Tools/Tecniques to nudge people fill in blanks

[Tarek Abdel-Hamid]

Looking for ideas about tools/techniques that have been found effective in helping (nudging) a person or a group who is starting to put a model together, to think about (see) "distant" (non-salient) pieces (either variables or links) that they might otherwise miss.

[James Thompson]

If the group is locked onto a particular loop or variable, nudging them to "think distant" can be frustrating for the participants and facilitators. One means I have used asks the participants to disaggregate a "constant". The constant is made into a stock and we explore what causes it to change. If the facilitator suspects a particular constant may lead the group to include more "distant" portions of the system of a problem, selecting another variable to disaggregate that is likely to connect to the first will create new loops to explore.

This approach can lead to some pretty elaborate "systems" with all sorts of thinking errors, e.g. different time scales. So it is probably a good idea to say in advance that the goal is to brainstorm or play, and the later work will distil their conceptualisation into a useful thinking tool.

[Michael Fletcher]

One simple technique to start to get people to think divergently about their problem is called the "Impact Wheel." The traditional impact wheel approach is similar in structured brainstorming in many respects, and its certainly less intimidating than Causal Loops can be for some people. Again the traditional method simply diagrams out direct effects of decisions or actions everyone expects. Then the group is asked to come of the 2nd order effects, and cross-effects and then 3rd order effect etc. until the problem is reasonably explored or diminishing returns kick in.

In most of the discussions of the technique there is no specific discussion of delayed effects, which can be added, and are put on the second rung of effects and further out if necessary. I have added delayed effects to the traditional method when I have used it; there were no audible cries of pain from the audience.

An additional divergent technique is the Hexagon technique, which I'm familiar with but have not used. Both techniques have some web pages devoted to discussing them that are easily found.

[Jean-Jacques Lauble]

There are three words that I found important in this phrase. Starting, distant and miss.

I believe that it is illusionary to put everything that affects reality especially at the beginning of the modeling effort, whether salient or distant or important or not. I even believe that one can at a first stage and even when a model is ‘finished’ not include important aspects of reality, the objective of modeling being usefulness.

My priority is always understandability before completion. Some people may think differently. A model is never complete and it is better to realize it as soon as possible. If something is missing it may always be found later on and there is always something missing. It is too difficult to decide whether something is salient or not, one of the objective of modeling being to discover it later on, as one works on the model. Putting too much pressure on people to find what is important or not is counterproductive to my opinion and I adhere to the opinion of Jim if I have well understood what he means. I think that one must be free to include anything one wants in a model, the choice depending on the client.

Otherwise the client will feel trapped in an overall determinist system where his feeling of freedom will be restricted especially in a group where the notion of importance may be highly variable. Putting too much element in a model, restricts mind’s openness especially at the beginning of a model.

Of course as Jim said, if the group feels locked somewhere, thinking about missing links may be important, but it must be done with care, otherwise the model becomes very quickly difficult to manage.

Jean-Jacques Laublé