Itarc 2015 how to solve wicked problems

© 2012 IRM AB All rights reserved
How to solve
wicked problems
or
What happens if we view
architecture work as design?

Aspect The heritage from System Engineering How we want to perceive EA today
What is the
”system”?
Software and hardware The business as a socio-cultural system: A
complex adaptive system, (where software is
an integral part)
World view Deterministic
The world is like a clock work, that can
be understood and manipulated with
formal methods
Non-deterministic
The world is complex and highly dynamic
View on system
and business
development
Ultimately a formally defined and
controllable process
A human act of ”theory making”
(what is called ”design” by many)
Metaphor Mechanics
Mechanical (dead) components
Biology
A cluster of cells where each cell have
knowledge and behaviour
EA has an origin in
System Engineering
– an heritage we maybe
should abandon

Aspect The heritage from System Engineering How we want to perceive EA today
Development
process
Predictable
The belief that it is possible to correctly
estimate and predict a solution
beforehand. We know already in
advance what the answer is, and
development is only about
implementing the answer.
Explorative
Controlled experiments.
Grounding projections on empirical
observation. We learn more and more until an
answer emerges.
The development
process spread in
time
Episodic
Discrete isolated projects with clearly
defined beginning and end
Continuous
Continuous small changes in a living and
dynamic system
Governance model Centralised hierarchical control Autonomy, cooperative self-organisation and
coordination
EA has an origin in
System Engineering
– an heritage we maybe
should abandon

New thinking grows both in
management, system
development and
design theory
• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Systems Thinking
• Complexity theory/ Complex adaptive system
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
• The view on knowledge in organisations
All this affects the Enterprise Architecture discipline to a paradigm shift.
Right now there is an old paradigm and a new in parallel, with all what this means.
Things are
happening…

New thinking grows both in management, system development and design theory
• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
Right now there is an old paradigm and a new in parallel, with all what this
means.
Things are happening…
Agile Software Development
A group of software development methods based on iterative and
incremental development, where requirements and solutions evolve through
collaboration between self-organizing, cross-functional teams. It promotes
adaptive planning, evolutionary development and delivery, a time-boxed
iterative approach, and encourages rapid and flexible response to change. It
is a conceptual framework that promotes foreseen interactions throughout
the development cycle.

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Design Thinking
As a style of thinking, design thinking is generally considered the ability to
combine empathy for the context of a problem, creativity in the generation
of insights and solutions, and rationality to analyze and fit solutions to the
context. While design thinking has become part of the popular lexicon in
contemporary design and engineering practice, as well as business and
management, its broader use in describing a particular style of creative
thinking-in-action
is having an
increasing
influence on
twenty-first century
education across
disciplines.

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Wicked Problems
a phrase originally used in social planning to describe a problem that is
difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete, contradictory, and
changing requirements that are often difficult to recognize. The term ‘wicked’
is used, not in the sense
of evil but rather its
resistance to resolution.
Moreover, because of
complex inter-
dependencies,
the effort to solve
one aspect of a
wicked problem
may reveal or create
other problems.

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Things are happening…Systems Thinking
The process of understanding how things, regarded as systems,
influence one another within a whole. In nature, systems
thinking examples include ecosystems in which various elements
such as air, water, movement, plants, and animals work together
to survive or perish. In organizations, systems consist of people,
structures, and processes that work together to make an
organization "healthy" or "unhealthy".
Systems thinking has been defined as an approach to problem
solving, by viewing "problems" as parts of an overall system,
rather than reacting to specific parts, outcomes or events and
potentially contributing to further development of unintended
consequences. Systems thinking is not one thing but a set of
habits or practices within a framework that is based on the belief
that the component
parts of a system can
best be understood in
the context of relation-
ships with each other
and with other systems,
rather than in isolation.
Systems thinking
focuses on cyclical
rather than linear cause
and effect.

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Things are happening…Complexity theory has been used in the fields of strategic
management and organizational studies. Application areas
include understanding how organizations or firms adapt to
their environments and how they cope with conditions of
uncertainty. The theory treats organizations and firms as
collections of strategies and structures. The structure is
complex; in that they are dynamic networks of interactions,
and their relationships are not aggregations of the individual
static entities. They are adaptive; in that the individual and
collective behavior mutate and self-organize corresponding
to a change-initiating micro-event or collection of events

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Complex adaptive systems are a 'complex macroscopic collection' of relatively 'similar and
partially connected micro-structures' – formed in order to adapt to the changing
environment, and increase its survivability as a
macro-structure.
They are complex in that they are dynamic
networks of interactions, and their relationships
are not aggregations of the individual static
entities. They are adaptive in that the individual
and collective behavior mutate and self-organize
corresponding to the change-initiating micro-event
or collection of events.[

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Things are happening… Chaos theory studies the behavior of
dynamical systems that are highly
sensitive to initial conditions—a
response popularly referred to as the
butterfly effect. Small differences in
initial conditions yield widely
diverging outcomes for such
dynamical systems, rendering long-
term prediction impossible in general.

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Things are happening…Whenever a company designs a new product, service, or
experience, it is essentially designing its business. When done
well, Business Design creates offerings that inspire organizations
and excite customers. At IDEO, we combine design thinking and
traditional corporate strategies to help clients create avenues for
market growth. By shifting focus from linear practices to iterative
design processes, we can shed light on new options and explore
the various alternatives. Our methods include qualitative and
quantitative research, business model prototyping, data
visualization, organizational design, and IP liberation.

• Agile movement
• Design Thinking
• Wicked Problems
• Chaos theory
• Business Design
means.
Things are happening…Knowledge creation = Formation of new ideas through
interactions between explicit and tacit knowledge.
Nonaka: A model of knowledge creation consisting of
three elements: (i) the SECI process, knowledge creation
through the conversion of tacit and explicit knowledge;
(ii) ‘ba’, the shared context for knowledge creation; and
(iii) knowledge assets, the inputs, outputs and
moderators of the knowledge-creating process. The
knowledge creation process is a spiral that grows out of
these three elements; the key to leading it is dialectical
thinking.

The book ”The Design Way” is where we
found the most inspiration for what we want
to see as a central component for a new
understanding of Enterprise Architecture.
This book is not about EA specifically but is
applicable on all human activity that is about
creating something that did not exist before.
The authors argument for design (across all
fields) should be acknowledged as an
intellectual and practical tradition of human
investigation and action, besides science and
art.
As humans we create things all the time that
contributes to changing the world:
technology, organizations, processes,
environments, ways of thinking, systems of all
kinds. When we do we design.

Professor and Chair of Informatics at the School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University,
Bloomington. Stolterman’s main work is within interaction design, philosophy and theory of design,
information technology and society, information systems design, and philosophy of technology.
Stolterman has published a large number of articles and five books, including “Thoughtful Interaction
Design” (2004, MIT Press) and “The Design Way” (awarded “Outstanding book of the year 2003” by
the American Association for Educational Communications and Technology). Stolterman’s research can
be characterized as being grounded in careful analytical studies of the everyday practice of users and
professionals dealing with interactive artifacts with a strong emphasis of building theory. Stolterman
combines this approach with a strong critical and theoretical analysis of current practice.
Erik Stolterman

Visiting scholar in the School of Computer Science at the
University of Montana. He was the 2009-2010 Nierenberg
Distinguished Professor of Design in the
School of Design at Carnegie Mellon University. He is a
Senior Lecturer in the Graduate School of Business and
Public Policy at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey,
California. For over twelve years Dr. Nelson was the head of
the Graduate Programs in Whole Systems Design (WSD) at
Antioch University.
As a consultant, Dr. Nelson has worked with a variety of
organizations, including: non-profits and corporations, state
and federal agencies, international governments, and the
United Nations, and continues to work as an educator,
consultant, and researcher in the field of organizational
systems design where he brings both design thinking and
systems science to the study and design of organizations.
He is a past-president and a trustee of the International
Society for Systems Science; a position previously held by
such notables as Margaret Mead, C. West Churchman, Ilya
Prigogine (Nobel Prize recipient), Sir Geoffrey Vickers, and
Russell Ackoff. He is the co-founding Director and President
of the Advanced Design Institute, a not-for-profit.
Dr. Nelson received his Ph.D., graduating with distinction,
from the University of California at Berkeley. He also
received his Master of Architecture degree from U.C.
Berkeley, and a Bachelor of Architecture from Montana
State University.
Harold G. Nelson

1. understand the problem
2. collect information
3. analyse information
4. create solution
5. evaluate
solution
6. implement
solution
7. test
8. modify
(Rittel 1988: ”The reasoning
of designers”)
How we solve ”tame” problems

• can not be formulated exhaustively
• each formulation is an expression of a solution
• lacks stop rule
• is not right or wrong
• lacks exhaustive list of operations
• can be explained in
different ways
• each problem is
symptom for another
problem
• lacks both test and
ultimate test
• each problem is
unique
(Rittel 1988: ”The reasoning of
designers”)
Features of a ”wicked” problem

What is normally taught in schools is
“problem solution”. That is to primarily
identify what type of problem it is and
secondly apply a known method.
It is a reactive model suited for “tame”
problems.
Almost all significant problems we encounter in our daily life are “wicked problems”.
They are not suited for simple methods and can not even be classified that simple. If we
try traditional problem solution the result is paralysis and confusion.
The strategies working for wicked problems differ from those for tame problems, not only
in degree but in kind.
One more thing besides this: If we only fix “problems” (tame or wicked) we have
restricted ourselves.
Design wisdom is a better idea than “problem solution”. We then change focus from
escaping bad things only to steer to where we want.

If we want to change something we
often think we first have to analyze the
problem in an exhaustive way, and then
make rational decision between distinct
choices for action.
In reality analysis often leads to more
choices, that requires more analysis.
Decisions are not made in a rational way and can not be made in a rational way –
at least not in the sense the rational tradition sees it.
The reality is to complex to be dealt with in an exhaustive way.

“Design Thinking”
is a better viewpoint.
We need to build a
design culture to make a
better grounding for our
work.
It is applicable for all people whose work is to create something new
(that is something that did not exist before, at least not in exactly
the same form in the same context)

buildings…

cities…

cultures…

countries…

political systems…

organisations…

enterprises…

products…

services…

processes…

strategies…

ways to work…

world views…

The world we live in is created by humans
in all essential aspects.
Buildings, cities, cultures, countries,
political systems, organisations, companies,
products, services, processes, strategies,
work methods, world views, and more…
The activity to create something new , that
do not exist before, we can call “design”

Induction and
deduction are not
enough
Induction
To draw conclusion from the specific to
the general, i.e. from experience to
conclusion.
Deduction
To draw conclusion from the general to
the specific, i.e. to apply what we
already know on the reality.
Induction and deduction are the kinds
of reasoning emphasized in science. But
they do not suffice when we create
new. We need more kinds of reasoning.
We need to search for what is ”real”
instead of what is ”true”. We need
design judgement.

What we strive to create when we
design deals with judgement,
based on desire and purpose and
can never be described in
explanations, descriptions or
predictions.
Intuition
What we know, but not really
know how we know. A composed
understanding of experience
based on a complex set of
impressions from the world.
Abduction
To create a hypothesis (a
reasonable guess) from observed
facts. Gives new knowledge.

We always design for someone. To design is consequently (differing
from science and art) to serve someone.
To design is not to help people to create what they already know
they want. The result surpass what the client from outset
(normally only vaguely) perceive that she wants.
The designer brings
to surface a clearer
expression for the
clients wishes.
The designer creates
meaning.
Design is to serve

How to communicate is central.
• Notitia: The ability to create a true comprehension of things by observing
and participating in an open and attentive way.
(Hillman 1982: The Thought of the Heart and the Soul of the World)
• The designer is responsible not only to the client but to all affected.
• Design work is a partnership with all involved, a ”conspiracy” in the meaning
that you are breathing together. It resembles what is called ”flow”.
• Empathy is the ability to
”be” the other person and
still be yourself.
Design as participation

Designers need to see more than the things in their own. They need to see and
handle the important relations between the things in the world. It means we
think in systems in everything we do. Every design is either an element in a
system or a system in its own.
There is a number of approaches in systems thinking.
• Systems Approach
• Systems Design
• Systems Theory
• Systems Dynamics
• Systems Analysis
• Cybernetics
• Systems management
How we can understand systems

How can we
understand
Enterprise
Architecture?
Science or
art?

How can we understand Enterprise Architecture?
Science Art
EA?
Communalities
-Has a community
-Experimenting
-Moves borders
-Has criticism/examination
Science
• Physical world  Theory
(concrete) (abstract)
• Science is our attempt to
express or share our
understanding of the world
around us. It is about the
world in an objective sense.
The purpose is to give utility.
Art
• Personal idea  Manifestation
(abstract) (concrete)
• Art is our attempt to share or
influence others through
individual experiences. Art is
not to have purpose but is a
purpose in itself
Differences in
purpose

Science Art
Design
EA!
Science
• Physical world  Theory
(concrete) (abstract)
• Science is our attempt to
express or share our
understanding of the world
around us. It is about the
world in an objective sense.
The purpose is to give
utility.
Art
• Personal idea  Manifestation
(abstract) (concrete)
• Art is our attempt to share or
influence others through
individual experiences. Art is
not to have purpose but is a
purpose in itself
Design resembles art but
with a purpose. Is for a
purpose for someone.
The result should be
useful.

There are many ways to
approach and inquire the
world when you about
to make a design.
Each method gives only
a restricted view.
We must therefore always combine more than one method.
There is no bottom in the information we can retrieve. A complete
analysis is not possible. Requirements are not ”out there” to be
”discovered”. We can only focus on what we want to achieve and
be open for ways to show them self in due time.
How design
comes about

”Design is about
bringing things into
the world that have
not existed before.”

To bring something
new into the world
we need more than
creativity.
The ability to imagine
what this new
”something” is, how it can be realised and to communicate this are
central components. This goes for all kinds of design and for all
phases of the work.
Imagination and
communication

As designer I interpret and
conceptualise ideas and give
them shape so they can be
communicated and be
understood by all involved.
Rich pictures conveyed with
graphics and text in diverse forms
are essential.
(Pictures are fundamental to
human communication, both
with others and also with
ourselves)
This is not only for what is new but also for understanding what is there today.
A situation can never be described exact as it is. Every description is based on a selection of attributes I
think is important. This process is also about to imagine alternative choices and to use ones
judgement. This is a non-linear, very dynamic and emergent process that emerges in the relation with
all involved.
Imagination and
communication

centering
conversation
dialogue
graphologue
iteration
implementation
The phases of design communication
1. Centering
The clients (implicitly and explicitly
communicated) needs and wishes triggers
imaginations among the involved.
When it works it feels like a conspiracy, a
breathing together.
2. Conversation
To wholly an fully pay attention
to the other, to find relations
and connections that can be a
starting point for a contract.
3. Dialogue
Movement towards shared understanding
and shared expression in the specific
context. Does not necessarily mean that
all have the same understanding, but we
understand each other:
This is not:
- an expert comes with a truth
- negotiation of what should be included.
4. Graphologue
The insight in new possibilities in
the shape of new mental
pictures. Pictures trigger new
emergent and divergent pictures
and so on. The pictures are
carried by communicative
artefacts that let us ”touch” the
pictures, experience their
qualities.
Acceptance often comes as a
surprise. Neither client nor
designer knew beforehand what
would come
No a shared ground is created for
an intentional change, a
judgment that a picture is rich
and mature for next iteration,
whether implementation or only
on paper.
5. Implementation
The picture continues to concretize and crystallize and
take concrete place in the world as an artefact and
thereby gets a life of its own.
conspiracy
trust
agency
common
understanding
common meaning
meaning

In the heart of the design discipline lies
the ability to make solid design decisions.
The judgment is not grounded in strict
rational reasoning but in aggregated
experience, learnings from consequences
of past choices made in complex situations.
Good judgement can not be taught as general rules, since it is extremely
dependant on context. However it can be trained.
A common misconception is that judgement is based on a complete
understanding of the situation, and that there are ”correct” decisions to arrive
at. Such understanding is never possible. From this misunderstanding we get
”analysis paralysis” or over-simplification.
If the client wants a process that leads to guaranteed and predictable result,
design is not applicable. Design is an act of bringing to the world things that
does not exist yet, neither in the imaginary world or in the real world.
The design process as
judgement

The client plays a role
continuously through the
whole process. Design
decisions are never fixed but
new ideas, insights, changed
circumstances, new
understanding and knowledge
changes the context even for
made decisions.
Judgement in design is a fully dynamic and dialectic process, that moves
between conscious and unconscious decisions and between the client and the
designer. Because we can not take in all details we must deliberate choose to
ignore some aspects to focus on others. We choose what is to be foreground and
what is to be background.
The design process
as judgement

Good design is possible! We can be better designers if we
look upon the design process such as we are intentionally
making well grounded judgements and not like
something just happens or is about logical reasoning
alone.
The design
process as
the use of
judgement

A design is always a combination
of something, i.e. we have joined
and connected elements.
To design is to join things, people
included, to something unified whole.
We bring together parts, material, functions, structures, processes, activities and
events in a way that the composition gets an emergent presence in the world.
Such a combination is more than a pattern of parts: it is a combined whole that
shows emergent qualities that transcends the qualities of the parts, both
isolated and as a sum. Limitations, as well as conclusions drawn beforehand
should always be thoroughly investigated and questioned.
Design is to combine

There are no universal ready-made compositions
that can be used without extensive adaptation.
So there is nothing to gain in direct copying or
imitate earlier design.
However, by studying earlier designs as case
studies helps us to recognise the specific in every
design situation. It helps us to develop a
sensibility and appreciation for the design
process, the spirit and energy that makes good
design.
Design expresses creativity, not because the result consists of new technology,
new materials or new social functions, but because of how different elements
are knit together in a way that is appropriate for the specific circumstance and
purpose.
Design is to combine

Designers use the material
in the design process, more or less
as a design partner. It is often
expressed as ”asking the material
what it wants to become”.
The material responses through its
limitations and possibilities.
Something similar happens when
we begin to put our thoughts on paper.
Our own words appears to us in a way that reveals our hard to get or unformed thoughts.
When we read what we have been writing we are forced to rewrite or even rethink our
ideas. The written text exposes our thinking to us through the power of an interactive
material.
This shows that the material fabrication is not something that comes after the design is
finished. On the contrary, the design process continues even after the design has taken
place in the world. The development often continues over generations of versions, users
and stakeholders.
Craft and
material

It is not possible to determine
how good a design is before it has
made its presence in the world.
It is only in its real environment
with all relations that all qualities
get visible.

Evils we can not escape
- something new replaces something
old that gets ruined
- alternative opportunities are lost
The evil of design
Evils we can escape
- power we have without
understanding what we do
- acting without personal connection
to the consequences (due to
ignorance, negligence or inattention)
Wilful evils
- power without desire to do
good
- to act on behalf of someone
without her consent

Has a ”soul”, which
can be seen as a strong
connection between
• a feeling of organic
wholeness
• meaning, to be
relevant and useful
- We then use words like
integrity, wholeness, richness, deepness, authenticity.
Good design

As designers
we create the
world
What we do changes
the reality for
ordinary people.
The world gets more
and more created by people.
We have a great responsibility

As designers we
create the worldIt easily happens that we try to
escape our responsibility by
wishfully inventing some sort of
guarantor, someone or something
that can ensure the decisions we
make are right and can be
implemented. If this would work
we could regard ourselves only as
truth tellers. What we arrive at is something inevitable. The following are common
escape paths:
To move the responsibility to someone else
- to the design process (a detailed and rigid method removes the whole responsibility. The designer becomes
an operator only)
- to some design principle
- to an universal truth (e.g. scientific fact)
- to someone else (client, stakeholder, user. The designer becomes a facilitator only)
- To hide the responsibility (e.g. by embedding all actions in a complex administrative network of
responsibilities)
- To think away the responsibility completely

As designers we create the world
If I want to be a good designer there is no defensible way to move, hide or
remove responsibility for my own actions.
There are no theories, methods, technics or tools that can calculate, anticipate,
or show the true best future reality. The true best future reality does not exist as
predetermined objective fact.
As people we have the ability to create a different future – constrained only by
our present reality and by our imagination.
The only thing I can trust – the only guarantor there is for a good design – is that
I can develop my character as designer, my values.
A designers character is his or hers kernel. No judgement in design can be made
based on knowledge alone. Design decisions are in this meaning an act of trust
to my kernel values and convictions. The designer must trust her own ability to
good judgement. This can developed through reflexion.

”In order to create character
we have to live the examined life.”
”When we guide our lives by our
own pondered thoughts,
it is our life that we are living,
not someone else´s.”
Robert Nozick

Itarc 2015 how to solve wicked problems

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (12)

Semelhante a Itarc 2015 how to solve wicked problems

Semelhante a Itarc 2015 how to solve wicked problems (20)

Último

Último (20)

Itarc 2015 how to solve wicked problems

Notas do Editor