for most people in organizations, a better strategy is to find a partner whom they can trust. Leaders, regardless of “rank,” need a partner to talk to and confide in while going through the often intense phases of change.

Systems thinking is a process of discovery and diagnosis—an inquiry into the governing processes underlying problems we face.

Then comes the leap: What alternative solutions might you have tried, if the quick-fix avenue were not available to you? Would any of those alternatives have been more fundamentally satisfying?

Look at the performance involved with your worst current problem. If there are small triumphs and long troughs, there may be a “Fixes That Backfire” structure involved.

Often, people are aware of the negative consequences of applying this quick fix. But they do it anyway, because the pain of not doing something right away is more urgent, and feels more powerful…

Use this archetype to distinguish between true “tragedies of the commons” and situations where you “shift the burden” of a painful decision to the next level up. It’s a true “tragedy” if the incentives at the individual level must work at cross-purposes when you look at the collective outcome.

simple guiding principle: “Measure quantitatively that which should be quantified; measure qualitatively that which should not be quantified.

Manufacturers (like Procter) had learned through the 1970s and 1980s to heavily discount their goods and use lots of price promotions in marketing, to boost market share and value, and thereby improve profits. (This is shown in P&G’s balancing loop, the small circle at upper left.)

you can gradually evolve a new type of organization. It will be able to deal with the problems and opportunities of today, and invest in its capacity to embrace tomorrow, because its members are continually focused on enhancing and expanding their collective awareness and capabilities. You can create, in other words, an organization which can