Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-dtkg6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-02T23:18:42.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A NEW RESEARCH PROTOCOL FOR USING SYSTEM MAPS IN SYSTEMIC DESIGN RESEARCH

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Stine Moons ,
Esther Noëth ,
Els Du Bois  and
Alexis Jacoby
Stine Moons*
Affiliation:
Universiteit Antwerpen
Esther Noëth
Affiliation:
Universiteit Antwerpen
Els Du Bois
Affiliation:
Universiteit Antwerpen
Alexis Jacoby
Affiliation:
Universiteit Antwerpen
*
Moons, Stine, Universiteit Antwerpen, Belgium, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

System maps are established tools in design practice and education as well as non-design research, both as a process and an outcome of systemic analysis and synthesis. Applying causal loop diagrams (CLD's) in (systemic) design research could be of great value to tackle the growing societal complexity. At this moment there is, however, no clear research protocol to include the rich data necessary for systemic research and ensure a scientifically valid system map in the context of design research. In this paper, we propose a protocol using CLD's as a research method and outcome in design-inclusive research. The protocol synthesises rich data from qualitative research in a way that the representation yields higher validity compared to the regular approach to systems mapping, using a process of reflection and iteration on boundary setting. An iterative process of qualitative research methods with lean validation methods was used to come to a conceptual proposal. The protocol can support systemic design researchers and practitioners to include a scientifically grounded CLD in the explorative research actions phase, thus bridging the research towards a phase of creative design actions.

Keywords

Design practiceResearch methodologies and methodsComplexitySystemic designCausal loop diagrams
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 343 - 352
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Allender, S., Owen, B., Kuhlberg, J., Lowe, J., Nagorcka-Smith, P., Whelan, J., and Bell, C. (2015), “A community based systems diagram of obesity causes”, PLoS ONE, Vol. 10 No. 7, pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0129683CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amrina, U., Hidayatno, A., and Zagloel, T. Y. M. (2021), “Mapping challenges in developing sustainable small and medium industries: Integrating lean and green principles”, Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 311–328. https://doi.org/10.3926/jiem.3041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banathy, B. (1996), Designing Social Systems in a Changing World, Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9981-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, W. (2002), The System Archetypes, William Braun.Google Scholar
Cassidy, R., Tomoaia-Cotisel, A., Semwanga, A. R., Binyaruka, P., Chalabi, Z., Blanchet, K., Singh, N. S., Maiba, J., and Borghi, J. (2021), “Understanding the maternal and child health system response to payment for performance in Tanzania using a causal loop diagram approach”, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 285 No. 114277, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114277CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuppen, E., Ejderyan, O., Pesch, U., Spruit, S., van de Grift, E., Correljé, A., and Taebi, B. (2020), “When controversies cascade: Analysing the dynamics of public engagement and conflict in the Netherlands and Switzerland through ‘controversy spillover’”, Energy Research and Social Science, Vol. 68 No. 1015932, pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Council, Design (2021), Beyond Net Zero: A Systemic Design Approach, Design Council, London.Google Scholar
Gillen, E. M., Hassmiller Lich, K., Yeatts, K. B., Hernandez, M. L., Smith, T. W., and Lewis, M. A. (2014), “Social Ecology of Asthma: Engaging Stakeholders in Integrating Health Behavior Theories and Practice-Based Evidence Through Systems Mapping”, Health Education and Behavior, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198113486804CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gudlaugsson, B., Ghanem, D. A., Dawood, H., Pillai, G., and Short, M. (2022), “A Qualitative Based Causal-Loop Diagram for Understanding Policy Design Challenges for a Sustainable Transition Pathway: The Case of Tees Valley Region, UK”, Sustainability, Vol. 14 No. 8, pp. 1–49. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, H., and Cowley, S. (2004), “Developing a grounded theory approach: A comparison of Glaser and Strauss”, International Journal of Nursing Studies, Vol.41 No. 2, pp. 141–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7489(03)00113-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horváth, I. (2008), “Differences between ‘research in design context’ and ‘design inclusive research’ in the domain of industrial design engineering”, Journal of Design Research, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1504/JDR.2008.018777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inam, A., Adamowski, J., Halbe, J., and Prasher, S. (2015), “Using causal loop diagrams for the initialization of stakeholder engagement in soil salinity management in agricultural watersheds in developing countries: A case study in the Rechna Doab watershed, Pakistan”, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 152, p.251–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.01.052CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, P., Bowes, J. (2012), “Toward the Integration of Visual Languages for Systemic Design” [presentation], OCAD University. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/11697695/Toward_the_Integration_of_Visual_Languages_for_Systemic_DesigD_ISSS_2012 (Accessed 7th December 2022).Google Scholar
Jones, P. and Van Ael, K. (2022), Design Journeys through Complex Systems: Practice Tools for Systemic Design, Bis Publishers, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Kauffman, D. L., (1980), Systems One: An Introduction to Systems Thinking, Future Systems Incorporated, St.Paul.Google Scholar
Meadows, D. H., (2008), Thinking in Systems, Sustainability Institute, London.Google Scholar
Midgley, G., Munlo, I., and Brown, M. (1998), “The Theory and Practice of Boundary Critique: Developing Housing Services for Older People”, The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 49 No. 5, pp. 467–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/3009885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mies, A., and Gold, S. (2021), “Mapping the social dimension of the circular economy”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 321 No. 128960, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, R., and Jones, P. (2020), “Leverage analysis: A method for locating points of influence in systemic design decisions”, FormAkademisk, Vol. 13 No. 2 Art. 3, pp. 1–25. https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.3384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niks, I. M. W., Veldhuis, G. A., van Zwieten, M. H. J., Sluijs, T., Wiezer, N. M., and Wortelboer, H. M. (2022), “Individual Workplace Well-Being Captured into a Literature- and Stakeholders-Based Causal Loop Diagram”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 19 No. 8925, pp. 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19158925CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noel, L.-A., and Paiva, M. (2021), “Learning to Recognize Exclusion”, Journal of Usability Studies, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 63–72.Google Scholar
Paina, L., Bennett, S., Ssengooba, F., and Peters, D. H. (2014), “Advancing the application of systems thinking in health: exploring dual practice and its management in Kampala, Uganda”, Health Research Policy and Systems, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp.1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4505-12-41CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reich, Y. (2017), “The principle of reflexive practice”, Design Science, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, C. E., Lupton, R. C., and Allwood, J. M. (2021), “Re-framing the threat of global warming: an empirical causal loop diagram of climate change, food insecurity and societal collapse”, Climatic Change, Vol. 163, No. 49, pp. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-02957-wGoogle Scholar
Sevaldson, B. (2022) SOD-related courses. Available at: https://systemsorienteddesign.net/ category/sod-related-courses/ (Accessed 22nd November 2022).Google Scholar
Sahin, O., Salim, H., Suprun, E., Richards, R., Macaskill, S., Heilgeist, S., Rutherford, S., Stewart, R. A., and Beal, C. D. (2020), “Developing a preliminary causal loop diagram for understanding the wicked complexity of the COVID-19 pandemic”, Systems, Vol. 8 No. 20, pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems8020020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvia, G., Pluchinotta, I., Tsoulou, I., Moore, G., and Zimmermann, N. (2022), “Understanding Urban Green Space Usage through Systems Thinking: A Case Study in Thamesmead, London”, Sustainability, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shoar, S., and Payan, S. (2022), “A qualitative system dynamics approach to modeling the causes and effects of design deficiencies in construction projects”, Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-02-2021-0025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoyko, P. (2022), Systemviz. Available at: http://systemviz.com/ (Accessed 22nd November 2022)Google Scholar
Lab, Strategic Innovation (2022) Synthesis Maps – Gigamaps. Available at: https://slab.ocadu.ca/project/synthesis-maps-gigamaps (Accessed 22nd November 2022).Google Scholar
Sutanto, J., Kankanhalli, A., Tay, J., Raman, K. S., and Tan, B. C. Y. (2008), “Change management in interorganizational systems for the public”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 133–176. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222250304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, W. (1998), “Systems thinking as if people mattered: critical systems thinking for citizens and managers”, Lincoln School of Management Working Papers Series, No. 23, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
Ulrich, W., and Reynolds, M. (2020), “Ch. 6. Critical Systems Heuristics: The Idea and Practice of Boundary Critique”, In: Reynolds, M., and Holwell, S. (2020), Systems Approaches to Making Change: A Practical Guide, Springer, London, pp. 255–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7472-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, K., St. Arnold, G., and Crea, T. M. (2021), “Using a community-based system dynamics approach for understanding inclusion and wellbeing: a case study of special needs education in an eastern African refugee camp”, Conflict and Health, Vol. 15 No. 58., pp.1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13031-021-00390-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, K., Zimmermann, N., Warwick, E., Pineo, H., Ucci, M., and Davies, M. (2022), “Dynamics of short-term and long-term decision-making in English housing associations: A study of using systems thinking to inform policy design”, EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Vol. 10 No. 100017, pp. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejdp.2022.100017CrossRefGoogle Scholar