Viable system model Overview[edit] The model was developed by operations research theorist and cybernetician Stafford Beer in his book Brain of the Firm (1972).[1] Together with Beer's earlier works on cybernetics applied to management, this book effectively founded management cybernetics. The first thing to note about the cybernetic theory of organizations encapsulated in the VSM is that viable systems are recursive; viable systems contain viable systems that can be modeled using an identical cybernetic description as the higher (and lower) level systems in the containment hierarchy (Beer expresses this property of viable systems as cybernetic isomorphism). A development of this model has originated the theoretical proposal called Viable systems approach. Components of the viable system model[edit] Here we give a brief introduction to the cybernetic description of the organization encapsulated in a single level of the VSM.[2] Principal functions of the VSM Rules for the viable system[edit] These principles are:
Compliqué ou complexe ? « Barba-Rossa’s Blog Je crois que je me souviendrai toujours de cette explication d’un de mes profs d’apprentissage pour nous démontrer la différence entre un système compliqué et un système complexe. Prenez tout d’abord un avion, vous la démontez et ensuite vous la remontez selon le mode d’emploi, c’est un système très compliqué mais en suivant étape par étape, vous y arrivez et il fonctionne à nouveau.Prenez maintenant un plat de spaghetti, vous le renversez sur la table et maintenant vous essayer de le remettre dans l’état initial. Ça, c’est un système complexe, il y a tellement d’interaction, de paramètres, de variables, que vous pouvez vous approchez de la solution exact mais il y aura toujours une ou deux choses qui ne seront jamais pareil. J’espère que ma mémoire ne m’a pas trop fait défaut et que j’ai pu restituer fidèlement son explication. Voili ! Tags: complexe, compliqué, système
Zetetique.com Systems - A Journey Along the Way Systems A Journey Along theWay Welcome to a journey in the realm of systems. The real intent here is not to study systems as a discipline, though more an intent to study lots of things and employ a systems perspective to foster understanding. Every attempt will be made to avoid the major failing of "system science." Enjoy the journey! System The word system probably has more varied meanings than any other word in use today. A system is an entity which maintains its existence through the mutual interaction of its parts. The key emphasis here is "mutual interaction," in that something is occurring between the parts, over time, which maintains the system. This definition of a system implies something beyond cause and effect. Emergence Associated with the idea of system is a principle called emergence. Stumbling across this as I did was most enlightening. One could study hydrogen and oxygen in isolation from each other forever and never discover the characteristic of wetness. Classes of Systems
Dunning–Kruger effect Cognitive bias about one's own skill The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with limited competence in a particular domain overestimate their abilities. Some researchers also include the opposite effect for high performers: their tendency to underestimate their skills. In popular culture, the Dunning–Kruger effect is often misunderstood as a claim about general overconfidence of people with low intelligence instead of specific overconfidence of people unskilled at a particular task. The Dunning–Kruger effect is usually measured by comparing self-assessment with objective performance. For example, participants may take a quiz and estimate their performance afterward, which is then compared to their actual results. There are disagreements about what causes the Dunning–Kruger effect. There are disagreements about the Dunning–Kruger effect's magnitude and practical consequences. Definition[edit] David Dunning Measurement, analysis, and investigated tasks[edit] [edit]
Home | Santa Fe Institute Enseignements de Zététique, Université Nice Sophia Antipolis Apprentissage de la démarche scientifique - la zététique - via le support des phénomènes "paranormaux" Une définition du vocable "Zététique" ? ... Cliquez ici Présentation Deux très courtes phrases (de Henri Broch in "Le Paranormal", éd. LaZététique n'est pas restreinte au seul domaine du "paranormal", de l'Extra - Ordinaire ; elle constitue la base même de tout traité d'autodéfense intellectuelle. - Zététique 1er semestre. - Zététique 2ème semestre. L'objectif de l'enseignement de Zététique est d'aboutir - via le support motivant des parasciences et des phénomènes "paranormaux" - à une compréhension de ce qu'est la méthodologie scientifique, à une mise en forme de l'approche nécessaire pour qu'une hypothèse ou un résultat acquière le qualificatif "scientifique". Pour découvrir l'ensemble des fascicules de Zététique, cliquez ici Licences Sciences UE obligatoire (mais programme restreint) en L1SV UE optionnelle (numerus clausus de 35 étud.) en L1PC et L1SF A) Méthode & Outils généraux . .
SystemsWiki Wicked Problems If you work in an organisation that deals with social, commercial or financial planning - or any type of public policy planning - then you've got wicked problems. You may not call them by this name, but you know what they are. They are those complex, ever changing societal and organisational planning problems that you haven't been able to treat with much success, because they won't keep still. They're messy, devious, and they fight back when you try to deal with them. This paper describes the notion of wicked problems (WPs) as put forward by Rittel & Webber in their landmark article "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning" (1973). Keywords: Wicked problems, general morphological analysis, policy analysis, Horst Rittel Introduction In 1973, Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber, both urban planners at the University of Berkley in California, wrote an article for Policy Sciences with the astounding title "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning". Ten Criteria for Wicked Problems 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.