Jamie P. Monat

Systems Thinking involves a way of looking at the world from a holistic perspective of interactions, relationships, feedback loops, self-organization, hierarchies, and emergent properties. Abiogenesis is the theory that life on earth developed from inanimate matter. Although a lot of research has been conducted on the elements of abiogenesis, as yet a plausible story linking those elements together has not been developed. The purpose of this paper is to use Systems Thinking as a means for connecting the abiogenesis elements into a convincing, plausible narrative explaining how life on earth began. We start with a theory based on molecular self-organization and then use the systems thinking concepts of hierarchies, emergence, and feedback to explain the possible pathways for the evolution of life from the raw chemicals found on the primordial earth. By using a Systems Thinking lens to analyze the hierarchical structure of DNA and RNA; the characteristics of the primordial earth; the self-organizing properties of specific chemicals; the Miller-Urey and similar experiments; and the current evidence of evolution found in DNA commonalities, homologous species structures, and bacterial mutations; we are able to articulate a plausible pathway to life from inanimate chemicals. We conclude with a description of an experiment that would produce a virus-like entity from raw chemicals. The implication is that this experiment will be successfully completed within the next 10 years, convincingly demonstrating the ability of life to develop from inanimate material and thus how life on earth began.

Sigal Kordova, Moti Frank

Accelerated technological developments and the sharp rise in the complexity of systems have increased the importance of systems thinking - a field that deals with seeing the system as a whole and examining the processes that occur within it and its surrounding environment. Consequently, the more complex engineering systems become, the greater the need for systems engineers and managers with high levels of systems thinking - professionals capable of understanding the big picture, without having to break down the system into its separate components. The research goal of this studywas to examine the degree of difference between the systems thinking capabilitiesof systems engineers and that of engineers from other fields. The study also explored the extent to which a correlation exists between the acquisition of engineering knowledge through practical work and systems thinking capabilities. Additionally, we examined the correlation between systems thinking capabilities and management capabilities. The study included quantitative and qualitative tools. The study population was comprised of 45 engineers from different fields, including systems engineers, software engineers, and mechanical engineers. The quantitative tool was a questionnaire that evaluated the engineers’ systems thinking capability. The qualitative tool was comprised of semi-structured interviews conducted with different engineers from the systems engineering field, as well as engineers in managerial positions. Study findings revealed no significant differences between engineers’ systems thinking capabilities and their engineering backgrounds. However, a significant difference was found between this capability and the engineers’ current occupational fields. Engineers who deal with systems engineering were found to demonstrate a higher level of engineering systems thinking capability than engineers who deal with software, hardware, and sales. The results of the qualitative study show that systems engineers perceive systems thinking as a valuable tool that provides an overview of the entire project, helping to map the difficulties and risks likely to occur over time. Additionally, findings indicate that systems engineers demonstrate higher levels of creative thinking than engineers from other fields. The interviewees demonstrated how high systems thinking ability helps senior managers see the organization as a whole, manage employees, build long-term work programs, and adapt the company to future demands in the market.

Jamie P. Monat

Patterns in nature are common, from zebra stripes to geese flying in V-formations to the nautilus’s spiral. In systems, the presence of a pattern indicates that there are several factors acting in feedback loops; those feedback loops are, in turn, caused by underlying laws or forces such as gravity, electrostatic attraction/repulsion, friction, surface tension, fluid shear, chemical potential, pheromones, and aerodynamic lift. The feedback loops cause the systems to oscillate and the oscillation is interpreted as an emergent pattern. Systems Thinking (specifically the Iceberg Model and causal loops) may be used to explain natural patterns. Understanding what causes natural patterns may help us to influence them, but more importantly, to translate that knowledge to the design and improvement of human-based systems.

Salah H. Abid, Russul K. Abdulrazak

In this paper, we introduce a new family of continuous distributions based on [0,1] truncated Fréchet distribution. [0,1] truncated Fréchet Uniform ([0,1] TFU ) and [0,1] truncated Fréchet Exponential ([0,1] TFE ) distributions are discussed as special cases. The cumulative distribution function, the rth moment, the mean, the variance, the skewness, the kurtosis, the mode, the median, the characteristic function, the reliability function and the hazard rate function are obtained for the distributions under consideration. It is well known that an item fails when a stress to which it is subjected exceeds the corresponding strength. In this sense, strength can be viewed as “resistance to failure”. Good design practice is such that the strength is always greater than the expected stress. The safety factor can be defined in terms of strength and stress as strength/ stress. So, the [0,1] TFU strength-stress and the [0,1] TFE strength-stress models with different parameters will be derived here. The Shannon entropy and Relative entropy will be derived also.

Jamie P. Monat, Thomas F. Gannon

Systems Thinking can be used to analyze and solve complex real-world problems that cannot be solved using short-sighted linear thinking. It can also help to understand complex international issues, such as the rise of terrorism and support for anti-American activities around the world; and to understand the illogical behaviors of organizations such as ISIS. In this paper, we apply the Systems Thinking methodology described by Monat and Gannon (2017) to analyze America’s foreign policy approach over the past 40 years. We conclude that the United States’ foreign policy has failed to use Systems Thinking in dealing with international issues. Instead of a cohesive strategy, the foreign policy has been one of short-sighted tactics, often with dire consequences. Examples include the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, the 2011 invasion of Libya, the arming of the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan, and even the rise of ISIS. Fundamental System Thinking principles that have been absent in addressing international issues include failure to recognize unintended consequences, failure to recognize and understand feedback loops, fixes that fail, poor root-cause analysis, and seeking the wrong goal. These failures are not exclusive to any one administration, but seem to be part of a pattern whose roots are embedded in the cultures of the U. S. State Department, the military, and the intelligence community.

Jamie P. Monat, Thomas F. Gannon

Systems Thinking can be used to address complex socio-economic problems, predict behaviors, and understand the seemingly illogical actions of individuals, countries, and organizations such as ISIS. It focuses on relationships among system components as well as on the components themselves. In this paper, we apply Systems Thinking tools (including the Iceberg Model, causal loop diagrams, stock-and-flow diagrams, and dynamic modeling) to analyze ISIS’s beliefs, goals, needs, and appeal, and to suggest new strategies for dealing with ISIS. We conclude that a Systems Thinking analysis leads to approaches that are very different from typical linear thinking solutions, such as “bomb them back to the Stone Age,” and suggest alternative approaches for dealing with ISIS. These include waging a non-military but a socio-economic war against ISIS using social media, moving away from a policy of forcibly imposing democracies, rethinking the U. S.’s role as the world’s policeman, destroying ISIS’s sources of revenue, encouraging ISIS’s Middle Eastern neighbors to fight the land war (with the U. S. serving only in an advisory capacity), addressing the root causes of ISIS’s appeal, and preventing both Iran and ISIS from developing nuclear capabilities at all costs.

Gina S. Mejía, Kléber H. Mejía

This article describes how to design a management model that enables the accreditation and quality assurance of the School of Engineering and Business, College of Administrative Sciences of the National Polytechnic School of Ecuador. These criteria are: i) educational objectives, ii) curriculum, iii) infrastructure and equipment, iv) faculty, v) student academic management, vi) learning outcomes or achievements, vii) student environment, viii) formative research, ix) links with the community. In this sense, the change is also in the integration of four new criteria that are considered primary as mentioned in the Higher Education Act-LOES-its General Regulation and the Law of Transparency and Access to Public Information,-LOTAIP, and other regulations. It includes a criterion that is related to the criterion number 4-Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. In conclusion, the model presented is composed of 13 criteria, which allowed us to evaluate the quality of the Business Engineering program. It is estimated that the results achieved can become the baseline, for, on the one hand, create an action plan to improve quality of education in the Engineering Company of the National Polytechnic School.

Jamie P. Monat, Thomas F. Gannon

Systems Thinking is a popular current topic in the world of Systems Engineering. However, as yet there is no commonly accepted definition or understanding of it. In this paper, we analyze some of the popular Systems Thinking literature and attempt to identify common themes. We conclude that Systems Thinking is a perspective, a language, and a set of tools. Specifically, Systems Thinking is the opposite of linear thinking; holistic (integrative) versus analytic (dissective) thinking; recognizing that repeated events or patterns derive from systemic structures which, in turn, derive from mental models; recognizing that behaviors derive from structure; a focus on relationships vs components; and an appreciation of self-organization and emergence. Specific Systems Thinking tools include systemigrams, system archetypes, main chain infrastructures, causal loops with feedback and delays; stock and flow diagrams; behavior-over-time graphs, computer modeling of system dynamics, Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM), and systemic root cause analysis.

Salah H. Abid, Heba A. Hassan

In reliability theory, a combination of two distributions failure rate model for reliability studies is paid much attention. In this paper, we will derive the failure rate model of (Marshall-Olkin Extended Uniform distribution) MOEU and every one of MOEU , MOEU , uniform , truncated exponential , truncated Weibull , truncated Frechet , truncated Rayleigh , doubly truncated Cauchy and doublytruncated Gumbel distributions.

Esam A. Gomaa

The Gibbs free energies for K₂CrO₄ were evaluated in mixed dimethylformamide (DMF)-H₂O solvents at 301.15 K from the experimental solubility measurements. From the experimental solubility data also the ionic radii of potassium and chromate ions are evaluated . The total free energy of the salt is divided into its individual contribution in the mixtures used. Libration Gibbs free energy for moving K₂CrO₄ from standard gas state to standard solution state was calculated according to specific cycle for the solvation process using the solubility product. Also the lattice energy for solid K₂CrO₄ (cr) was also calculated and used for further evaluation. The conventional Gibbs free energies for the cation (K⁺) and the anion (CrO₄^2-) were estimated theoretically and also the Gibbs free energy of CrO₄^2- gas was evaluated and all values were discussed.