IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/srbeha/v29y2012i1p30-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stages and Dimensions of Systems Intelligence

Author

Listed:
  • Rachel Jones
  • James Corner

Abstract

Following the footsteps of emotional, social, cultural and other types of intelligence, systems intelligence offers a new perspective on how individuals act with a lesser or greater degree of intelligence within physical and social systems. First appearing in the published literature in 2004, systems intelligence has resonated with the related fields of decision making, communication and leadership, among others. However, to date, a taxonomy for considering systems intelligence has yet to be described. Building off Kegan's framework for human development and Hämäläinen and Saarinen's recent levels, we offer a new taxonomy of systems intelligence and describe its stages and dimensions. We focus on the three stages of attentive, active and inspired systems intelligence, incorporating three, four and eight dimensions, respectively. This taxonomy serves as a useful conceptualization for the future development of measurement tools for systems intelligence and as a basis for understanding how individuals might transition between stages. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachel Jones & James Corner, 2012. "Stages and Dimensions of Systems Intelligence," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 30-45, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:29:y:2012:i:1:p:30-45
    DOI: 10.1002/sres.1090
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.1090
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sres.1090?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R J Ormerod, 2008. "The transformation competence perspective," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(11), pages 1435-1448, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Kata‐Riikka Kumpulainen & J.Tuomas Harviainen & Esa Saarinen, 2022. "Design Gaming for Learning Systems Intelligence in Socio‐Emotional Systems," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 163-167, January.
    2. Kenny, Daniel C. & Bakhanova, Elena & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Voinov, Alexey, 2022. "Participatory modelling and systems intelligence: A systems-based and transdisciplinary partnership," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    3. Gerald Midgley & Erik Lindhult, 2021. "A systems perspective on systemic innovation," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 635-670, October.
    4. Hong Jiang & Shukuan Zhao & Xiangyu Wang & Zhuming Bi, 2013. "Applying Electromagnetic Field Theory to Study the Synergistic Relationships Between Technology Standardization and Technology Development," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 272-286, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    2. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    3. Lowe, David & Espinosa, Angela & Yearworth, Mike, 2020. "Constitutive rules for guiding the use of the viable system model: Reflections on practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1014-1035.
    4. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    5. M. Nassereddine & M. A. Ellakkis & A. Azar & M. D. Nayeri, 2021. "Developing a Multi-methodology for Conflict Resolution: Case of Yemen’s Humanitarian Crisis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 301-320, April.
    6. A. M. S. Al-Raqadi & A. Abdul Rahim & M. Masrom & B. S. N. Al-Riyami, 2017. "Sustainability of knowledge and competencies management on the perceptions of improving ships’ upkeep performance," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 8(1), pages 230-246, January.
    7. Z Zhu, 2011. "After paradim: why mixing-methodology theorising fails and how to make it work again," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(4), pages 784-798, April.
    8. Small, Adrian & Wainwright, David, 2018. "Privacy and security of electronic patient records – Tailoring multimethodology to explore the socio-political problems associated with Role Based Access Control systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 344-360.
    9. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    10. Henao, Felipe & Franco, L. Alberto, 2016. "Unpacking multimethodology: Impacts of a community development intervention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 681-696.
    11. Franco, L. Alberto & Lord, Ewan, 2011. "Understanding multi-methodology: Evaluating the perceived impact of mixing methods for group budgetary decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 362-372, June.
    12. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Lahtinen, Tuomas J., 2016. "Path dependence in Operational Research—How the modeling process can influence the results," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 14-20.
    13. Franco, L. Alberto & Greiffenhagen, Christian, 2018. "Making OR practice visible: Using ethnomethodology to analyse facilitated modelling workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(2), pages 673-684.
    14. J Luoma & R P Hämäläinen & E Saarinen, 2011. "Acting with systems intelligence: integrating complex responsive processes with the systems perspective," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(1), pages 3-11, January.
    15. Harper, Alison & Mustafee, Navonil & Yearworth, Mike, 2021. "Facets of trust in simulation studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 197-213.
    16. W Hobbs & N J Curtis, 2011. "Theory and application of perceptual positions to data collection and analysis in military environments," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1753-1764, September.
    17. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    18. Siebert, Johannes & Kunz, Reinhard, 2016. "Developing and validating the multidimensional proactive decision-making scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 864-877.
    19. D Champion & J M Wilson, 2010. "The impact of contingency factors on validation of problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(9), pages 1420-1431, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:srbeha:v:29:y:2012:i:1:p:30-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/1092-7026 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.