedtoconstructsystembehaviorsand proposals forproblematicsandregularitiesinasocialsystem.Systemigrams,causalloopdiagrams,influencemaps,richpicture,iterativeinquiry,processflows,panarchy,ecologicalsystemmapsandothersareemployedtorepresentappropriatesystemrelationships.. Atthesametime,teamsareencouragedtoorganicallyexploreandvisuallyrepresentthesalientandtheoreticallysignificantaspectsofasocialsystem.Stakeholdertables,organizationalbreakdowns,architecturalmaps,structuralandprocessviewsarecomposedtorepresentwholesandpartsinrelationtoeachother.. Anabductiveprocessofrepresentation,reasoning,testing,andre‐representationispromoted.Studentsarenotalwaysabletogainaccesstoappropriateexpertsorthefieldtoassesstheirhypothesesandemployavisualreasoningandsimulationprocesstoevaluatethefitofconceptsandsystemproposals.. Completemapvisualizationistypicallydoneclosetothepointofversioncompletion.Visualmetaphorsaresketchedandconsideredforbringingthemaptolife.Narrativeproposalsaretestedagainstthemapandgapsareidentifiedfromthenarrativeorprocessflows.. Manysynthesismapsareformedwithdefinitivetimelinesortemporalmodelsoverlonghorizons.Thelonghorizonmapsgenerallyintegrateforesightmodelsintothesystemframework.Three(orizonsCurryand(odgson, ,roadmapsandoutcomemapsareoftenusedtoelaborateanticipatorymodelsintothesystemview.. Whilesomesynthesismapsidentifyinterventionsearlyinthecycleofdesign,mostteamscompleteasignificantversionofthemap,reachingapointofsharedunderstandingandanarrativebeforedefiningoptionsforsystemicdesigninterventionandchangeproposals.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Cou se‐Based Map Case AnexemplarysynthesismaprepresentingtheprocessandproductoftheOCADUcourseispresentedinFigure ,theBiomimeticEconomymapdevelopedbyastudentteam,afutures‐basedsystemmodelsubsequentlypresentedatRSD Church,Benifand&Ahmed, .Figure4.TheBiomimeticEconomy.WithpermissionfromChurch,Benifand&Ahmed ,Theproceedingspapersupportingtheposterpresentationdescribesthelargemapanddiscussesthefunctionsofhumaneconomiesrelevanttoanddrawingfromthreenaturalsystemecologicalregimes.Theleftofthemappresentsakindoflegendofthesixdesignprinciplesforbiomimicryrelevanttoeconomicfunctions–resilience,optimizing,adaptive,systemic,value‐based,andlife‐supporting.Thebottomofthemappresetsalong‐horizontimeline,atypicalorganizingfeatureinsynthesisandG)GAmaps,hererepresentingtherelativeperiodofcenturiesextendingoveraThree(orizonsmodelofthreeeconomicmodes,basedontheprinciplesofecologicalsuccession:

Type)system Current,(orizon ,rapidgrowthcyclestocapitalexhaustion,representedasS‐curves,anunsustainablelineargrowthmodel. Type))system (orizon ,operatingnearthecarryingcapacityoftheeconomy,representedasapanarchycycleofgrowththatexpandstoanasymptote,retractsandreorganizes. Type)))system, (orizon ,characterizedbyaproposedcomplexcontinuouscyclesustainedwithoutcapitalgrowth,similartoanoldgrowthforestecosystem.Multipleembeddedcausalloopsnarratethedynamicsofeachsystemandtheirtransitions.Thecentralcyclicimagerepresentstheemergenceofacirculareconomy,usingJaneJacobs’ model,transitioningfromgrowthenterprises e.g.)BM tothe emergencyadaptations ofemergingsharingeconomyfirms,andthen proposed asshiftingtotruecirculareconomicmodels.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Sy thesis Map Case Study – Ca e  Resea h  )narecentlypublishedmedicaljournalarticle Jones,Shakdher,Singh, wereportedanOCADUniversitycollaborationwithamulti‐yearC)(Rstudy,Can)MPACT.Basedonqualitative,administrativedata,physicianandpatientinterviewsandcancerstatistics,Can)MPACTwasafirst‐everstudyoftheefficacyandimprovementopportunitiesfortheCanadiancancertreatmentsystem,withaspecialfocusonprimarycare.Twosynthesismapsweredeveloped.Theclinicalsystemmap Figure ,CancerCarePathwaysinCanadian(ealthcare,wasalarge‐scaleprocessandsystemmapoftheclinicalsystemsofcareacrossCanadadesignedtocommunicatethefindingsfromtheCan)MPACTstudy.Asecondsynthesismap‐TheClinicalMap Figure visuallyrepresentsbreastandcolorectalcancerprocessesacrossCanadianprovincialandterritorialsystems.Aroadmapmetaphorillustratesasystem‐wideviewofpatientflowacrossthestagesofcancercare.Green roadsigns identifyclinicalcancerstagesacrosstheroadmap:Pre‐Diagnosis,Peri‐Diagnosis,Diagnostic)nterval,Diagnosis,Treatment,Rehabilitation,AfterCare,andSurvivorship withPalliativeCareexpressedasanendpoint .Thevisualmetaphorofseasonaltreesvisuallyconnectsthesestagestothepatient’scancerjourneyfrompre‐diagnosis summer throughtreatment winter ,followedbynewgrowth spring insurvivorship.Figure5.CanIMPACTClinicalSynthesisMap.©2016OCADUStrategicInnovationLab.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Thelevelsofprimary,secondaryandtertiarycareguidetheverticaldimension.)nformationandcommunicationstechnologyreachesacrosslevelsandstages,butisshowndisconnectedfromprimarycare.Theroad‐likepathwaysarecolour‐codedwhereexpertsdifferentiatedcarepathwaysbetweenbreastcancer pink andcolorectal blue .Wherenotdistinguished white ,thepathwaysindicatecurrentpracticessharedacrossthecancerjourneys.Yellownavigationsignsindicatecancereventsacrossprimarycarepathways.StartingwithPreventionandendingwithLong‐termCare,theseeventsshowpointsforprimarycarecontinuityduringcancertreatment.Aparallelpathbelowthestagesindicateswheresomepatientsmayalsoemploycomplementaryoralternativetherapies.Significantareasofcomplexitygeneralizedacrosscancercarearerevealedinperi‐diagnosisandthediagnosticintervalpathways.Apatientcanbescreen‐detected andthenpresenttoafamilyphysician,showninthebreastcancerpathway ormaybeinitiallydiagnosedinprimarycare whitepathway .Thecircularpathwaysinthediagnosticcyclesuggestmultiplepossibletestswithinprimarycare.Withaprimarycarediagnosis,patientsarereferredandflowtosecondary/tertiarycancercare.Thestagesofintake,biopsy,pathology,andconfirmeddiagnosisareshown,andthecomplexpathwaysofcancertreatment,shownonthemapinatypical notdefinitive orderofsurgery,radiation/chemotherapy,andcontinuingtreatmentthroughassessmentofoutcome.Figure6.CanIMPACTPatient‐CentredSynthesisMap.©2016OCADUStrategicInnovationLab.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

Co lusio s Wepresentadescriptionofsynthesismapsasdevelopedandtaughtinaleadinguniversitydesignpractice.Synthesismaps,originallybasedonSevaldson’sG)GAmappingprocess,canincludeawiderangeofsystemmapsformsandtypes,toodiversetobefullypresentedinaproceedingspapers.TheprimarydistinctionbetweensynthesismapsandG)GAmapsistherelianceonevidenceandstructuredsystemmapsusedinthesynthesismaps,drawnintothemappingprocesstosupportthesystemsthinkingpedagogyoftheassociatedcoursepractice,Aswithanysystemmap,theprimarypurposeofthevisualmethodistocommunicateaconsensusmodelofasystemofconcerntostakeholdersandinformedaudiences.Thesynthesismaphassignificantpotentialasadesignartifacttoexplainandproposethroughvisualcompositiontheemergingproblemsandregularitiesasnarrativesentailedinacomplexsocialsystem.Theopen‐endedvisualmodelingapproachprovidesexpandeddegreesoffreedomforsystemdefinitionandintervention,enablingthesynthesismapstobeemployedinawidevarietyofapplicationsandmulti‐stakeholderproblems.Refe e es . Blair,C.D.Boardman,J.T.&Sauser,B.J. .Communicatingstrategicintentwithsystemigrams:Applicationtothenetwork‐enabledchallenge.SystemsEngineering,10 , ‐ .. Braun,W. .Thesystemarchetypes.System,27.. Bronfenbrenner,U. .Theecologyofhumandevelopment.Experimentsbynatureanddesign.Cambridge,MA:(arvardUniversityPress.. ChecklandP. .SystemsTheory,SystemsPractice.Chichester,UK:JohnWiley&Sons.. Checkland,P.,&Poulter,J. .Softsystemsmethodology.)nSystemsApproachestoManaging

Change:APracticalGuide pp. ‐ .SpringerLondon.. Church,R.,Benifand,K.&Ahmed,N. .Reimaginingthefuture:Thebiomimeticeconomy.)nProceedingsofRSD3,ThirdSymposiumofRelatingSystemsThinkingtoDesign.Oslo,Norway:OsloSchoolofArchitectureandDesign,October ‐ , .. Curry,A.,&(odgson,A. .Seeinginmultiplehorizons:Connectingfuturestostrategy.JournalofFuturesStudies,13 , ‐ .. Gharajedaghi,J. .Systemsthinking:Managingchaosandcomplexity:Aplatformfordesigningbusinessarchitecture.Elsevier.. Gunderson,L.(.,&(olling,C.S. .Panarchy:Understandingtransformationsinsystemsofhumansandnature.)sland,Washington.. (orn,R.E. .VisualLanguage:Globalcommunicationforthe21stcentury.Bainbridge,WA:MacroVUPress.. Jacobs,J. .Thenatureofeconomies.NewYork:Random(ouse.. Jones,P.(. .Systemicdesignprinciplesforcomplexsocialsystems.)nG.Metcalfe Ed. ,SocialSystemsandDesign.pp. ‐ .SpringerJapan.. Jones,P.(.,Shakdher,S.&Singh,P. .Synthesismaps:VisualknowledgetranslationforCan)MPACTclinicalsystemandpatientcancerjourneys.CurrentOncology inpress .. Meadows,D.(.&Wright,D. .Thinkinginsystems:Aprimer.ChelseaGreenPublishing.

Pro eedi gs of RSD  S posiu , Toro to,   

 

. Midgley,G.,Cavana,R.Y.,Brocklesby,J.,Foote,J.L.,Wood,D.R.,&Ahuriri‐Driscoll,A. .Towardsanewframeworkforevaluatingsystemicproblemstructuringmethods.EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch,229 , ‐ .. Norman,D.A.,&Stappers,P.J. .DesignX:ComplexSociotechnicalSystems.SheJi:TheJournalofDesign,Economics,andInnovation,1 , ‐ .. Novak,J.D.,&Canas,A.J. .Theoreticaloriginsofconceptmaps,howtoconstructthem,andusesineducation.ReflectingEducation,3 , ‐ .. Senge,P.M. .Thefifthdiscipline.MeasuringBusinessExcellence,1 , ‐ .. Sevaldson,B. .Gigamapping:VisualizationforComplexityandSystemsThinkinginDesign.Nordes,4.(elsinki:NordicDesignResearchConference.. Warfield,J.N.&Staley,S.M. .Structuralthinking:Organizingcomplexitythroughdisciplinedactivity.SystemsResearchandBehavioralScience,13 , ‐ .