Solution cycle

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Solution Cycle (learning and solution cycle ) is an empirically developed process model based on systemic considerations . It was developed by the innovation researcher Gustav Bergmann on the basis of findings from action research projects . The process design should enable the actors in change, innovation and development processes to orientate themselves, to provide a common methodological basis and to show design and intervention options.

Phases

The eight phases of the Solution Cycle can be combined into three main modes (mode = tuning, tone):

Understand: recognize and clarify

The perceptual mode comprises the phases of recognition and clarification with the first observations, the exchange of perspectives as well as the joint description of the problem and vision finding. Knowledge is generated in the sense of Gregory Bateson (learning level 0).

An emphatically “decelerated” approach seems appropriate in order not to follow the tendency to intervene quickly. A careful and slow approach enables a more precise perception and the consideration of different points of view and realities. One of the most important results is the joint description of reality. The attempt is made to combine the various problematic perspectives into a common figure. So it is determined in the dialogue in which field the main tasks and problems are located. A primary goal is to enable the actors to better recognize and understand themselves and their relationships with one another.

In addition, this phase involves developing a good relationship among the actors involved and developing a common ground with rules, manners and goals. It is also important to formulate an achievable vision. When the task to be solved is clear to everyone involved and everyone was able to contribute to the clarification, a strong motivation often develops. Everyone knows what it's about, the purpose and goals are understandable. The often complicated problems can sometimes be solved in an unfathomable way if the self-organizing ability to solve problems is discovered (see solution-oriented short therapy ). A profound and common understanding of the interrelationships often turns out to be an essential building block for later solutions.

Change: create, select, realize

The subsequent creative mode (with the phases of creating, selecting, realizing) is used for interactive solution development, in-depth planning of interventions as well as active change. It is created, selected, tried out and realized. This is where teams are formed, engagement sparked, solutions created, changes planned and implemented. New things are learned and changed (learning level 1). The actors experience their self-efficacy and discover coherence in their actions when they make independent and responsible decisions and are allowed to try out new things in an atmosphere that is open to experimentation.

Reflection: flow, learn, quit

In the reflexive mode the observation of the changes (contact, flow or flop) is in the foreground. The experiences are systematized into patterns and rules (best patterns) and the learning-oriented reflection of the events (feedback, appreciation, detachment) manifested.

This level 2 includes second-order learning. The experiences are viewed and reflected from the outside perspective. In the best case, knowledge of the third order can be obtained, which makes a contribution to metacompetence, a universal problem-solving ability of the system.

In practice, these reflective phases are often left out for reasons of efficiency, in order to move on to the next project.

If the outlined findings are now linked with one another, solutions can be derived that can be adapted to the individual requirements of each social system. On the basis of the solution cycle, targeted interventions can be carried out that help initiate important (change) impulses, create positive atmospheres and create the framework conditions for the development processes themselves.

A second-order observer should accompany the event and steer it contextually. These can be actors with great independence and autonomy. The process facilitators have the task of enabling initiatives, interactively agreeing the framework and the rules, monitoring compliance with them and designing the atmosphere appropriately.

Every unilateral intervention undermines the self-organization ability of the actors involved, thereby reducing competence and inhibiting engagement. The management staff act as moderators who use targeted interventions to get the process going and keep it flowing. They pay less attention to strict adherence to planned goals and measures than to opening up opportunities for action and promoting understanding between the actors.

Methodical integration

By agreeing on a methodical approach, easy coordination and coordination of different areas is also possible. Because the universal process design enables every actor to recognize at which stage a project is and which methods and behaviors are appropriate in each case. In this respect, a “methodical integration” can take place.

literature

  • Gustav Bergmann: Art of Success . Sternenfels, 2001
  • Gustav Bergmann, Jürgen Daub: Systemic innovation and competence management . Wiesbaden 2008
  • Gregory Bateson : Ecology of Mind . Frankfurt 1983 p. 366 ff .; to the learning level concept
  • Steve de Shazer: Ways to Successful Short Therapy . 2nd edition. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 1990; for systemic solution orientation