Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Ruth Malan (ruthmalan@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 25-Jan-2025 00:55:24 JST Ruth Malan

   • Diana Montalion 🌻

   Next up in #PapersInSystems: we’ll be discussing Crafting Conceptual Integrity: ch 2 of Learning Systems Thinking

   Discussion will be led by (the author!) @diana

   Monday, February 10, 1-2pm Eastern Time

   Free, but enroll for access:
   https://ti.to/bredemeyer/montalion_conceptualintegrity/with/conway-on-systems

   • Embed this notice
     Ruth Malan (ruthmalan@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 25-Jan-2025 00:55:24 JST Ruth Malan

     in reply to

     • Diana Montalion 🌻

     Scanning for “appetizer” quotes —

     ‘Technical debt is how we describe the lack of cohesion in the system.’

     — I hear @diana ’s voice in my mind, especially at parts like the last phrase in:

     ‘Donella Meadows defines systems thinking as how “parts together produce an effect
     that is different from the effect of each part on its own.”

     Relationships produce effects. Software becomes a system of software when “parts together” achieve something that could not exist without the “together” part.’

     agaric repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Ruth Malan (ruthmalan@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 25-Jan-2025 00:55:24 JST Ruth Malan

     in reply to

     • Diana Montalion 🌻

     “For many software professionals, the biggest mindshift when thinking in systems is also the most important one: software systems are sociotechnical. When I say our systems are sociotechnical, I mean that our thinking, behaviors, and communication patterns are inextricable from the software systems we produce.”

     — @diana