@systemspractitioner
Interesting question. I don't know what he would be thinking if still around today, but I hope he would be using a less "cybernetic" and more "organic" approach in which there is no one fixed hierarchy of "systems" imposed from above, but where "higher" levels are created spontaneously, as needed, by the interaction of the elements on the "lower" level to satisfy some of their emergent needs for more efficient communication and coordination.

@Kihbernetics I have always perceived the actual use of vsm to be organic. I’ve never used it as an imposed hierarchy, although I know people who do use it that way.

@systemspractitioner

I understand many people are comfortable with VSM but I never used it and I find it cumbersome and complicated to understand. I worked with companies using #CMMI, #ISO, #6Sigma, #SCRUM, along with a few other standards and frameworks and, apart from my #DynamicalSystem model, which I use to explain practically everything these days 😀, I try not to have strong preferences for specific tools and frameworks and try to learn first how what the company is currently using and familiar with can be re-used, tweaked or augmented to achieve their goals for the future.

@Kihbernetics I use VSM as a learning system. Different to top down. I also see VSM quite differently to the picture you shared. I find it exceptionally useful for exploration to understand an organisation and how it is managing complexity. It also helps me to explore the dynamics in the situation. Exploring the archetypes is particularly powerful, many of which I see playing out in situations. It opens up a wide range of possibilities . For me, it’s all about how the VSM is perceived.