Blog 1 - Introducing the Blog Series: “Unbounded Affairs: Systemic Design (with)in Government”

Soundtrack Blog 1: Looped — Kiasmos (2020)

Artwork Blog 1: Explore the Milano Triënnale Exhibit 2022: “Unknown Unknowns: An Introduction to Mysteries”, for example the Dutch art installation “Have we Met? Humans and non-humans on common ground.”

Have we met? humans and hon-humans on common ground

Read other blogs: Prologue, Introduction (blog 1), A Complex Matter (blog 2), Systemic Viewpoints (blog 3), Shapeshifting Design (blog 4), De-methodising Design? (intermezzo blog), The Relating Public Servant (blog 5), Relating Design Story (blog 6), The Collaborating Public Servant (blog 7) Collaborating Design Story (blog 8), The Learning Public Servant: REWILD-ing the mind (blog 9) and Learning Design Story (blog 10)

Introduction

“Unprecedented” floods and wildfires, “unforeseen” labour shortages and “failing” health care systems: the news headlines say it all. We are living in complex times. Governments around the world are increasingly struggling to respond in meaningful ways to these “complex” challenges, especially against the backdrop of diminishing biodiversity and growing socio-economic inequality. Are there ways for governments, and public servants within, to get better at seeing and responding to complexity when designing public policies, programs and services?

“Systemic design” is globally gaining momentum as a new approach for “public sector innovation”. Systemic design labs, toolkits and courses are popping up everywhere, while “complexity” experts promise to teach us how to “tackle/solve” the world’s biggest “problems”. Systemic design, also referred to as systems innovation, system-shifting design, systems oriented design or (co)-design for complexity, brings together systems thinking — a way of looking at the world and its complex challenges as interdependent and connected — and design practice — a pragmatic, iterative and collaborative way to generate creativity, imagination, initiatives and interventions — to transcend and expand our thinking and actions to work with(in) complex challenges (see Sevaldson & Jones, 2019, System-Shifting Design Report, 2021).

But why systemic design? What is challenging about systemic design as a concept and as an approach, especially when applied in a public service context? How could governments use systemic design as an approach to achieve better outcomes for people, society and our planet?

The questions above deserve deeper inquiry as systemic design enters the public (design) space. Systemic design holds much promise for alternative futures, and yet conversely is equally capable of reproducing systemic oppression, as pointed out in a recent systemic design panel discussion (“Confronting Legacies of Oppression in Systemic Design”, RSD 11, 2022). How to act on its potential, without getting too distracted by the “sexyness” of system maps, and without trapping ourselves in endless systems “thinking” without systems “doing”?

In the “Unbounded Affairs: Systemic Design (with)in Government” blog series we will explore “public systemic design” as a way for public service workers to think about and work with uncertainty in an increasingly complex, interwoven and entangled world. By shining a brighter, larger and more diverse light on these concepts, this 10-part blog series attempts to make the invisible visible, to “see the unseen” and bring people together in a state of political awareness and “unbounded” learning, to ultimately design conditions that are conducive to regenerate life on earth.

The next sections speak to the blog’s intentions and intended audience, the writing principles and approach of the authoring collective, the different places in which the conversations took place and the design metaphor that will be used throughout the series. It concludes with a reading guide to help navigate through the content.

The Intentions

The “Unbounded Affairs: Systemic Design (with)in Government” blog series brings together thinkers and practitioners in design practice, systems thinking, complexity science, public administration, philosophy, deep ecology and social justice to:

1. Introduce the public sector to systemic and systemic design thinking and practice.

Why do we need to apply different ways of working in the public sector? What is problematic about current innovation approaches, such as “human-centred” design”? What is public systemic design?

2. Bring more awareness and deeper inquiry to inherent promises and pitfalls of “public systemic design.”

What are systems? What is design? Can systems be designed, or do they design us? What are the paradoxes, dilemmas and tensions of systemic design in a government context?

3. Bring together and at the same time diversify systemic design concepts by introducing new language, design concepts and visualisations.

How might we better bring together and apply different (“Western”, “Indigenous”) systemic lenses in design processes? How might we decolonise and “un-center” humans in systemic design? What is “squircularity” and what is (inter)systemic design?

4. Share stories that illustrate systemic design being applied in practice.

How do we “do” systemic design instead of just thinking about it? How might we apply systemic design in a government context?

5. By doing the above this blog series in its entirety is meant as an intersystemic design intervention in and of itself. It is an invitation to learn and to expand our understanding of “systemic design” by coming to see how our own designerly views sit in between “systems” and “designs”.

How do the perspectives of human “designers” on all things living and non-living play a role in between our perceptions of “systems” (introduced in this blog series as: systemic viewpoints) and our “design” activities within? How can we make this human, political element more visible and actionable in systemic design practice, especially in a public service design context?

The Audience

The series is written for people who

• work in the public service of (local, municipal, provincial, national) governments — especially “office/desk” people (policy folks, managers and up) and are typically a few steps removed from the “operational” service provider folks (such as nurses, police officers, childcare providers)
• were maybe told to work more “systemically”, or design at a “systems level” and are curious to learn more about what that means, and where to begin applying these concepts
• might not perceive themselves as “designers” but could maybe benefit from seeing their decision-making or imaginative space as “design space” in which design approaches can be used
• are not very familiar yet interested in other kinds of governance forms, such as First Nations/Indigenous world views, laws and governance

Reading this blog series will help deepen understanding and expand knowledge of the application of systemic thinking and design practice so that it can be used in designing collaborations for government policies, programs, and services.

Service designers and UX/UI designers/researchers who work with and in government and other public institutions such as universities or libraries and who are frustrated with the (lack of) impact of their work, might also find value in repositioning and reorienting their work towards public systemic (service) design. This blog series helps with that.

Last but not least, people who are already familiar with thinking about and practising public systemic design may experience some “yeah, that!”, “never thought of that” (or “that’s non-sense”) — sensemaking moments by reading the series and connecting to a wider public systemic design community than they had previously imagined existed. We are very much inviting everyone’s views and are hoping to spark lively discussions.

The Writing Approach and Principles

This blog series was written over the course of 2022 by Marlieke Kieboom, an Anthropologist turned “public service worker” and systemic design practitioner (see Prologue). However the knowledge this series holds was produced and shared by the “Ministry of Unbounded & Entangled Affairs”, a diverse collective of people who are actively working in the field of government innovation, academia and systemic design: Kevin Ehman, Johnnie Freeland, Ben Weinlick, Ashley Dryburgh, Robert Boraks, Darcy Ridell, Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer, Paige Reeves, Rebecca Rubuliak, Keren Perla, Laura Hebert and others.

The following statements describe the epistemology of the blog series:

• knowledge isn’t produced or held by one person

The blog series is intentionally void of personal attributions. Each blog originates from 1-on-1 and group dialogues and was written in non-academic, narrative fashion. Some conversations continued via a string of emails or follow-up conversations over time to deepen our storytelling and sensemaking. Throughout the blogs, knowledge from online videos and academic and non-academic articles were added.

• one person’s knowledge is not more important than someone else’s, and no one knows everything

By lack of a better way to reflect and bring forward an unbounded, entangled, collective view on and of humanity “we”, “us” and “our” are used instead of “I”, “my”, or “mine”. By reading and interacting with the blogs, you become part of this collective, consuming, stewarding and expanding the knowledge the blogs hold. Therefore there is no active reference to “they”, “them”, “theirs”, nor do we actively seek those boundaries in our writing. In doing so we do want to acknowledge that the collective “we” consists of people that hold different power positions in society.

• knowledge is fluid, not stationary or static over time and in space

Unlike these blogs that after publishing become frozen in time, our stories, words and conversations continue in open-ended, unfinalised and diverse ways. Each blog is connected to the other blogs, but could also be read as a stand-alone story. Each blog contains references for further listening or reading to encourage continuous learning from different perspectives.

• knowledge and our views on knowledge originate in local contexts and are social constructs

Throughout this blog series we will find many words in between quotation marks to invite ourselves to think about their origin and their meaning. Has anything ever been “un-pre-cedented” or “un-for-seen”? By introducing this practice we intentionally stay away from “explaining” throughout this blog series. The word “ex-plain” comes from Latin: ex- (“out”) + planō (“I flatten, make level, make plain”). Which social construct is this word reflective of? In which contexts is “ex-plain” used and by whom? Why?

• introducing new language and text formats as “design” for our minds

This blog series is not a book, yet not an academic article, yet not a bundle of stories or a report. New language and concepts are introduced intentionally to invite active engagement in our brains, instead of passive consumption. Its artistic, sometimes philosophical writing style might push us beyond our comfort zones. That’s ok. Our invitation is to let our minds wander free, and see what happens when it connects to new ideas. Could it spark curiosity, imagination and new pathways?

• knowledge as a relational connector

“Complexity-people’’ have a tendency to “complexify”: by making complex things (needlessly) more complex we exclude people from engaging with each other and the content. Systemic design thinkers and practitioners are part of this dynamic:

• We argue amongst ourselves over what is or isn’t a “system”, “design” or a “systems map” as if there is a “true” way of thinking about life, creation, emergence or complexity
• We intensify a systemic “gaze” by strongly focussing on the system that needs “change” while excluding our connectedness with “the” system by not see our designing selves as a continuous, interconnected part of the “whole”
• We let our individual “egos” get in the way to demonstrate who was “first” in coming up with a “new” thought, methodology or idea
• We use language that is hard to understand and focus strongly on rational methodologies that are complex and hard to master
• We rely on overly complex, academic and visual tools to convey messages such as “systems maps”
• We do a poor job of showing how (public) systemic design can be applied in practice
• Our field isn’t yet culturally diverse

This dynamic excludes people who are just starting to learn about systems, complexity and design. Uptake will remain low if people don’t understand systemic design nor identify with the folks who practise it. How can people “do” systemic design in their work without having to be an expert in it and without having to comply with all sorts of (cultural, academic) rules, standards, norms? The blog series aims for connection. We want to invite people and connect to their learning journeys by writing in clear language and using easy to understand examples.

In light of this novel, organic writing approach we, as a collective of thinkers and practitioners have come to agree on the following set of principles regarding the content of this blog series:

• In general, our personal experiences, views and opinions differ, and that is OK
• We continue to pursue systemic design practice in government settings despite clear challenges in applying public systemic design
• We believe that governments have everything necessary within their purview to facilitate complex innovation and yet struggle to do so
• We aim to inspire change-makers inside and outside traditional public organisations to work towards regenerative, equitable, diverse futures
• We acknowledge the interconnectedness of topics such as extractive capitalism, institutionalised racism, colonialism and climate change
• We acknowledge that systemic design will not change the artefacts that systems produce unless we hold “oppressors”, including ourselves as designers who have power over the means of producing artefacts, accountable while supporting the “oppressed” in dismantling systemic oppression (Frederick van Amstel, 2022).

Our writing approach is loosely and respectfully inspired by a cultural, Indigenous* practice called “yarning”. In (Australian) Aboriginal culture yarning is a structured, cultural activity for knowledge production, inquiry and transmission.

“[yarning] has protocols of active listening, mutual respect, and building on what others have said, rather than openly contradicting them or debating their ideas. It references places and relationships and is highly contextualised in the local world views of those yarning.” (…) “The end point of a yarn is a set of understandings, values and directions shared by all members of the group in a loose consensus that is inclusive of diverse points of view” (Tyson Yunkaporta — Sandtalk, 2020).

We invite you to learn more about yarning through further self-study.

*Who is Indigenous? One way of seeing is “seeing an Indigenous person as a member of a community retaining memories of life lived sustainably on a land base, as part of that land base” — as expressed by Tyson Yunkaporta in Sandtalk, 2020.

The Design Metaphor

What is a good analogy or metaphor to describe this new body of systemic design thinking and practice to ourselves, a friend, mother, husband or colleague? A good metaphor in the field of “complexity” is hard to find. It needs to meet many requirements, such as being easy to understand and relate to across many cultures while being able to hold a certain level of mystery and sacredness. Previous analogies have been very noun-centred, such as cybernetic “machine”, “network” or “ecology”. We think in this time and age it should be a verb, since it has to invite an activity of relating, of seeing oneself as part of the “things” we work on, as part of a bigger “whole”.

Throughout this blog series we have found a good metaphor in a new word that emerged during the research for this blog series: the verb “squircle-ing”, and the nouns “squircularity” and “squircle” to depict an “in-between”, intersystemic design space. Maori “system navigator” and design thinker Johnnie Freeland (from Aotearoa / New Zealand) brought forward this idea of visually representing the “human-created” systems view as a square, and the “natural” systems view as a circle.

The square represents human-created, human-centred, more logical, linear, reductivist (“Western”) based knowledge systems, “where man sits above nature, man tries to control nature”, where man is separate from nature. The circular or cyclical form stands for understanding how we locate ourselves as humans within our living and non-living contexts, places, ancestors and future generations, and is more akin to the way traditional (“Indigenous”) cultures perceive natural life more “wholistically”, such as in the concept of “all my relations”.

In his work Johnnie suggests presenting the circle and the square as two overlapping, complementary lookouts that could mutually benefit from being used simultaneously, instead of being positioned as two polar opposites on a linear spectrum.

Visual 1: Separate, human-created (square) systems view and whole, natural (circular) systems view together form a “squircular” design space. Figure adapted from Johnnie Freeland, 2020.

We have found this a very useful visual image to remind ourselves of the two systemic views and to spark conversations. In speaking about it from a design perspective, we started calling it “squircular” seeing, “squircular” thinking, or “squircularity” by phonetically merging the words “square” and “circle”. The “squircularity” design principle, then refers to that conflictive yet productive, collaborative “in-between” design space, that is neither circular or square shaped, and that transcends time, place and different “life” forms beyond just humans. In this “squircular” shape, different systemic worldviews come together, yet do not merge. This “squircular” design space is somewhat “magical”, in that its synergy might contain “shapeshifting” properties, to enable us to “escape” and transcend disconnected status quo’s, and to create new design spaces that move towards designing for “relationality”.

With using this metaphor throughout this blog series, we are looking to find synergy between different ways of viewing the world through different systemic lenses. We also want to make intentional reference to the ontological link between the emergent field of (Western) complexity theory and bodies of Indigenous knowledges in systemic design thinking and practice. This is an exciting yet nascent field that we would very much like to support in its expansion.

“Squircle-ing” as such is an attempt to go beyond the binary of “Western”/”Indigenous” views to include people who inhibit both or neither “Indigenous” and “Western” ways of thinking and doing, and to include people who are suffering from the consequences of over 400 years of “Enlightenment” and extractive capitalism in any way, shape or form. It’s an attempt to reshape our relations through acknowledging the deep harm that has been done (to people, to the earth) by recognizing imbalanced power relations, without romanticising the past, and without creating more polarisation. What can diverse systemic views bring us when designing for a post-Anthropocenic Era: the Symbiocene?

More to come on designing with “squircularity” in blogs 3 & 4. A full story on how this design concept can be applied follows in blog 8.

The Places

The series mostly features anecdotes (all blogs) and full stories (blog 6, 8, 10) on applied public systemic design in so-called “Canada”, known pre-colonisation as Turtle Island. Canada is a deeply complex, political playing field between local, provincial and federal governments, First Nations, Métis and Indigenous peoples, social innovators/designers and activist communities. We hope the knowledge generated here can be of use elsewhere. People who became part of the blog series collective conversed in the following places:

• Victoria (British Columbia, Canada), on unceded Coast Salish territories, respecting the lands of the lək̓ʷəŋən speaking People, known today as the Esquimalt and Songhees Nations and the W̱SÁNEĆ First Nation
• Vancouver (British Columbia, Canada), on unceded traditional territories of the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam), Sḵwx̱wú7mesh (Squamish), and səlilwətaɬ (Tsleil-Waututh) Nations
• Netherlands, a democratic nation state that became wealthy through colonising people and extracting resources from foreign, unceded lands
• Edmonton (Alberta), amiskwaciwâskahikan ᐊᒥᐢᑿᒌᐚᐢᑲᐦᐃᑲᐣ, which is part of theMétis Nation Homeland and is governed by Treaty 6
• Aotearoa | New Zealand

Reading and Visual Guide

This reading guide helps to navigate the content of this blog series. The concepts, dilemma’s, paradoxes, approaches and codes described in this blog series intend to balance “depth” and “rigour” with “accessibility” and “simplicity”. If it gets too dense in the “thinking” section, skip to the “story” section. Want to gain more depth? Dive into “further reading/watching/listening” sections of each blog.

Theory: Blogs 2 & 3 invite us to think deeply. They introduce the complex context in which public service tasks are situated, and the concept of contemporary public systemic design. We discover a “deep paradox” and a curious systemic design “dilemma” that are both specific to systemic design in a government context through sharing anecdotes of public service designers. These 2 blogs are “long reads”, and set the stage for what is to come.

Practice: Blogs 4, 5, 8 and 9 focus on the practice. What can public servants do in their respective “complex” work scenarios? We introduce public systemic “shapeshifting” design and uncover “light”, “deep” and “far + wide” work scenarios. We provide ideas for an non-prescriptive “code” for each scenario on how to practise public systemic design within these scenarios. Blog 9 introduces the “REWILD public systemic design mindset”, which holds 5 “open” systemic design principles: Relate, Expand, Widen, Imagine, Liberate and Distribute (stories, love, power).

Methodology: Blog “Intermezzo” pauses us and makes us think about the word “Methodology”. Does (inter)systemic design need a methodology?

Stories: Blogs 6, 8, 10 introduce stories from the field of public systemic design. The first story about using systemic design to lower overdose deaths is told from a government perspective and is situated in a “light” systemic design scenario. The second story about building a “different kind of prison” highlights a design perspective in a “deep” systemic design scenario.

Future: Blog X summarises the blog series. It also looks at the future of “systemic design”. What is on the horizon?

Throughout the blogs we will see black and white visual imagery — depicted against a black, starry night sky. It’s that feeling of sitting next to a warm bonfire, and looking up to the endless sky that we’d like to evoke and connect to as we move through our blogs.

We hope the blogs have something for everyone who is curious to learn more about the world we live in, and how to situate ourselves, our government work, systemic design and complexity within.

Visual 2: Reading Guide: “Unbounded Affairs: Public Systemic Design Blog Series

What’s next

In our next blog we introduce ways of understanding “complexity” when designing in a government context. We will use two stories, one about water, and one about mining, to illustrate the challenges public service designers face. We uncover a “deep paradox” in systemic design. How to overcome it?

Further reading, watching, listening

• Check out this inspiring list of system-shifting innovators at the recent “system innovation 2022” learning festival
• Watch an inspiring talk by Pia Andrews (public service transformer in Aotearoa/New Zealand, formerly at the Australian and Canadian Government) and Geoff Mulgan (Professor at UCL + Ex-Nesta) on the “future of public institutions” (2021)
• Check out Emergence Magazine or listen to their podcast for inspiration on the nexus of design, art, technology and complexity.
• “For the Wild” podcast is a podcast on the “Anthology of the Anthropocene”. Key topics include the struggle to protect “wild nature”, to promote ecological renewal and resistance and to heal from the disconnection furthered by consumer culture and human supremacy.
• “Welcome to the Symbiocene” —In this episode of “Tegenlicht” (“Backlight”), a Dutch-English narrated tv-programme, future-forward thinkers Glenn Albrecht, Neri Oxman and Jalila Essaïdi are being interviewed about how they think we can move to a new “era” where humans work together with “nature” to create “abundance”.
• Read more about shifting systems and every-day patterns in this excellent blog series by the Yunus Centre (Griffith University): “What is needed is a foundation for public systems that moves away from goals of access to more and better servicing of communities, and towards goals around learning how we can promote patterns of thriving, aspiration, success and ‘wellbeing’.”.

About the Author

Get in touch! My email is: first name dot last name @gov dot bc dot ca

Marlieke Kieboom (white, she-her, Zeeuws-Flamish-Dutch-German and “unknown” roots, MSc Political Anthropology + MA Complex Emergencies, immigrant settler* in Canada | Turtle Island) is a public service designer with 20+ years of experience and knowledge in the fields of social innovation, systemic (service) design, complexity science and public policy. Marlieke has led major collaborations between academia, governments, non-profits and communities in Europe, Canada and Latin America. She finds joy in developing new approaches for coming to see and relate to each other and the complexity of our worlds in collaborative, participatory and decolonised ways. Read more about what inspired Marlieke to write this blog series in the Prologue.

Marlieke wrote this blog series based on conversations with a like-minded and like-hearted collective — the “Ministry of Unbounded & Entangled Affairs” — whose people work and think at the intersections of design, public policy, complexity, social justice and deep ecology. The series was written over the course of 2022. Read more about the collective and the blog series in Blog 1.

Consider making a one-time contribution via Paypal or becoming a supporter on Patreon to express gratitude for 300+ hours of “free” research and to nurture future writing, community building and the development of open learning material on systemic design for public servants. Thank you!

* “A settler is someone who benefits from the privilege of having their worldview imposed upon the lands and the bodies of everyone living in these lands” — Chelsea Vowel (Vice, 2019)