Complex Adaptive Systems Thinking Approach for Intelligence Base in Support of Intellectual Capital Management

The increasing prominence of hydrogen and its mixture with methane needs a comprehensive understanding of the complex interactions linked with industrial explosion risks and mitigation strategies. Systems thinking and system dynamics approaches are used to deal with complex systems This research explores the application of a Systems Thinking approach in the context of explosion management, specifically focusing on safety considerations associated with hydrogen, methane, and their mixtures. A Causal Loop Diagram is proposed for providing a holistic view of the complex interdependencies linked to the hydrogen enrichment implementation. A System Dynamics-based model is developed for computing the effects of hydrogen addition on the explosion risk and considering the dynamic behaviour of the interdependencies involving storage conditions, infrastructure design, and emergency response protocols. Furthermore, by adopting this holistic perspective, this research aims to identify leverage points and potential vulnerabilities in the explosion safety management associated with each gas and its mixtures. Using the developed models, it is possible to quantify and compare the risk profiles associated with H 2 and CH 4 /H 2 mixture handling, providing valuable insights for designing effective explosion management strategies. By using the Systems Thinking approach, this work contributes to a better understanding of the multiple challenges in explosion management, leading to informed decision-making and advancements in safety practices. • Integrated Systems Thinking approach for explosion safety management. • Causal Loop Diagram for a holistic view of the hydrogen enrichment implementation. • System Dynamics model for computing the effects of hydrogen on the explosion risk. • Dynamic behaviour of the interdependencies linked to the hydrogen enrichment. • Better understanding of the multiple challenges in explosion management.

Recently, there have been calls to integrate systems thinking approaches into chemistry education in order to strengthen students’ conceptual understanding, build their problem-solving capabilities, and prepare them to make informed, ethical decisions about globally relevant issues, such as sustainability. Unfortunately, implementation of systems thinking approaches in chemistry classrooms currently poses challenges. Exemplar systems thinking materials with a STEM focus are limited, particularly at the tertiary level. Moreover, the science education community has yet to agree upon a systems thinking definition or develop a comprehensive list of systems thinking skills that students should develop. Thus, a current priority for the advancement of systems thinking in chemistry education is the development of resources for instructors and students alike. In the current project, we constructed a tool that provides an operational definition for systems thinking in chemistry education and serves as guide for the design, analysis, and optimization of systems thinking activities. The Characteristics Essential for designing or Modifying Instruction for a Systems Thinking approach (ChEMIST) table identifies five essential characteristics of a systems thinking approach, along with corresponding systems thinking skills through which students can demonstrate their engagement in each essential characteristic. Here, we describe the inspiration and development of the tool. We also provide examples of how the tool might be used to support chemistry teaching and learning from a systems thinking approach. Finally, we present some initial ideas about the relationship between systems thinking and other approaches to chemistry education reform.

Purpose – This paper aims to present a review of co-evolution practice in Host Partner Program of IndobuildTech Expo with system thinking approach that related to the current state of research. Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents a co-evolution model that relevance to the collaboration practice between exhibition organizer and visitors of IndoBuildTech Expo through Host Partner Program. Additionally, linking the co-evolution model in Host Partner Program that occurs with a system thinking construction through casual loop diagrams. The data collection method is a documentation study, by collecting written information, either in the form of research reports, media reports, and other documents related to the topic of writing. Furthermore, with a systems thinking framework, the author will carry out an analysis based on predetermined dimensions referring to the documentation study conducted. Findings – For the exhibition industry to generate lasting value, innovative concepts that take into account their capabilities and prospects are needed. One method is to implement synergy collaborations that leverage crossnetwork efforts to strengthen the exhibition business ecosystem. In this work, the co-evolution implementation process is carried out using the systems thinking methodology. It is the term used to advancements in collaboration between organizer and visitors. Co-evolution could improve the quality of visitors and elevate the perspective, contribution and role of visitors in the exhibition. Research limitations/implications – The concept of co-evolution with a systems thinking approach may not be widely used in the MICE sector at the moment. In order to address the needs of exhibitors and create a sustainable exhibition, it is envisioned that co-evolution with a systems thinking approach would lead to an increase in visitor quality and quantity. Studied co-evolution using a systems thinking approach in the exhibition industry are still in their early phases. The necessity for further co-creation research that more precisely articulates the modalities businesses can employ to progress towards co-creation is supported by this synthesis of earlier studies. Practical Implication – Co-evolution with this system thinking method seeks to increase the 'excellence service' of exhibition organizing activities and fulfill exhibitors' satisfaction for visitor quality and quantity to accomplish long-term IndoBuildTech show activities. R eferring to the strategic actions taken by Debindo-ITE on the system thinking process by identifying causal processes, as a result, the relationship between co-evolution and the systems thinking process approach is intertwined. Originiality/value – Studied co-evolution using a systems thinking approach in the exhibition industry are still in their early phases. The necessity for further co-creation research that more precisely articulates the modalities businesses can employ to progress towards co-creation is supported by this synthesis of earlier studies. This paper

Public health research and interventions are not confined to local communities.As the concept "Think Globally, Act Locally" indicates, a global perspective is always essential.Furthermore, a long-term perspective of the future has become increasingly important as highlighted by "Think Long Term.Act Now" (https://whatwe-owethefuture.com/).The systems thinking approach incorporates both global and long-term future perspectives.This book is an introductory guide to the systems thinking approach in public health.It explains the basics of stock and flow diagrams, causal loop diagrams, and systems archetypes.It also shows applications of the systems thinking approach in system dynamics models, group model building, and evidence-based public health.To acquire the basic skills used in the systems thinking approach, readers are advised to practice building the models in the book using designated software.Once knowledge and skills of the systems thinking approach are acquired, a foundation will be set for more advanced studies, deepening knowledge through specialized books, webpages, and participation in and presentations at academic conferences.The book is structured as follows.Part I introduces the basic concepts of systems thinking and consists of two chapters: "Introduction to Systems Thinking" (Chap. 1) and "Systems Thinking in Public Health" (Chap.2).Part II describes basic principles and skills.In learning systems thinking, a causal loop diagram, a qualitative model, is conventionally introduced first, and a stock and flow diagram, a quantitative model is introduced second.However, a causal loop diagram inherently includes nonlinear relationships of quantitative changes of two variables in a stock and flow diagram, and its understanding is indispensable.Therefore, this book introduces a stock and flow diagram model first.After a stock and flow diagram (Chap.3) and a causal loop diagram (Chap.4) are explained, the skills for building a stock and flow diagram (Chap.5) and a causal loop diagram (Chap.6) are outlined stepwise for beginners and self-learners using the software.Part III focuses on systems archetypes.Systems archetypes represent complex causal relationships among people and organizations, and the modeling of eight systems archetypes is explained in Chap.7 using a causal loop diagram, a behavior over time graph, and a stock and flow diagram.Chapter 8 presents examples of the systems archetypes in public

This article is centered around the key question: how do we address teaching about biology, based on complex systems? In the dynamic landscape of biological sciences, the exploration of life's intricacies demands a holistic and interconnected approach. Complexity science and systems thinking offer a transformative framework for understanding the dynamic and interconnected nature of biological systems. As educators in the field of biology, it is imperative to equip undergraduate students with the tools to navigate and comprehend the ever-growing complexity of living systems. Traditional reductionist views, while valuable in understanding specific components of biological phenomena, often fall short in capturing the intricate interconnections and emergent properties that characterize living systems. In the pursuit of understanding these complexities, undergraduate biology education must transcend traditional reductionistic silos and embrace holistic interdisciplinary approaches such as complexity science and systems thinking. This article delves into the integration of Complex Systems Thinking (CST) in undergraduate biology courses, highlighting its significance, pedagogical implication, and practical strategies for implementation. Furthermore, it describes the key characteristics, and proposes a few pedagogical concepts associated with complexity, emergence, and systems thinking. The primary goal is to provide biology educators with the tools and enough basic information about the ‘features of complexity’, utilized in Big History, so that they can consider why and how such an approach might be applied in the education of both biologists and a scientifically literate citizenry.

Interest within the chemistry education community in incorporating sustainability into chemistry education has converged on a systems thinking approach, and efforts to implement this are ongoing. One challenge to implementation is the different amenability to systems thinking approaches of topics that are important in chemistry at the secondary–tertiary interface. To identify low-hanging fruit, we developed a repertory grid consisting of five poles mapped to elements of systems thinking. Secondary and tertiary educators completed the grid during workshops, to measure the amenability of 12 chemistry topics that are important in both secondary and tertiary chemistry education to teaching through systems thinking approaches. Three of the 12 topics analyzed were considered highly amenable to systems thinking approaches by both secondary and tertiary participants. The level of teaching experience was found to be most significant in determining a participant’s perception of amenability of topics. The relationship of these topics to the curriculum structure at the secondary and tertiary level is discussed.

The fast-paced lifestyle in India today accompanied by rapid globalization and rampant urbanization along with recent the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed the manner in which people lead their lives. The transition from conventional joint families to nuclear families has also become the norm now. All these factors cumulatively are causing several health problems mainly related to mental health issues amongst children and adolescents during this pandemic. The need of the hour is to tackle the issue of mental health amongst children and adolescents through a system thinking approach which takes into account diverse factors that can eventually improve or enhance mental health outcomes. A system thinking approach would consider the role of factors such as food, sports, music, yoga and spirituality in addressing mental health challenges amongst children and adolescents. Studies have been conducted by researchers in the past which indicate that there is a positive correlation between the kind of food that is being consumed, mindful eating, physical activity, physical literacy, music, yoga, mindful meditation, spirituality, which together lead a greater sense of awareness and thereby creates positive emotions by buffering the negative emotions such as anxiety and depression levels. As a public health emergency, the COVID-19 outbreak, there is a dire need to adopt a system thinking approach by not only with schools but also emphasized on parents or caregivers. The government should adopt systems thinking approach asa mandatory part of the curriculum of schools while parents and children as key stakeholders.

This paper proposes Systems Thinking as a methodology to better observe, learn, analyse and construct curriculum and pedagogy. Informed by von Bertalanffy’s (1950) principle of Dynamic Equilibrium (Fliessgleichgewich), Systems Thinking presents a means to consider complex systems as continuously breaking down and rebuilding to adapt and maintain function. In addition, I refer to two root metaphors applied by key systems theorists: (i) Descartes world like a machine (reductionism) and (ii) world like an Ecology (holism) and relate these to a Systems Thinking approach to curriculum construction, pedagogy and learning. I also draw upon the Aristotelian dictum: ‘the whole is greater than its parts’ (gestalt) to illustrate how elements of all systems are interconnected and how the application of Systems Thinking can inform new pedagogical approaches and curriculum design. In explaining how a Systems Thinking approach could apply to curriculum development, I draw on two key theorists who draw their perspectives from organismic biology: Ludwig von Bertalanffy and Fritjof Capra, and compare their concepts with theorists who focus on more organisational and applied perspectives, such as Russell Ackoff and Peter Senge. I link this spectrum of Systems Thinking to curriculum development, by first considering its specific relevance to education through its relationship to applied approaches to learning, such as those proposed by Kurt Fischer and Zheng Yan (1998) and Fischer (2019). I then consider the potential for Systems Thinking to act as an analytical tool, which can be applied to global/national educational policy and practice. By looking at critiques of the reductionist Global Education Reform Movement (GERM) as described by Sahlberg (2012), I consider the ways in which taking a Systems Thinking lens can shift the balance in curriculum design more towards Capra’s proposal for a deeper ecology in learning. Finally, I examine the case of the Australian Curriculum and outline how Systems Thinking provides an innovative methodology to support curriculum development of relevance to today’s context. In considering effective historic and emerging initiatives, I propose future approaches where Systems Thinking can be a co-creation tool for learners throughout the education system that is sensitive to student self-efficacy, personalised and independent learning. This is imperative if we are going to prepare students for a future world that cannot be conceived, predicted nor imagined.

The pluralistic and often competing goals of myriad constituents, the changing demographics of students, the uncertainty of funding, and the growing demands for accountability from stakeholders have increased the complexity of systems which community college leaders must manage. Emerging from the recent literature on community colleges is a call for new models of leadership in the context of leading in an increasingly uncertain and complex environment. Systems thinking offers a means to help leaders respond to these growing organizational complexities and move leadership from a traditional bureaucratic model to a more adaptive model better suited for today's dynamic community colleges. Despite a robust body of literature on systems thinking in myriad fields, there is comparatively scant evidence of systems thinking's application to organizational management or leadership per se in higher education and even less in community colleges. Hence, a systematic review of literature on systems thinking and complexity theory and their application in higher education was bolstered with evidence from healthcare. Findings reveal three reoccurring ways in which leaders apply systems thinking processes for improving organizational performance. A conceptual model for systems thinking leadership is proposed in which the three processes, characterized as discovery , framing , and action , can be enacted either individually or sequentially for enhancing organizational performance. The model draws upon boundary critique, critical systems thinking, systemic intervention, total systems intervention, systems dynamics, soft systems methodology, complexity theory and complex adaptive systems, yet uses language more readily identifiable and accessible to community college practitioners to encourage the use of these systemic practices. Systems Thinking Leadership, as proposed in this paper, provides a framework for community college leaders-presidents, chief academic officers, deans, department chairs, and faculty-to view their organization through a systems lens, and to enact and engage the adaptive and participatory practices of discovery, framing, and action for improving organizational performance.

Healthcare is a complex system that involves high risk to patients, clinicians, manufacturers, and other stakeholders. Clinicians process inordinate amounts of data and synthesize these inputs to make critical decisions that affect patient health and safety. The unprecedented advancement in medical technology during the past half-century has contributed substantially to healthcare’s expanding complexity.1 Consequently, clinicians have more knowledge to synthesize, tasks to perform, and processes to manage than ever before.1 The delivery of care often is overly complex and unstandardized, thereby reducing rather than increasing safety. For example, new devices are being implemented in medical practice at an astounding pace, requiring clinicians to continuously expand their breadth of knowledge and expertise. Consequently, a main cause of adverse events is misuse of medical devices. Variation in medical devices among hospitals (and within a given hospital) is a key cause of these adverse events. Design improvements and standardization of equipment have been suggested as ways to reduce errors. Although new technologies usually are advantageous for the patient, health professionals often encounter difficulties in using devices. Furthermore, current healthcare systems are not designed to support the care of complex patients, such as populations with chronic conditions requiring care management across multiple providers and services. In 2005, a joint report from the National Academy of Engineering and Institute of Medicine advocated the extensive application of systems thinking to improve the delivery of healthcare.2 Systems thinking centers on the dynamic interaction, synchronization, and integration of people, processes, and technology.3 By gaining an understanding of the dynamics among people, processes, and technology, systems thinking aids in recognizing how to intervene (e.g., focusing on changes to device design, clinician training, and/or clinical practice) in the system successfully. Moreover, systems thinking helps identify the critical relationships and connections often missed or undervalued that are pivotal to a successful implementation effort. If the high-risk healthcare industry focuses on an enhanced application of systems-thinking approaches, it will benefit from opportunities to reform the care delivery system by reducing unnecessary complexities and unexplained practice variations. This article describes five ways in which systems thinking can be incorporated into healthcare organizations. Rather than providing an exhaustive list of information, this report is meant to serve as a starting point for exploring how to integrate systems thinking.

This article describes a new concept of health, originally developed and published in 2014. This model offers a new understanding of health, disease and healing that may be very useful for patient care. In fact, the Meikirch model leads to a new comprehension of health as a complex adaptive system. Systems thinking and complex adaptive systems share a number of components, namely: emergence, self-organization, and hierarchies of interacting systems. Systems thinking, especially with simulation models, facilitates understanding of health as a complex phenomenon. Therefore, the simulation model is becoming an excellent translator of complex problems in easily understandable results. Systemic thinking is a process that can influence cause and effect and prompts solutions to multifaceted tribulations. In conclusion, this paper describes the principles of complementarity and of differences between scientific approaches for systemic thinking and traditional thinking and suggests that it is time for research approaches that fosters a non-mechanistic thinking.

Learning process innovation with a system thinking approach can improve the quality of learning through analysis of the relationship between learning problem variables and problem-solving. The purpose of this study to implement a system thinking approach to improving creative thinking, and problem-solving skills by thinking in a systemic way that can be developed in the learning process. Community Service uses a descriptive method with a qualitative approach. Data collection techniques are carried out by observing and documenting students in the learning process. System thinking in the learning process provides an overview of the interrelationships of problems in learning so that it can be used as a basis for developing problem-solving strategies through learning innovation. Learning Innovation with a System Thinking approach through interactive and student-centered learning can improve creative thinking skills, and problem-solving abilities to identify and find solutions to problems in the learning process.

Foetal complications due to abnormal Alpha-Fetoprotein (AFP) levels are becoming a serious matter. The risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs) is substantially greater in the raised maternal serum-alpha fetoprotein (MS-AFP) group than in the normal MS-AFP groups. The top three APOs in terms of occurrence rate in the increased MS-AFP group were structural foetal abnormalities, spontaneous abortion, and premature delivery. Low levels of AFP in the maternal may indicate a risk of Down syndrome. This is a critical matter that needs to be investigated and dealt with seriously, based on the systems thinking approach. This research aims to investigate screening methods on AFP foetal based on system thinking approach. The main purpose of the study is to provide an analytical and integrated approach to deal with foetal complications due to AFP level. This integrated approach comprises various analytical aspects, including conceptual framework, data analysis, evaluation of the screening methods. How systems thinking can contribute to improve all these aspects of foetal complications will be investigated. The methodology will enable to conduct a detailed explanation to the major problems of AFP in the form of a causal loop diagram based on the holistic view of the systems thinking approach. It is expected that the application of a systems approach could provide an effective method of analysis for understanding and managing the foetal abnormalities by considering all aspects in a holistic manner and clearer methods of intervention to reduce the cases.

Systems Thinking is increasingly applied to address complex societal and public health issues in Aotearoa, New Zealand and has been proposed as a good fit with traditional wisdom and Mātauranga Māori (Indigenous knowledge) from Aotearoa, New Zealand. In this article, we delve into the theoretical underpinnings of Systems Thinking approaches used in Community-Based System Dynamics research and find parallels with Indigenous narratives and knowledge. The synergy created by combining these two knowledge systems and practices is proposed as an effective way to approach public health issues that emerge from complex adaptive systems, particularly in communities with large numbers of Indigenous peoples. Examples are given from an initiative to engage community to improve food security and nutrition in regional Aotearoa, New Zealand.

Towards a Critical Systems Thinking Approach during IT Adoption in Organisations