507
D-3430
System Dynamics:
A Possible Artifact for The Systems Age*
by
Peter M. Senge
Assistant Professor
Sloan School of Management
Massachusettes Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
March 1983
For the 1983 International System Dynamics Conference
July 27-30, Pine Manor College, Chestnut Hill, Boston, MA.
* The author would like to thank his colleague Charles Kiefer
for his invaluable contribution in developing many of the ideas
described in this paper.
D-3430
System Dynamics: A Possible Artifact for the Systems Age
The purpose of this paper is to expand our thinking
about the possible role system dynamics may play in the evolution
of western thought and society. While such a theme may seem
presumptuous when applied to a tool known to only a small
fraction of people at present, it is my intention to give it some
creditability by showing that western society may already be in
the midst of evolving fundamental assumptions, beliefs, and
perceptions more consistent with a systemic world view. Pulled
by this undercurrent, tools like system dynamics can focus the
forces of change and bring them to bear more directly on pressing
societal problems.
508
D-3430
Background: Observations of A Quiet Revolution
Pitirim Sorokin, founder of the Sociology Department at
Harvard University, predicted over 40 years ago that western
materialistic society would eventually stagnate, as people lost
their fundamental desire for increasing standards of material
well being. Sorokin predicted that the turmoil brought about by
this stagnation might eventually lead western society to
reemerge as an “integrated culture," a society oriented more
toward a balance of material and spiritual values [Sorokin 1943].
In a recently published a book, Daniel Yankelovich
argues that profound shifts in basic cultural values and
attitudes are evident in public opinion surveys over the past 20
years (Yankelovich 1982). He interprets his survey results as
showing a fundamental grass-roots shift toward a more "sacred"
world view:
I use the term sacred here in opposition
to the merely instrumental. The
distinction is important. We adopt an
instrumental philosophy whenever we ask
about something: what is it good for?
From that perspective a tree is good for
lumber, or for giving shade, or for en-
hancing the appearance of the landscape.
A forest no one harvests or sees is not
good for anything....People and objects
are sacred in the sociological sense when
they are valued for themselves, apart
from their instrumental use [Yankelovich
1981, p. 85].
Yankelovich points out that instrumentalism as a personal outlook
is essential to a materialistic society. He believes that survey
509
D-3430
results clearly show that it is waning, paving the way for "a new
social ethic":
There are now scraps and shreds of evi-
dence that American culture is evolving a
new ethic of commitment. The word “com-
mitment" shifts the axis away from the
self...toward connectedness [underlining
mine] with the world. in the interviews
conducted, people often express a longing
for connectedness [Yankelovich 1981, p.
85].
Similar themes have been articulated by many keen
observers of western culture, from Lewis Mumford to Teilhard de
Chardin, Recently, Marilyn Ferguson has added a new dimension to
the discussion by showing the importance of new perceptions
emerging from science. In her recent book, The Aquarian
Conspiracy, Ferguson points to modern. physics, brain research,
systems theory, biology, and chemistry as sources of new views of
reality:
Our discoveries about the startling
nature of reality are a major force for
change, undermining common sense ideas
and old institutional philosophies..
{This knowledge] reveals a rich, crea-
tive, dynamic, interconnected reality...
(Ferguson 1980, p. 145].
Ferguson argues that a primary impact of modern science will be
on socitey's shared assumptions concerning man and the systems he
is part of:
If we believe the universe and ourselves
to be mechanical, we live mechanically
+++eI£ we imagine that we are isolated
beings,...we will lead different lives
than if we know a universe of unbroken
wholeness [Ferguson 1980, p. 146].
D-3430
Insights From Past System Dynamics
Research
System Dynamics studies (such as Meadows et al 1972 and
N. Forrester 1972) have identified two distinct modes or paterns
of economic and social behavior which are combining to create
unique pressures for change throughout the world.
life cycle of industrial growth.
One is the
For approximately two
centuries, industrial growth has fueled a tremendous economic
success story based on abundant natural resources.
essential natural resources are unlimited.
But, few
As growth has begun
to run into basic limits of land, water, oil, and other minerals,
economic and social stresses have increased.
growth era have been challenged.
Beliefs of the
The cultural shifts identified
by Yankelovitch, Ferguson, and others reflect not only the
consequences of material progress but also the growing awareness
of the interdependencies and limits it encounters.
The life cycle of industrial growth is a very long term
process relative to the typical time horizon of human decision
making. The transition to a post-industrial growth era may span
50 years or more. However, another dynamic superimposed on the
life cycle suggests that the 1980s may be a crucial decade of
change. This second behavior mode
The long wave appears to offer the
economic crises evident throughout
of the long wave suggests that the
technologies of advanced economies
is the economic 10!
ng wave.
best explanation for the
the world today.
The theory
capital base and underlying
evolve cyclically.
Periods of
510
D-3430
growth eventually result in capital overexpansion and overcom-
mitment to outmoded technologies. Stagnation and even depression
may be required to correct imbalances and create conditions for
renewed growth. (Forrester 1978, Graham and Senge 1980)
The superposition of these two dynamics makes the 1980s
a time of potential crisis when the rate of change to new ways of
thinking as well as new technologies will be greatest. The trend
back towards political conservatism in the early 1980s mirrors
similar political shifts at the beginnings of past long wave
transitions (see Senge 1982). As economic stagnation becomes
broadly recognized, the first reaction is to "attempt to breathe
lige into the old structure" -- that is, to go back to what was
working well 20 years ago. Studies done by political scientists
have shown clear 50 year cycles in political values, character
ized by a shift toward conservatism coincident with the ending of
a long wave expansion. But, the effort to breathe life into the
old structure fails because the "old structure," especially the
dominant industries of the past long wave growth phase, are
closer to the cause of the problem than to a solution. Within a
few years after the conservative resurgence, radical shifts in
political philosophy and social institutions can occur, Franklin
Roosevelt, originally elected on a conservative platform quite
similar to Mr. Reagan's, changed the nation's economic course
dramatically when he embarked on the New Deal policies of greatly
expanded government intervention. Analogous dramatic shifts in
D-3430
economic and social policy may very well occur in the near future
as the nation attempts to cope with the pressures of the current
long wave transition.
A Hypothesis
The central hypothesis of this paper is that the
transition caused by the life cycle of industrial development and
the economic long wave may be towards a systems age -- that is, a
new era in which more systemic ways of thinking enter the
mainstream of western society. Although this transition is only
beginning and is difficult to assess, sufficient evidence exists
to make this hypothesis a serious proposition. Within this
broader shift towards more systemic modes of thinking, system
dynamics may play a crucial role because of its capacity to focus
developing awareness of the systemic nature of reality on
practical problems.
The theme of a societal shift towards more systemic ways
of thinking is developed in depth in The Turning Point, a recent
book by Fritjof Capra. Capra is the author of the widely read
book The Tao of Physics, which traces parallels between the view
of reality that has emerged in modern physics and views intrinsic
to ancient Eastern cultures. Capra argues that only in the 20th
century has modern science returned to the dynamic holistic view
that has long characterized many ancient cultures. While The Tao
of Physics focused on the physical sciences, The Turning Point
51l
D-3430 8 D-3430
speculates more extensively about implications for the social
sciences and society:
A massive shift in the perception of reality
is underway, with thinkers in many disciplines
begining to move away from the traditional
reductionistic, mechanical world view to an
ecological, holistic systems paradigm...The
beginnings of this change are already visible
in all fields, and the shift...is likely to
dominate the entire decade (Capra 1982b, p.
19).
The emergence of the relativistic view of reality in
twentieth-century physics provides an instructive parallel to the
Pressures and process that may unfold more broadly in our
society. This process began when physicists found themselves
confronted by experimental discoveries that were difficult to
reconcile with basic prevailing assumptions about the nature of
reality:
The new concepts in physics introduced at the
beginning of this century and still being
elaborated in our current theories of matter,
have brought about a profound change in our
world view, from the mechanistic world view of
Leibniz and Newton to a holistic and ecologi-
cal view similar to the views of mystics of
all ages and traditions. ‘This new view of
reality was by no means easy to accept for the
physicist in the early 20th century. The
exploration of the atomic and sub-atomic world
brought them in contact with a strange and
unexpected reality. In their attempt to grasp
this reality the scientists became painfully
aware that their basic concepts and their
language, and their whole way of thinking, was
inadequate to describe the atomic phenomenon.
The problem was not merely intellectual but
amounted to an intense emotional, and one
could even say existential, crisis. (Capra
1982b, P.__)
Capra likens that state of present day economics to
Newtonian physics:
future of system dynamics.
Present day economics, for example, fails to
recognize that the economy is merely one
aspect of the whole ecological and social
fabric, Economists tend to dissociate the
economy from the fabric and to describe it in
terms of highly realistic theoretical models.
++-Whereas the surrounding ecosystems are
self-balancing and self-adjusting organic
wholes, our current economies and technologies
recognize no self-limiting principle.
Undifferenciated growth is still regarded by
most economists as a sign of a “healthy”
economy...The material world, according to
contemporary physics, is not a mechanical
system composed of separate objects, but
instead appears as a complex web of
relationships. Sub-atomic particles cannot be
understood as isolated, separate entities, but
have to be seen as interconnections... The
notion of separate object is an idealization
that is often very useful but has no
fundamental validity (emphasis mine)
7 Pe 2.
(Capra
Capra suggests that the understanding of physical
reality in modern physics is most likely to be translated into
the social sciences through
general systems theory...not a well defined
theory like relativity theory or quantum
theory... (but)a particular approach (or)
perspective.
The systems view looks at the world in terms
of relationships and integrations, Systems
are integrated wholes with unique properties
of their own that cannot be reduced to or
understood by simply combining the properties
of smaller units. Instead of concentrating on
basic building blocks or basic substances, the
systems approach emphasizes basic principles
of organization (Capra 1982b, p. 22).
Capra's thesis of a societal transition to more systemic
ways of thinking provides a challenging context for analyzing the
system dynamics practitioners have
D-3430 10
long argued that the methodology should be viewed on two levels:
(1) a tool for solving specific problems and (2) a means for
developing a more systemic point of view regarding problems. The
two objectives are intertwined and may, in fact, be difficult to
attain separately. Fundamental problems in a corporation or
larger social system are generally interconnected and difficult
to solve in a piecemeal fashion. Frequently, system dynamics
applications fail to permanently resolve fundamental problems
when the tool is narrowly applied as a problem solving device.
The benefits of even highly successful applications often prove
only temporary, as policymakers drift back into old ways of
thinking and operating. (See, for example, Roberts 1981 or
Lyneis et al. 1977.)
Evidence for the Hypothesis
If Capra's thesis is valid, it suggests that important
changes in the environment may be contributing to a systemic
point of view highly compatible with tools like system dynamics.
What evidence is there for these changes and how can system
dynamicists benefit most from them?
Capra primarily supports his thesis through his
background in physics, summary of the work of leading systems
theorists such as Prigogine, analysis of social movements like
environmentalism, and observations on the breakdown of
D-3430 3s
traditional nonsystemic ways of dealing with key social problems.
I believe that there is another important source of evidence in
the emergence of new thinking and methods for managing large
organizations. Moreover, because it deals with the attitudes and
perceptions of policymakers, it is especially relevant for system
dynamics.
In recent years, organizational innovation, especially
occuring in the business sector, has begun to attract increasing
attention. ‘The wide spread interest in Japanese management
techniques appears to be a symptom of a much deeper reexamination
of fundamental assumptions in management. A small number of
corporations are emerging as pioneers in a new, more systemic
approach to organizational design and management. Relative to
Capra's thesis, these organizations are particulary important as
loci for operationalizing the underlying shift in systemic
awareness. Moreover, they are showing how the shift to more
systemic modes of operation can influence individuals throughout
a system. That is, they are developing a set of attitudes and
beliefs along with a set of design principles and management
methods.
One common element to these new organizations is a
sharp break with the hierarchical philosophy underlying
traditional organizations. The organizations strive for an
environment in which each and every individual shares a sense of
responsibility and ownership for the system as the whole. As Ray
Stata, president of Analog Devices, observes,
D-3430 a
“Much of our traditional organizational
thinking is derived from the Catholic Church
and the Roman Army--institutions predicated on
the notion that the person at the top | has
information and influence not shared
others." (Kiefer and Senge 1982, p. Te. 117)
The first step of an organization towards a more systemic
orientation is to pierce the illusion of the hierarchy that
suggests that only a small number of people are responsible for
the performance of the system as a whole, while the great
majority are mere "cogs in the wheel." This does not imply the
elimination of all authority, but most fundamentally the creation
of a new value system. As Stata says,
We're not trying to eliminate all hierarchy at
Analog, but to undercut the value system that
is linked to the hierarchy. The greatest
limitation in traditional organizations is
that people further down the hierarchy somehow
consider themselves as lesser beings than
those above them. (Kiefer and Senge 1982, p.
114)
Many organizations are evolving radically decentralized
orgnanizational designs to sustain this new value system. One
example is the Kollmorgen Corporation, a $250,000,000 diversified
manufacturing company. One of the key ideas underlying the
Kollmorgen corporate. design is that whenever an operating unit
becomes too large, it becomes impossible for each individual to
understand the system as a whole and feel responsible for it.
Consequently, divisions continually divide as they grow.
Divisions rarely exceed 400 or 500 hundred people. As new
business opportunities develop, small sub-divisional groups
513
D-3430 8
initially form. If these "product teams" succeed and grow, they
eventually split off from their divisional parent and become a
new free-standing business unit.
Corporate control in a company like Kollmorgen is kept
to a bare minimum. In a corporation of approximately 5,000
employees, the corporate staff, including secretaries and
accountants is around 25. Virtually all operational control is
at the divisional and sub-division level. Corporate strategic
and financial responsibilities are carried out through a
Partner's Group. The Partner's are all Division presidents and
corporate officers. The group operates by consensus. Each
partner has a veto on all basic corporate decisions.
Managers in companies like Kollmorgen and Analog Devices
need to develop new views of management control. Unlike the
"top-down" approach assumed necessary for most of our major
social issues, these organizations believe strongly in the
effectiveness of local initiaves to deal with complex problems in
the organization, Stata refers to "organic control" -- a strong
emphasis on local control for local problems. This, of course,
is consistent with the strong emphasis on personal
responsibility. It also means a great deal of freedom and open
flow of information within the organization. People at the local
level cannot be expected to be effective problem solvers if they
do not have good understanding of the problems and the
interrelationships within the organization. Bob Swiggett,
President of Kollmorgen, stresses the importance that everyone
D-3430 M4
within the organization share access to all basic information
regarding organizational performance and how the organization
operates, Only within an environment with open information can
individuals act responsibly. Senior managers like Swiggett must
work continually to undermine information monopolies, whereby
people traditionally have attempted to solidify power.
Swiggett and Stata are illustrative of the new role for
senior managers in the evolving decentralized organization.
Whereas chief executives in traditional organizations are above
all else decision makers, chief executives in the emerging
organizations are, above all else, teachers and designers. They
participate in decision making, but their success is predicated
on their ability to create an environment where quality decisions
can be made by others.
Moreover, their greatly reduced involvement in the daily
operations of running the business gives them the time and
opportunity to commit themselves to activities that traditional
managers rarely do. They have the time to think about how the
organization functions as a system, how it interacts with its
environment, and how it is evolving. They have the time to teach
others how the organization functions, the values that are
critical to its integrity, and the philosophy that guides its
development, In my experience, senior managers in companies like
Kollmorgen may spend 50% to 75% of their time in key strategic
and educational activities. By contrast, more traditional
control-oriented managers are able to allocate only a fraction of
this time to such activities.
514
D-3430
It is impossible at this time to accurately assess how
widespread such corporate innovation is. It appears to be quite
widespread within the “high-tech industries," where sustaining
creativity and innovation is critical. However, current research
indicates that many of these ideas are taking hold in industries
as diverse as retailing, consumer goods, and traditional
manufacturing. Much research needs to be done to better
understand this new organizational thinking and practice and to
assess its relevance for the public as well as the private
sector. (Kiefer and Senge, 1982b, other references.)
The Possible Role of System Dynamics
To understand the possible impacts of system dynamics in
this emerging transition to a systems age one needs to understand
the more generic problem of the interaction of technology and
culture. This problem is an important research area for cultural
anthropologists. There have been many case studies of local
societies that have made accelerated transitions to new cultural
configurations when tools commensurate with the new culture were
introduced. Although there is uncertainty if tools alone are
sufficient to foster cultural transitions, it is widely believed
that appropriate tools can accelerate such shifts when other
conditions for the transition already exist.
Inventor, philosopher, and futurist Buckminster Fuller
argues that appropriate tools can be of the utmost importance
515
D-3430 16
when a cultural shift is underway. He suggests that the
development of “artifacts" for a new age are among the most
important developments to speed societies transition. such tools
allow people to go beyond talking about the need for a new way of
operating or even thinking deeply about such a way -- they allow
people to act differently (see Fuller 1981).
One can begin to imagine this process concretely by
thinking of the possible impacts of the first tool on human
evolution. At this stage of his evolution man was undoubtedly
the product of his environment with little cognitive realization
of his potential to influence that environment. As he developed
facility with his earliest tools, his cognitive world began to
change in parallel. Eventually he came to see himself as
influencing his environment as well as reacting to it. It is
impossible to imagine this shift in attitude and perceptions
having occured independent of practical experience. In this
sense, the first crude tools were artifacts for a way of life
that would put man on a pathway to the modern world.
What is needed today are similar artifacts to facilitate
the transition to more systemic ways of thinking and operating .
System dynamics seems a logical candidate. Firstly, it has
perhaps unique capabilities to be applied to our most important
organizational and societal issues. Unlike many other methods
within the field of general systems theory, system dynamics is
strongly problem oriented. It has already demonstrated utility
in clarifying causes of long term corporate, urban, regional, and
D-3430
global issues. Of course, the methodology is not without its
shortcomings, as one should expect for a field at a very early
stage of development. However, few other methods for
understanding complex social systems can lay claim to having
created as much interest amongst analysts and policy makers into
the possibilities of social system modeling.
A second great strength of system dynamics is its
educational possibilities. Unlike many systems analysis tools
which remain the province of specially trained experts, system
dynamics models have repeatedly been used to teach the public at
large about systemic issues. One suspects that this potential
strength of system dynamics has barely been tapped, since most
studies still today are done for specific clients and not public
education. But, it is clear that fundamental policy changes can
only take place through education. This is equally true in the
nation as a whole and within the corporation. Applications of
system dynamics which fail to result in broad education generally
fail to have enduring impact.
Because of its applicability to key problems and its
Strength as an educational tool I believe that system dynamics
can play an important role as a bridge between old and new ways
of thinking. The "systems age" remains a distant abstraction
until one begins to see that only through a systemic viewpoint
can we begin to understand our most pressing social issues such
as economic stagnation, inflation, and the nuclear arms race.
Public awareness is developing that these are not isolated
D-3430
separate problems created solely through political errors and
unfortunate circumstances. Awareness is developing that in some
ways these problems are but separate manifestations of the same
underlying mismatch between reality and our normal ways of
thinking about and attempting to influence reality. If this
emerging awareness can be crystallized through tools like the
system Dynamics National Model (Forrester 1982), system dynamics
can play an important role in the coming cultural transition.
Implications for System Dynamics Practice
Perhaps the most important general implication is for
practitioners of system dynamics and similar tools to think of
themselves as educators and cultural change-agents rather than
problem solvers. While effective consultants often think of
themselves in these terms, the depth and scope of the educational
process which must occur for system dynamics to be truly
effective is rarely recognized.
To be effective in this domain, one must recognize that
one's own attitudes and perceptions are often the greatest
barrier to overcome. Practitioners of system dynamics are
themselves part of a cultural milieu which emphasizes
separateness not connectedness. We are like caterpillars
attempting to describe to other caterpillars the nature of being
a butterfly. We must continually reflect on our own biases and
non-systemic perceptions of reality. This can become very
516
D-3430 19
personal, For example, it may very well be that the unquestioned
assumption that individuals are essentially separate entities may
eventually be seen as a working construct no more “fundamentally
valid" that the assumption that atoms are separate objects. We
tend to draw an arbitrary boundary around our "self" configured
in time and space. Yet, who among us is not a unique person
particularly because of the continual interactions we have had
with other individuals and circumstances that have made us
unique. Einstein said we need to pierce the "illusion of
separateness that holds each of us bound within a prison of our
own consciousness." Might this advice not be particularly
germane to professional modelers intent upon helping others
understand the connectedness of the world?
In addition to the needs for reflection and clearer self
definition, the research agenda for system dynamics can benefit
from viewing system dynamics as an artifact for systemic
thinking. In public sector applications, this will have
important implications for who is defined as the audience and how
the implementation process is viewed. In many instances, public
sector applications of system dynamics should focus on educating
the public at large regarding important system problems. All too
often, model builders adopt a narrow focus in the misguided
belief that answering the “client's questions" is the most
sure-fire path to successful implementation of modeling insights.
In a special lecture to international gathering of
globel model builders, Jay Forrester painted a different picture
D-3430 20
of successful implementation and the role of the model builder.
How does the modeler see himself? what
audience does the modeler address?...
I disagree (with common assumptions)
++sthat "policy makers" constitute the
audience for global modeling.
(Modelers assume)...that the world is run
by policymakers, apparently referring to
people in government. For the great
issues now being considered in world
modeling, the present people in govern-
ment are of little consequence. They do
not have the power to reverse long-
standing tradition. They will not be in
office long enough to deal with the
issues raised by world modeling.
++sthe audience for the work must be the
public in general, In today's social
structures, only in the role of the
individual as a private citizen does a
person take a long-range view of the
future. (Forrester 1981, pp. 22, 23)
To put such a view of the modeler's role into practice takes
courage, perseverence, and a long-term time perspective--the very
characteristics that system dynamicists repeatedly ask of
policymakers, Modelers will be more effective in this role as
change agents if they recognize that a sympathetic ear for their
message is emerging and learn to speak to that ear.
For corporate applications there are also important
implications. If system dynamics is to be used as an artifact
for systems thinking, the whole consulting paradigm
characteristic of most corporate applications may need to be
reexamined. Consulting projects rarely result in a lasting shift
in the way managers think about problems. Although
517
D-3430 aL
implementation is almost always the objective, "the
implementation stage seldom occurs," in the words of Edward
Roberts (1981). Although there may be instances where one or two
managers close to the consulting team develop a fundamentally new
way of looking at problems, such a shift occurs rarely and never
have I seen it occur pervasively within an organization.
Corporate applications of system dynamics appear to have realized
only a very small fraction of the potential impact of the tool.
To be more effective change agents, it will probably be
necessary for the system dynamicist to become closer to the
organization in many ways. The few consultants I know who seem
to have deep and lasting impacts in organizations work with only
a small number of organizations at a time and work very deeply
with those organizations. In effect, they live within the
organization, They become trusted. ‘The become “part of the
team." From this role, they can fill a much broader educational
function. In some cases, effective consultants even sign
multi-year contracts with clients as a way of guaranteeing
long-term in-depth interaction. In Roberts' terms, they stay
with the process “until implementation is achieved," perhaps
longer.
It may be most effective, for system dynamics to be
applied to several corporate problems simultaneously. This would
greatly increase the likelihood of a fundamental shift in the way
of thinking within the organization. When one is focused soley
on an individual problem, pressures to “solve the problem" force
D-3430 22
managers to try and "digest" the recommendations of the modeler
without altering their own understanding. Valiant attempts by
modelers working in the conventional consulting paradigm to
educate their clients often reach one or two managers at best and
rarely permeate more broadly.
One solution is to insist on top management
participation, as suggested by Roberts and many other reviewers
of past system dynamics applications. But, top management
involvement is insufficient for the purpose of organizational
reeducation unless the top managers see this as part of their
role. This is one reason why applying system dynamics within
organizations already in transition to a more systemic
orientation may be important. These organizations appear to
offer uniquely fertile soil for the long-term organic viewpoint
of system dynamics, A great deal might be learned about both
organizational issues and the effective implementation of systems
thinking tools out of such applications.
This is one of many reasons why identifying companies
developing the decentralized nonhierarchical management
philosophy is critical. The research task of identifying and
examining these companies is at a very early stage. System
dynamics theorists of organizational change may be able to play a
central role in the needed research, both beneficiaries and
contributors in understanding the principles and methods
underlying these companies.
D-3430 23
Lastly, it is of critical importance that the
developement of educational materials in system dynamics and
related systems thinking skills continue as rapidly as possible.
Surely, there can be no hope for a broad emergence of systemic
thinking until tools for such thinking are a central component of
Public education. In recent years, great strides had been made
in this area (see, for example, Roberts et al. 1982). However,
much remains to be done, especially in the area of teaching
public school teachers how to integrate systems thinking concepts
into their classrooms.
D-3430 24
REFERENCES
Capra, F., The Turning Point: Science and the Rising Culture,
Simon and Schuster, 1982.
Capra, F., "The Turning Poin A New Vision of Reality," The
Futurist (Dec. 1982), pp. 19-24.
Ferguson, M., The Aquarian Conspiracy: Social
Bob. tarchers Toe Angeles 1980-~
Forrester, J, W., "Growth Cycles," De Economist (1978), pp.
Forrester, J. W., “National Modeling in the Global Context,"
System Dynamics Group Working Paper D-3325, 1981.
Forrester, N. B., The Life Cycle of Economic Development, The MIT
Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1972.
Fuller, R. B., Critical Path, St. Martins Press, New York 1980.
Graham, A. K. and P. M. Senge, "A Long-Wave Hypothesis of
Innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 1980:
pp. 283-311.
Kiefer, C. and P. M. Senge, "Metanoic Organizations in the
Transition to a Sustainable Society," Technological Forecasting
and Social Change (1982), pp. 109-122.
Lyneis, J., D. W. Peterson, and B. E. Tuttle, "Implementing the
Results of Computer-Based Models: Lessons from a Case Study,"
System Dynamics Group Working Paper D-2674, 1977.
Meadows, D. L., et al., The Limits to Growth, Potomac Associates,
Washington 1972.
Roberts, E. B., “Strategies for Effective Implementation of
Complex Corporate Models," in E, B. Roberts, ed., Managerial
Applications of System Dynamics, The MIT Press, Cambridge,
Hass. 1981.
Roberts, N. et al., Introduction to Computer Simulation: The
System Dynamics Approach, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Nass. 1983.
Senge, P. M., “The Economic Long Wave: A Survey of Evidence,"
System Dynamics Group Working Paper D-3262-1, 1982.
519
D-3430 25
Sorokin, Pitirim,
Yankelovich, Daniel, "New Rules in American Life," Psychology
Today, April 1981, pp. 35-91.
