Intervention #1:  Remove the limit by scaling down the efforts initially
(Laws #1, #2, #6 and #9)
Intervention #2:  Gradually increase efforts but beware of exceeding
the levels that created the limits in the first place (Law #9).
Intervention #1:  Reflecting the structure and long-term trends by / to
decision-makers (Law #1, 3, 4)
Intervention #2:  Look for reasons why the system was set up to create
just “one winner” – investigate historical origins of competencies or
identify potential competency traps (Law #1)
Intervention #3:  Identify goals or objectives that define success at a
level higher than the individual players that set them in competition.
Intervention #1:  Become aware that the reason urgent files go up, is
caused by very actions to 'deal with urgent files' in the first place - for
every urgent file we attend, we are creating another urgent file (Law #1,
6)
Intervention #2:  Make the process of 'attending to files' transparent to
complainant, assuring them further and thus less likely to 'trigger fears'
in them we are not attending to their file (Law #8).
Intervention #1:  Recognise dependency that symptomatic soltuions
create  (Law #3, #4, #6)
Intervention #2:  Gradually increase resource allocations to
fundamental solutions.  In the short-run mindfully scale down
resources to symptomatic solutions, enough to keep the crisis at bay
and allowing more resources to be made available for fundamental
solutions (Law #3, #9, #6).
Intervention #1:  Be aware that the goal is implicit and is affecting the
actions we take subconsciously and the harder we find in creating the
results we want, the harder we are likely to push the actions, causing the
system to push back harder (Law #2).
Intervention #2:  Convert the goal to a vision we desire to create and learn
to use 'slower is faster' to create the desired result (Law #6).


Intervention #1:  Manage the way mistakes are handled (Law #8)
Intervention #2:  Gradually increase the numbers available in the field
by introducing Apprentice Scheme to improve the quality of competency
in the field (Law #9, Law 6).
Using Systems Thinking to diagnose and take
interventions on real-life cases!
CASE STUDY #1
“We need men on the ground.  So let’s
see if we can find ways to cut the time
they take to learn things in the classroom
… besides they really learn more on the
job.  That way, we do not keep them too
long in the classroom and that way
deploy them on the ground quickly.”  
However, after some time …. “I / he made
a mistake and when my supervisor learns
about it … he chides us (after all is a
young punk!) and that does really feel
good at all … maybe I have made a
mistake of wanting to do this profession
…” …. A few days later when the
supervisor calls for duty … “I tell him that
I am busy … that I have a wedding to
attend.” …. Except after some time … “I
do not feel confident doing the job.  I
better quit!”
CASE STUDY #2
The intakes are declining.  So maybe,
students are not finding the subjects
we offer as interesting.  So let’s
introduce a new subject or module …
and hopefully with publicity the intake
increases.  Actually the intakes do
increase … at first.  So the next time
intakes decline, we should just do more
of the same … introduce new
programmes, novelty.  However, over
time, intake declines … again.   The
lecturers on the other hand (this is a
separate dialogue) … our workload is
increasing … we need to learn new
subjects and it takes time.  Meanwhile,
the time left to build up rapport with
the students is declining …  Oh I wish,
the students would stop complaining …
can’t they see how much work I put in
… into this … my health and my
personal time is affected …
CASE STUDY #3
The more we allocate resources to
school promotions, the easier it is to
recruit students.  That’s the way to go!
CASE STUDY #4
“This file is urgent!  Minister wants to
see a reply at the end of the day.  Get
on to it quickly!”  So I set aside what I
am doing and focus on the ‘urgent file’.  
Except, when I come back to it a few
days later, my deadline to complete the
file I was first working on is drawing
nearer.  I scramble to finish the work
as best as I can but some stones are
left unturned.  But I have little choice
and hope for the best.  A few weeks
later … I receive a memo on that file …
“treat this file as urgent.  The
complainant is unhappy about the
outcome and has written to the
Minister demanding an explanation!”
CASE STUDY #5
We need to be the best in order to
recruit students … so … have the
lecturers go for retraining … “Be Jack of
all trades and … try to be the master of
two.”  That is much easier than trying
to become the best there is in the field!
CASE STUDY #6
Students are not interested in
learning!  We need to close the gap …
what might we do to force them to
learn? … I wonder …
To learn more about this, look for workshops on Systems Archetypes