Description and Implementation of the System
At Aisystant, the course "Rational Work" teaches you to distinguish between the physical world and the mental space, whether in speech or in writing. This course also trains you to connect abstract reasoning to the physical world. People cannot do without mental concepts—they help us communicate. But we must not lose sight of the physical world behind words and symbols. "Losing touch with reality" is especially discouraged in project work; otherwise, it becomes difficult to create successful systems.
For example, a bankruptcy trustee might mistakenly believe that the goal of their work is to enter data about the liquidation of a company into a registry. However, this entry is merely information that certifies all remaining assets of the company have been distributed among creditors. These assets exist in the physical world—they are the trustee's goal and their system. The registry entry only describes this system. Therefore, in any activity, you must not confuse the system itself with its description. This approach (and skill) in thinking needs to be practiced. But first, it is important to understand the concepts of "implementation of the system" and "description of the system."
In systems thinking, the concepts of "implementation of the system" and "description of the system" belong to different worlds. "Implementation" means we are talking about an object in the material and physical world, while "description" emphasizes that the reasoning concerns the mental space—that is, not the system's physical substance.
In this context, the concept of "implementation of the system" may seem tautological, because when we say "system," we already understand that we are referring to a physical object that exists in reality. However, the word "implementation" is intentionally used together with "system" to contrast it with the phrase "description of the system." Often, when discussing the "implementation of the system," the "description of the system" is discussed in parallel[1].
The implementation of a system can be a specific system as a physical object. For example, this "Blue Lagoon" cocktail in your hand, or this particular pencil. These objects are literally present in the physical world—they exist in four dimensions (4D): length, width, height, and time[2].
When we describe a system, we use words and terms that define its characteristics, properties, actions, features, behaviors, states, and so on. For example, terms like color, price, height, weight, desires, and so forth. These words differ from words like "car," "table," or "watch," which refer to physical objects.
To describe a system, you need to master certain methods of description[3]. Each characteristic will have its own worldviews, theories, and disciplines. If you need to describe the price of a car, you must know the practices (methods of description) of pricing; if you are describing a company for a shareholder, you cannot do without understanding financial reporting under IFRS or US GAAP and the specific technology for preparing the relevant financial documents (for example, SAP).
System descriptions are inherently abstract. This concept is necessary to draw attention to the substantive aspect of the system being discussed. But descriptions can be linked to the physical world—that is, you can focus on the form. To do this, you need to look at the information carrier on which the system descriptions are stored. At that point, we are talking about system documentation[4].
Using the concept of "system documentation" means that attention is focused primarily on the physical medium that contains the system description[5]. For example, a menu is the system documentation for a "cocktail." It contains the description of the cocktail: its ingredients, price, photo, and so on.
Documentation is often created using tools (technologies) that implement a particular discipline used to describe the system. For example, "Financial Reporting under US GAAP" documentation is generated using the SAP IT system.
Thus, the ability to distinguish between the concepts of implementation, description, and documentation of the system—and to identify these concepts in your own life—is an important thinking technique. Without the skill of fluently distinguishing these concepts, further study of systems thinking concepts will be impossible.
Therefore, you can simply use the term "system" without the word "implementation." But if you want to draw attention to the fact that you are considering the system and its description separately, you can use the terms "implementation of the system" and "description of the system." ↩︎
Note that this is not an abstract chair or car, which have no connection to physical space and time. ↩︎
For more on this concept, see Section 6. ↩︎
When we talk about the description of a system, we emphasize the importance of the content or essence that characterizes a system. When we talk about documentation, we focus on the fact that this content can be read, viewed, calculated, etc., on a specific medium. The more concepts there are, the more confusion arises. But if you study these concepts, order and clarity will emerge. ↩︎
When you hear or read the word "description," determine from the context what is meant: the actual "description," or a "document with a description." Often, the word "description" can mean either or both. ↩︎