Insight register | System Canvas

Living hypotheses; no claim of validation

Reprioritized research register — accessibility and use

Priority	Hypothesis / design commitment	Evidence required
P0	A practitioner can start with one problem and a minimal canvas without learning the six lenses first	Unassisted task study and error observation
P0	Progressive disclosure reduces learning cost without lowering diagnostic validity	Controlled comparison, quality scoring, time/workload
P0	Visual accessibility must mean correct application, not attractive diagrams alone	Misleading-simplification tests, confidence calibration
P1	A stable actor model supports coherent movement between analytical viewpoints	Cross-view comprehension and tracing tasks
P1	Evidence tags and rival-hypothesis prompts reduce causal storytelling	Unsupported-mechanism rate and calibration
P1	The procedure can reuse existing IAD, VSM/ECM, 4EM and EA constructs without becoming a rebranded duplicate	Expert prior-art crosswalk and counterexamples
P2	Second-order regulator checks and overlapping-game models add diagnostic value when genuinely relevant	Targeted comparative cases
P2	Biological analogies assist understanding without misleading mechanistic inference	Concept-transfer interviews and errors

Product and methodological decisions

The four user-facing capabilities are analyze, diagnose, evaluate, refine.
The five moves (frame, map, explain, redesign, test/adapt) remain a suggested facilitation path, not mandatory stages.
The six lenses are selectable analytical views, not six required worksheets.
Start simple; disclose complexity when it affects a decision. Do not imply that a simpler representation has made the real system simple.
C4, Business Model Canvas, 4EM and ArchiMate are usability and viewpoint precedents; IAD, VSM, ECM and other systemic theories provide substantive analytical prior art.
Explicitly distinguish System Canvas methodology from Human Viable Systems Model normative evaluation.

Immediate research tasks

Produce a matrix comparing current System Canvas prompts with actual IAD, VSM, Espejo ECM, 4EM and enterprise-architecture procedures.
Prototype one case at three levels: one-minute orientation, minimum working diagnosis, optional focused theory-backed views.
Recruit at least one practitioner unfamiliar with systems theory and one relevant domain expert to identify different failure modes.
Test whether independent practitioners notice missing evidence and choose appropriate escalation.
Establish prespecified success/failure thresholds before broad claims of improved accessibility.

High-potential ideas

Priority	Idea	Next maturity step
1	Mechanism-oriented systems redesign	Operationalize and compare to causal-loop analysis
2	Six complementary diagnostic lenses	Test coverage, redundancy and cognitive cost
3	Reflexive regulation	Construct regulator-of-regulator diagnostic cases
4	Boundary-aware overlapping games	Analyze interfaces and strategic spillovers in chess
5	Declared-purpose vs operational-objective vs actual outcome	Develop evidence-based goal divergence audit
6	Power as relational capability	Link decision rights, resources, information and rule revision
7	Epistemic/deontic integration	Develop claim/evidence and rule/authority diagrams
8	Stakeholder agency and human viability	Specify optional HVSM evaluation criteria
9	Teachable visual grammar	Prototype novice-friendly, cross-view diagrams

Essential cautionary distinctions

System vs game; composition vs containment; recursion vs second-order cybernetics; statement vs evidence; credibility vs truth; knowing vs believing; declared purpose vs incentive vs effect; norm vs enforcement; authority vs legitimacy; survival vs desirability; power-over vs power-to; useful diagrams vs demonstrated causal mechanisms.

Maturity process

Concept → testable hypothesis → repeatable procedure → pilot evidence → comparative validation → teachable mature method.

Open research questions

What does the integration genuinely add beyond Beer VSM, Ostrom IAD, 4EM and causal-loop methods?
Which cross-view questions find otherwise missed mechanisms?
How do we avoid infinite scope expansion?
What evidence differentiates causal mechanisms from stories?
How can plural goals be negotiated rather than presumed?
How can analysts account for externalities and nonhuman ecological systems?
How do interventions alter the incentives and power of their own regulators?
Which classroom exercise transfers to unfamiliar domains?

Case backlog

Chess, journalism/platforms, dating, participatory workplace governance, local maintenance services. Track case packets separately with provenance, uncertainty and results.

Update discipline

Record new claims with date, author, confidence, sources, rival explanations, proposed test and maturity status. Only promote claims into the core thesis after explicit review.