Consolidated Notes & Direction
SESSION PURPOSE
The purpose of the orientation session was to begin bringing the internal team into clearer alignment around:
▪️ the broader direction of the work
▪️ the internal structure now being built
▪️ the level of discipline, inquiry, and coordination required going forward
▪️ and the role of the internal team in supporting future research, systems observation, institutional coordination, and facilitation work
The session was not positioned as conventional training.
Rather, it marked the beginning of a longer process intended to gradually prepare the team to:
▪️ understand systems behaviour over time
▪️ work with persistent issues
▪️ participate in research and systems observation
▪️ support strategic coordination processes
▪️ and facilitate the country’s broader developmental and institutional alignment processes emerging around STRLDi
AREAS COVERED DURING THE SESSION
The session walked participants through:
▪️ the purpose of the Internal Capacity Build
▪️ persistent issues and systems behaviour over time
▪️ the unemployment study as the working case study
▪️ the Five Disciplines and compressed programme structure
▪️ how the work moves from training into research, coordination, facilitation, and eventually broader strategic engagement
Participants were also introduced to the distinction between:
▪️ event-based thinking
and
▪️ structural and systemic thinking
with emphasis placed on understanding how issues persist across administrations, reforms, institutions, and generations.
EMERGING QUESTIONS FROM THE SESSION
Several important questions and observations surfaced naturally during the discussions, including:
▪️ whether the unemployment study can also be strengthened using HRDC-related data sources
▪️ questions around accreditation pathways and institutional recognition structures
▪️ how systems thinking work fits existing procurement and contracting environments
▪️ how the work transitions from internal learning into formal institutional engagement
▪️ and the level of readiness required before wider rollout
One of the clearer observations from the session was that the work itself is beginning to surface institutional questions naturally — around:
▪️ legitimacy
▪️ accreditation
▪️ data
▪️ procurement pathways
▪️ and how systems respond when work does not fit neatly into existing categories
Importantly, much of this is not being forced externally.
The work itself is beginning to reveal the structures, assumptions, and operating patterns underneath existing institutional environments.
RECOGNITION OF CROSS-SYSTEM CHALLENGES
There was also growing recognition during the session that persistent issues cannot continue being approached ministry by ministry in isolation.
Many persistent issues spill simultaneously across:
▪️ governance
▪️ economy
▪️ human systems
▪️ and nature
This reinforced the need for more integrated systems understanding and improved coordination capacity across sectors and institutions.
LONGER INTENTION OF THE WORK
The longer intention of the work is not limited to government offices alone.
The work is ultimately aimed at helping countries and regions improve their ability to:
▪️ understand how systems behave over time
▪️ reduce fragmentation between sectors and institutions
▪️ strengthen coordination capacity
▪️ improve strategic decision-making
▪️ strengthen institutional resilience
▪️ and move toward healthier, more durable national outcomes
The role of the internal team is not to directly carry out national development itself, but to facilitate healthier coordination, systems understanding, institutional alignment, and strategic processes that support the country’s broader developmental direction over time.
At regional level, the work aims to support more consistent and structurally healthier upward movement in GDP through:
▪️ stronger productive systems
▪️ improved institutional coherence
▪️ reduced systemic leakages
▪️ more adaptive governance structures
▪️ and better long-term strategic alignment
The work is intended to help governments, institutions, organisations, and populations better understand the systems they are already operating within — so that interventions become progressively more coordinated, adaptive, and effective over time.
PARTICIPANT RESPONSE & ATMOSPHERE
The atmosphere during the session was thoughtful overall.
There remains some caution in the air, which is understandable given the nature and depth of the work being introduced.
At the same time, there was growing recognition among participants regarding:
▪️ the scale of the work
▪️ the seriousness of the direction being built
▪️ and the possible long-term implications for governance, institutions, coordination, and national strategic processes
Some participants also expressed interest in sharing aspects of the work and study with potentially interested parties and institutional contacts.
NEXT SESSION
An adjustment has been made to the next session schedule.
NEXT INTERNAL CAPACITY BUILD SESSION
DATE
Sunday, May 17, 2026
TIME
2:00 PM – 6:00 PM
VENUE
STRLDi Training Room
Mmopane
IMPORTANT REFERENCE PAGES
Orientation Slides / Session Presentation
Participants are encouraged to review the presentation slides from the orientation session carefully:
Internal Capacity Build Structure & Training Schedule
The full internal programme structure, session schedule, and discipline breakdown can be viewed here (Password: STRLDi):
CLOSING NOTE
This orientation session marked the beginning of a longer developmental process.
The intention is not simply to produce participants who can speak about systems thinking conceptually.
The intention is to gradually build the capacity to:
▪️ observe
▪️ research
▪️ coordinate
▪️ facilitate
▪️ analyse
▪️ and support healthier institutional and national alignment processes over time
The work will deepen progressively as the sessions continue.
POST-SESSION NOTES: A NOTE ABOUT PRESENCE & TFD
This arose in my discussions with Brunoh post-session.
This was perhaps the first and only book Peter wrote with Otto Scharmer and the others. It is a beautiful bridge of a book.
What makes Presence different from The Fifth Discipline is that it deemphasises the tools somewhat and places more attention on the inner state of the intervenor — purpose, awareness, sensing, and the capacity to hold the work of The Fifth Discipline responsibly and coherently.
Peter would often say though, that, as The Fifth Discipline rolled out into organisations, the practice of the Learning Organisation actually comes through the disciplined use of the tools. As the tools are practised seriously, the individual’s inner work also begins to unfold alongside for them.
I am quite sure Peter had his reasons for becoming more silent on that point in Presence. He became much more anecdotal there. In fact, when I met him in Boston, he mentioned the book briefly to me once, but I also sensed he did not stay with that direction in the same way.
One important thing many readers do not realise is that The Fifth Discipline itself did not carry the full body of the tools. Those came later through:
▪️ The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook
▪️ The Dance of Change
▪️ Schools That Learn
Most people stopped at the first book and never moved into the practical architecture of the work.
For us, during the year-long programme, it was compulsory reading to move through all of them carefully — and more importantly, to work the tools into everyday living.
Whether it was:
▪️ the Ladder of Inference
▪️ the systems archetypes
▪️ Personal Mastery practices
▪️ dialogue
▪️ or mental models
the emphasis was always on practice.
That is why, in the work I am now building, I place so much emphasis on the tools as the entry point.
The unemployment study is one example of what happens when the disciplines and tools are practised long enough to begin observing systems structurally rather than reactively:
https://strldi.weebly.com/unemployment-summary.html
This is partly what I was trying to show in yesterday’s article, “When Systems Thinking is Trapped in Detailed Complexity”:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dynamic-complexity-why-persistent-systems-cannot-detail-damodaran-1ewpe/
The article was not only discussing theory. It was quietly spotlighting the practice of working with a systems archetype in real-world observation — learning to recognise recurring structures underneath events and discussions as they unfold.
Over time, the tools stop feeling like “tools” and begin becoming part of how one naturally observes systems, conversations, institutions, and behaviour over time.
The longer developmental path of the work moves progressively through:
▪️ training and grounding in the disciplines
▪️ research and systems observation work around persistent national issues
▪️ and eventually into stewarded strategy labs with leaders who have already moved through the earlier stages of systems understanding and inquiry
The intention is not to design strategy for countries externally, but to help countries progressively develop the internal capacity to design, coordinate, and steward healthier strategic directions with their own institutions, leadership structures, and populations over time.
So yes — Presence may very well help place you back into alignment with the conversation. But I suspect what will truly anchor you again is not only reading it, but gradually returning to the disciplined practice underneath the work.
Systems Thinking Research & Leadership Development Institute (STRLDi) 
Leave a comment