Timothy Johnson is all about accomplishment.
His motto is ” Carpe Factum” which is Latin for ” Seize the Accomplishment”. Having read his other books, I was excited to get my copy of SWAT (Systems Working All Together). Systems thinking has been a big part of my life for a long time and is embedded in much of how I manage projects and people. All the same, it’s great to “sharpen the saw” and there are some great key lessons I took away from the book.
Let me tell you a little about it.
A page turner
This is a great read. The format is a story or “business fable” which I enjoy very much. There is a good balance between character development for the sake of the story and the real meat of the systems thinking message is being conveyed.
The story juxtaposes an office environment most of us are familiar with and the world of police S.W.A.T. teams. Very interesting stuff, and I learned a lot about the work these women and men do that I didn’t know before. There are a few tense points with lots of action and suspense; very compelling. The villain was creepy and just a little too familiar. 
S.W.A.T Flyers
Throughout the book, the main character keeps a notebook where he jots down key systems thinking ideas as he is learning from the situations and people around him. These are great for reinforcing the key points because they are stated in universal terms. You could take these and write them on post-it notes to hang in your office or put them on a mind map for reference…. hey, I just might do that!
I enjoyed the illustrations of email from the characters to each other in the book too, and the diagrams that show what the team came up with. These elements really help bring the story to life.
Systems thinking in practice
The appendix has some great resources for you. Don’t worry too much about taking notes while reading through the book. Just immerse yourself in the story. Afterwards, you can use the appendix and S.W.A.T Flyers as a means of reference when you are implementing systems thinking concepts yourself.
Why you should care
Going from the fly-by-the-seat-of-my-pants approach to systems thinking was huge for me many years ago. It was really the discovery of formal project management as a discipline that got me thinking this way. I started to see patterns of behavior in processes and people that I had simply overlooked before. It dramatically improved my ability to:
- Identify core causes of problems and tackle them
- Consider the throughput of a system as a whole and not just individual parts (thank you Goldratt)
- Leverage the power of feedback for continuous improvement
There were a few systems thinking concepts and approaches that really resonated with me from SWAT. Here’s one I’ll share with you.
“Consistent where critical; variable where valued.” This is a line from the book stressing the importance of identifying those key parts of a process that can not be compromised. The wording is a little quirky on the second part, but variable where valued means that within any system there will be places where wiggle room is required so the actors can respond to specific situations.
Part of this is a reminder to design your processes for the majority of situations. Don’t throw in extra process and slow the whole system down just to catch a few exceptions that come through now and then. Instead, empower the people in your system to react as necessary when deviations occur. This is what systems thinking does for you as opposed to ad hoc process changes.
My Review: 2 Thumbs Up! Go buy your copy now!
P.S. Dear reader, please share your own experiences with systems thinking. How is it important to you?
No related posts.
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
Hi Josh – thanks for the great review. Glad you enjoyed the book. It was a fun project to undertake, and I agree that project managers need to master the art of systems thinking – it’s critical for our success. Carpe Factum!
You bet Timothy, great job.
Systems thinking is the difference between “accidental” project management and disciplined project management.
Hi Josh – thanks for the great review. Glad you enjoyed the book. It was a fun project to undertake, and I agree that project managers need to master the art of systems thinking – it’s critical for our success. Carpe Factum!
You bet Timothy, great job.
Systems thinking is the difference between “accidental” project management and disciplined project management.
Josh,
Professor Bernard drilled systems thinking into our heads with his 3s philosophy. Systems thinking is a primary habit for me as well. You mentioned that systems should try to capture a majority of situations. I believe in a 80% solution. PMs will have to execute with limited information. This is especially true in the commercial sector where first mover advantages may require a 70% solution. If PMs purposefully design systems that are total solution, the project will ignominiously end in failure.
Thanks for the review. I will have to add this book to my bucket list.
Travis
Thanks for chiming in Travis!
I think of recurring processes in a project in particular.
Take change control for instance. The majority of inputs are going to flow through a well designed process with little unnecessary friction; but if you throw extra process in to handle the 10%-20% of cases where something “special” is happening, you’ve just compromised the throughput of the whole system.
Or what about expense and travel approval and reporting? If there’s a bunch of unnecessary rubber-stamping going on with multiple levels of approval (just in case there are a few trips that should be rejected) how much time and money is going to waste? My bet is probably more than what you saved on those “unnecessary” trips, especially since the trips probably still added some level of value to the organization.
Josh,
One big process that I am trying to consider is our work authorization system. I try like mad to use the RLN to drive my work authorization system, but there are always those exceptions. The little 1/2 hour here or there exception. It is cheaper to talk to the variances than it is to try to run this change through the system. End result is that the employee receives an authorization form in the event of an audit.
Great post!
Josh,
Another good book on Systems Engineering applicable to software and software intensive systems is “System Engineering: Coping with Complexity,” Steven, Brook, Jackson, and Arnold, Prentice Hall.
Josh,
Professor Bernard drilled systems thinking into our heads with his 3s philosophy. Systems thinking is a primary habit for me as well. You mentioned that systems should try to capture a majority of situations. I believe in a 80% solution. PMs will have to execute with limited information. This is especially true in the commercial sector where first mover advantages may require a 70% solution. If PMs purposefully design systems that are total solution, the project will ignominiously end in failure.
Thanks for the review. I will have to add this book to my bucket list.
Travis
Thanks for chiming in Travis!
I think of recurring processes in a project in particular.
Take change control for instance. The majority of inputs are going to flow through a well designed process with little unnecessary friction; but if you throw extra process in to handle the 10%-20% of cases where something “special” is happening, you’ve just compromised the throughput of the whole system.
Or what about expense and travel approval and reporting? If there’s a bunch of unnecessary rubber-stamping going on with multiple levels of approval (just in case there are a few trips that should be rejected) how much time and money is going to waste? My bet is probably more than what you saved on those “unnecessary” trips, especially since the trips probably still added some level of value to the organization.
Josh,
One big process that I am trying to consider is our work authorization system. I try like mad to use the RLN to drive my work authorization system, but there are always those exceptions. The little 1/2 hour here or there exception. It is cheaper to talk to the variances than it is to try to run this change through the system. End result is that the employee receives an authorization form in the event of an audit.
Great post!
Josh,
Another good book on Systems Engineering applicable to software and software intensive systems is “System Engineering: Coping with Complexity,” Steven, Brook, Jackson, and Arnold, Prentice Hall.
Systems Thinking goes back to the mid-1950s and Jay Forrester who is now Professor Emeritus at MIT. In the 1960s and 1970s there were a number of computer-based modeling tools developed: STELLA, iThink, and DYNAMO among them.
Peter Senge popularized the concepts around 1990 in his book “The Fifth Discipline” which is the origin of the concept of the “learning organization.” The current guru in the field is John Sterman, also at MIT, and just coincidentally, a neighbor of mine. As well, there is a Systems Dynamics Society which runs annual conferences.
A company called Pugh Roberts developed a detailed ST model of a project in, I think, the late 1970s. Their model was used by a defense contractor to win a major claim against the US Navy regarding delays caused by change orders.
Goldratt and TOC really address just the tip of the iceberg: bottlenecks that slow the flow of “stuff.” I find time-delay feedback loops far more interesting and useful.
Sterman’s book explains how auto-leasing is one of the primary causes of the automotive industries financial woes. He also includes an analysis of the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. An ST model was used to make major changes to intervention approaches that probably saved a few million lives.
On a smaller scale, I have a model that essentially provides a mathematical proof for Brooks’s Law.
Looking forward to reading this book.
Duncan
William R. Duncan, Project Management Partners
Director of Certification for asapm
Primary author of the original version of “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge”
Thanks Bill! For the uninitiated especially I’m going to start recommending SWAT as a great start into systems thinking.
I’ve read Senge but not Sterman. “The Fifth Discipline” and “Business Dynamics” are certainly books everyone should check out who is interested in systems thinking.
Systems Thinking goes back to the mid-1950s and Jay Forrester who is now Professor Emeritus at MIT. In the 1960s and 1970s there were a number of computer-based modeling tools developed: STELLA, iThink, and DYNAMO among them.
Peter Senge popularized the concepts around 1990 in his book “The Fifth Discipline” which is the origin of the concept of the “learning organization.” The current guru in the field is John Sterman, also at MIT, and just coincidentally, a neighbor of mine. As well, there is a Systems Dynamics Society which runs annual conferences.
A company called Pugh Roberts developed a detailed ST model of a project in, I think, the late 1970s. Their model was used by a defense contractor to win a major claim against the US Navy regarding delays caused by change orders.
Goldratt and TOC really address just the tip of the iceberg: bottlenecks that slow the flow of “stuff.” I find time-delay feedback loops far more interesting and useful.
Sterman’s book explains how auto-leasing is one of the primary causes of the automotive industries financial woes. He also includes an analysis of the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. An ST model was used to make major changes to intervention approaches that probably saved a few million lives.
On a smaller scale, I have a model that essentially provides a mathematical proof for Brooks’s Law.
Looking forward to reading this book.
Duncan
William R. Duncan, Project Management Partners
Director of Certification for asapm
Primary author of the original version of “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge”
Thanks Bill! For the uninitiated especially I’m going to start recommending SWAT as a great start into systems thinking.
I’ve read Senge but not Sterman. “The Fifth Discipline”
and “Business Dynamics”
are certainly books everyone should check out who is interested in systems thinking.
For those looking for the connections between SE and PM, Grady has “written the Bible(s)”
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_1?_encoding=UTF8&sort=relevancerank&search-alias=books&field-author=Jeffrey%20Grady
The DoD’s DOD5000.02 Integrated Master Plan / Integrated Master Schedule paradigm is owned by the Systems Engineers, and fleshed out by the Program Controls folks.
Glen B. Alleman
VP, Program Planning and Controls
Aerospace and Defense Business Sector
For those looking for the connections between SE and PM, Grady has “written the Bible(s)”
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_1?_encoding=UTF8&sort=relevancerank&search-alias=books&field-author=Jeffrey%20Grady
The DoD’s DOD5000.02 Integrated Master Plan / Integrated Master Schedule paradigm is owned by the Systems Engineers, and fleshed out by the Program Controls folks.
Glen B. Alleman
VP, Program Planning and Controls
Aerospace and Defense Business Sector
Travis,
There are at least three notions going on in parallel here.
“Systems Thinking,” is a generic term covering many topics
“System Dynamics” is a paradigm around modeling systems and their dynamic bahaviours.
“Systems Engineering” is a profession, based on principles and practices of “engineering systems.” http://www.incose.org is the home of this profession.
Systems Dynamics has been conjectured by some to be the next big thing in Project management.
Systems Engineering is the starting point in our aerospace and defense domain of the Integrated Master Plan (IMP) that drives the Integrated Master Schedule, both mandated by DOD 5000.02 procurement.
So let’s be careful not to mix up these words and the notions behind them – they may be interesting in the class room, but are not interchangeable in practice.
Glen B. Alleman
VP, Program Planning and Controls
Aerospace and Defense Business Sector
Travis,
There are at least three notions going on in parallel here.
“Systems Thinking,” is a generic term covering many topics
“System Dynamics” is a paradigm around modeling systems and their dynamic bahaviours.
“Systems Engineering” is a profession, based on principles and practices of “engineering systems.” http://www.incose.org is the home of this profession.
Systems Dynamics has been conjectured by some to be the next big thing in Project management.
Systems Engineering is the starting point in our aerospace and defense domain of the Integrated Master Plan (IMP) that drives the Integrated Master Schedule, both mandated by DOD 5000.02 procurement.
So let’s be careful not to mix up these words and the notions behind them – they may be interesting in the class room, but are not interchangeable in practice.
Glen B. Alleman
VP, Program Planning and Controls
Aerospace and Defense Business Sector
{ 5 trackbacks }