System 3 requirements: It is a whole which can not be divided into independent parts 1. 2. How parts affect each other depends on at least one other (no independent parts) 3. If you group them in subsystems, these subsystem can affect the whole and none h System is a product of the interactions of the parts. Not of the sum of the parts.

As a manager you cannot effectively manage the parts (the people who work in those fields do that better). You need to manage the interactions.

Putting the best parts together doesn't get you the best whole. Design the whole first, then improve it. If you improve a part, only if it improves the whole.

When you get rid of what you don't want, you do not necessarily get what you do want. You may even get something worse. Examples: Alcohol: Prohibition and organised crime. War on Drugs: more addiction.

Focus on what you want.

Reality consists of a set of problems. If you break them down and try^. How to deal with reality and then

identifying them and separating them and treating them separately but when you take reality break it into problems and treat each problem separately you'll have taken the reality apart you lose all of its essential properties of course it's a system and the problems themselves lose their essential properties because you've taken them out of the system of which they part we didn't know this until the 1950s and suddenly were confronted with a problem we did not know how to solve at that time how do you deal with the reality without taking it apart we had to invent a method is called reference projecting it's a very interesting method first let me tell you what it is it won't make any sense and I'll have to illustrate it for you first the English a mess now means a system of problems how do you formulate a mess without taking it apart into the problems that it's made up of by finding out the future that you are now in now what the world does that mean well it means this you start by making two assumptions that you know are false the first assumption is that the organization that you're a part of it's not going to do anything differently in the future then it's doing right now it's just going to continue doing what it's doing now it's current planes as current policies will be extended indefinitely into the future that's clearly false because you would be even thinking about it if that were true the second false assumption is you assume the future will change but only in ways you expect it to and that's clearly false now if you make those two assumptions and project the future of the organization every organization will destroy itself under those two assumptions what you've assumed a non adaptive organization in a changing environment even though you expect the changes doesn't make any difference if you don't adapt to change it will eventually destroy yourself that's what happened to the dinosaur but what you don't know is how and that projection reveals the inherent weakness or self-destructive tendency in the current organization and it's normally so subtle and obscure that I don't know of any other way of seeing