Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory
Abstract
In a world of accelerating change, educators, business leaders, environmentalists and scholars are calling for the development of systems thinking to improve our ability to take effective actions. Through courses in the K‐12 grades, universities, business schools, and corporations, advocates seek to teach people to think systemically. These courses range from one‐day workshops with no mathematics to graduate level courses stressing formal modeling. But how do people learn to think systemically? What skills are required? Does a particular type of academic background improve one's ability to think systemically? What systems concepts are most readily understood? Which tend to be most difficult to grasp? We describe initial results from an assessment tool or systems thinking inventory. The inventory consists of brief tasks designed to assess particular systems thinking concepts such as feedback, delays, and stocks and flows. Initial findings indicate that subjects from an elite business school with essentially no prior exposure to system dynamics concepts have a poor level of understanding of stock and flow relationships and time delays. Performance did not vary systematically with prior education, age, national origin, or other demographic variables. We hope the inventory will eventually provide a means for testing the effectiveness of training and decision aids used to improve systems thinking skills. We discuss the implications of these initial results and explore steps for fu…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education
Assaraf, O. B., & Orion, N. (2005) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20061 · Cited by 716 · see citing works
Closing the green finance gap – a systems perspective
Hafner, S., Jones, A., Anger-Kraavi, A., & Pohl, J. (2020) · Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.eist.2019.11.007 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
Evagorou, M., Korfiatis, K., Nicolaou, C., & Constantinou, C. (2009) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500690701749313 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
The Theoretical Nature of Systems Thinking. Perspectives on Systems Thinking in Biology Education
Verhoeff, R. P., Knippels, M.-C. P. J., Gilissen, M. G. R., & Boersma, K. T. (2018) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00040 · Cited by 151 · see citing works
A complete set of systems thinking skills
Arnold, R. D., & Wade, J. P. (2017) · Insight · doi:10.1002/inst.12159 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
The feasibility of systems thinking in biology education
Boersma, K., Waarlo, A. J., & Klaassen, K. (2011) · Journal of Biological Education · doi:10.1080/00219266.2011.627139 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sweeney, L. B., & Sterman, J. D.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Corresponding author
- Sterman, John D.
- ORCID
- Sterman, John D.
- Venue
- System Dynamics Review
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 249-286
- ISSN
- 0883-7066 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1727
- OpenAlex
- W2141851260
- Cited by
- 763
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 45 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 37
- FWCI
- 7.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- System Dynamics Review (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Complex Systems and Decision Making
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Systems Engineering Methodologies and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Keywords
- systems thinking, time delay, feedback, business students, decision aids, training effectiveness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review