University of North Texas — Learning Technologies

Master Systems
Thinking
Through
Real Problems

Four scenario-based games for doctoral and master's students. Each play presents a randomized situation drawn from organizational, educational, and institutional contexts.

GAME 01
Iceberg Analysis
Surface observable events and trace them down through patterns, structures, and mental models driving systemic behavior.
Systems Thinking Root Cause Mental Models
Play →
GAME 02
Causal Loop Diagramming
Identify reinforcing and balancing feedback loops that explain the dynamic behavior of a complex organizational problem.
Feedback Loops Systems Dynamics Leverage Points
Play →
GAME 03
SSM Evaluation
Apply Soft Systems Methodology to a messy organizational situation: build rich pictures, CATWOE, and root definitions.
SSM CATWOE Rich Picture
Play →
GAME 04
TAM/IDT Systems Diagnostic
Diagnose low technology adoption using TAM and Innovation Diffusion Theory. Identify adoption barriers and recommend interventions.
TAM Innovation Diffusion Adoption
Play →
GAME 01 — ICEBERG ANALYSIS
What Lies Beneath?
Work through the four levels of the iceberg model to uncover systemic causes.
SCENARIO
Iceberg Model Reminder: Events (visible tip) are driven by Patterns & Trends, which emerge from Structures, which are held in place by Mental Models (the deepest, least visible level).
1
Events Level — What is happening?
Identify the observable, reportable events. What can stakeholders actually see right now?

2
Patterns & Trends — Has this happened before?
What recurring patterns over time lead to or surround this event?

3
Structures — What is creating these patterns?
Structures include policies, reward systems, physical arrangements, reporting lines, resource flows, and processes.

4
Mental Models — What assumptions sustain the structures?
Mental models are the beliefs, values, and assumptions that keep dysfunctional structures in place.
GAME 02 — CAUSAL LOOP DIAGRAMMING
Map the Feedback
Identify the reinforcing and balancing loops driving dynamic behavior in a complex system.
SCENARIO
CLD Reminder: A Reinforcing loop (R) amplifies change in the same direction. A Balancing loop (B) resists change and seeks equilibrium. Arrows show causal direction; polarity (+/−) shows whether variables move together or opposite.
1
Identify the Key Variables
List the main system variables (not actions or events) that change over time in this scenario.

2
Map the Reinforcing Loops
Describe at least two reinforcing (amplifying) feedback loops. Name each loop and explain how it escalates the problem.

3
Map the Balancing Loops
Identify at least one balancing loop that could counteract the problem or is currently failing to do so.

4
Identify the High-Leverage Intervention Point
Meadows (1999) argues that the best leverage points are often at the level of goals, information flows, and rules. Where would you intervene?
GAME 03 — SOFT SYSTEMS METHODOLOGY
Define the System of Inquiry
Apply Checkland's SSM to move from a messy situation to a structured evaluation plan.
SCENARIO
SSM Reminder: SSM (Checkland, 1981) moves from an unstructured problem situation through rich picture, root definitions, CATWOE, and conceptual models toward feasible and desirable change. It is interpretive, not prescriptive.
1
Rich Picture — Elements of the Situation
Select all stakeholders and tensions that belong in this rich picture. Include conflicting interests, unclear roles, and external pressures.

2
CATWOE Analysis
Complete each CATWOE element for the most important "system of interest" you identified in Step 1.

3
Root Definition
Write a concise root definition that synthesizes your CATWOE into a single declarative statement of what the system is.

4
Feasible & Desirable Changes
SSM seeks changes that are both systemically desirable AND culturally feasible. Rank the options from most to least appropriate given this situation.
GAME 04 — TAM / IDT SYSTEMS DIAGNOSTIC
Diagnose the Adoption Failure
Use Technology Acceptance Model and Innovation Diffusion Theory to identify adoption barriers and prescribe interventions.
SCENARIO
TAM (Davis, 1989): Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use drive Behavioral Intention → Actual Use.  |  IDT (Rogers, 2003): Relative advantage, Compatibility, Complexity, Trialability, and Observability shape adoption rates across adopter categories.
1
TAM Diagnosis — Rate the Adoption Failure Factors
Rate how severely each TAM dimension is contributing to the adoption problem (1 = minor issue, 5 = major barrier).

2
IDT Adopter Analysis
Select which IDT innovation attributes are most problematic, and identify the adopter segment most critical to address first.

3
Systems-Level Diagnosis
Low adoption is rarely a technology problem alone. Identify the systemic factors involved.

4
Intervention Plan
Rank the recommended interventions from highest to lowest expected impact (drag to reorder).