Systems Theory is a rather fascinating domain of social sciences. I was struck by the universality of the systems view when I read the articles by Banathy (1995 and 1996), Cookson (1997) and Littlejohn (1996). I thought this theory could provide substantive answers to many questions originating in the ever-increasing complexities of today’s world. I now think systems view is meta-science that contextualizes various scientific disciplines.
 
Since my first learning about General Systems Theory, I have come to better understand that different perspectives reveal a different “layer” in a given system. These perspectives are like different lenses filtering specific wavelengths of light. Thus, looking at an object through different lenses permits us to see otherwise invisible layers. We can superimpose these layers over to depict a fuller picture of reality.

For example, Banathy and Jenlink (1996) demonstrate the application of systems view to education by using three lenses: The Systems-Environment Lens, Functions-Structure Lens, and Process-Behavioural Lens. In the first part of Artefact 1, we were required to analyse the system in question using one of these models. With the help of Cookson's (1997) comparison of the two distance learning programs, I looked at Power Engineering as a system via the Systems-Environment lens. This analysis alone made me aware of the general and systemic environment my department operates in and allowed me to identify some of the challenges we were facing at the time (see Undefined Inputs on page 12 of the Artefact file).

Troubleshooting is a set of skills that I began to develop early on as an operating marine engineer. These skills have proven to me again and again that we must have problem solving skills if we are to be productive and effective in any given instant or move ahead individually and as a team towards a particular goal. My intuitive grasp of problem solving methods however has also proven to me that the dynamically changing and highly complex environments (e.g. social settings) require different set of problem solving skills.

Systems Theory prompted me to think about these skills and I was pleasantly surprised to come across a term “Human Activity Systems” (HAS) which was coined by Checkland. Checkland characterised HAS by its dissimilarity to the natural and engineered systems and formulated a methodology that is known as soft systems analysis (Banathy and Jenlink, 1996).

Soft systems analysis was a very engaging exercise and I was eager to integrate new information with what I already knew to analyse the problem situation that I had identified in the Marine Engineering Department (see page 14 in the Artefact 1 file).

Already during the first stages of the analysis, I realized how quickly the new information was becoming new knowledge. I also knew I was learning about "troubleshooting" in a social setting by utilising soft systems analysis.

For example, I visualized the problem situation by means of rich pictures in Stage 2, developed a conceptual model in stage 4 and by comparing the outputs of Stage 2 and 4, I created a list of items that could be used to discuss about the problem situation (see Table 2 on page 28 of the Artefact 1 file). I thought that the conceptual model was a strong one but there was one caveat; my professor's comments indicated that I had over analysed this stage and that I had sacrificed efficiency. Looking back, I see my tendency to analyse problems in greater depth however assignments such as this one makes one recognize how much information they have to process to attain a complete solution. During my e-portfolio development I realized that application of new knowledge is not an intuitive process and novices can easily complicate the matters at hand however as they become more experienced, they begin to develop an instinct for making the processes more efficient and the results more elegant.

Through Artefact 1, I gained a new set of problem solving skills that were ready to be honed in real life.