Satir workshops

Both diagramming of effects and measurement modeling are different from causal models in that they do not require temporal asymmetry between cause and effect. Systems thinking can be used for risk management of oppositions and conflicting operations. Alternatively, and Open Space event can provide a grounded plan where stakeholders have participated in creating the plan, which increases likelihood of follow-through on plans.

When using systems thinking for oppositions, we can use the first three steps as described in systems thinking to make an organizational map. With the list of benefits and dangers per intervention possibility, a quick focus and determination becomes possible.

The created map can help finding existing stakeholder agreements, creating more explicit agreements, testing agreements, re-doing agreements if required, implementing changes, support diagramming of effects to discover more of what's happening in the landscape, and move that visionary landscape into dreaming for doing some scenario planning forward to get to a healthy “anticipating state”, after which we can move forward in more agile and nimble ways.

What if its not as simple as managing risks of an opposition?
For example, what if we experience tuggings like “I/we must find ways to manage risk in daily operations"?

To properly monitor operational risk, we consider the entire scope of the community activity, including every transaction. Intent of this strategy is to minimize the required amount of energy spent and maximize impact.

In these instances, we can adapt the systems thinking choreography easily to fit by:

1. Making a more detailed Weinberg organizational chart with more dimensions and developing representative data for each operational risk by conceptualising and selecting attributes for measuring actual and goal-states.
2. In this case we require more detailed manipulation and composition of measured attributes to create measurement models with Mathematica or MatLab. With ratio scaling we can synthesize measured attributes in target attributes.
3. We gather data as described before and with values available for the measured attributes, the measurement model can be used to compute the values of the target measurable attribute(s) to arrive at a description of the actual state.
4. Cognitive map making: Identify potential interventions by selecting abstract attributes that are the focus of measurement models as target attributes for effects modelling. Group the attributes and specify hypotheses expressing values of attributes as functions of each other, and more. Visualize dynamics, for example with MatLab or Mathematica.
5. Facilitation: Bring the stakeholders up to a level of operational safety and secure product development. The actual words are not important. For each side establish the need for the other's attention:
   • For operational safety: "In a world that is changing, your firm is physically changing, and you need to develop operational risk management if you are to survive your firm."
   • For product development: "How long will you continue to develop if you don't manage your operational risks properly?"
6. Mapping from reality to benefit space with stakeholders for agreement.

   Facilitation: Use each side to motivate the need for an integrated ability to respond: now that you know how to monitor operational risks you can minimize effort and more safely maximize your impact.

7. Creating an explicit agreement in a signing ritual and celebrate this success, and the rest of course!