On the design of systems-oriented university curricula

This paper proposes a tool called the Systems Education Matrix (SEM) for use in informing the work of developers of systems-oriented curricula at colleges and universities around the world. The SEM was developed by Team 1 at the 2008 IFSR Fuschl Conversation held at Fuschl am See in Austria. In order to manage the complex problems we are dealing with today, systems thinking is essential. It is clear that systems education should be acknowledged as an important 'scientific method' that can help today's society to deal with the complexities of contemporary issues. To serve this role effectively, systems education needs to be focused towards the various needs that exist. The members of Team 1 have focused on the nature of systems education that will be required to not only train systems specialists, but to make systems thinking and analysis an integral part of discipline focused research and management

Reversible formation and cleavage of Pt→Ag dative bonds in a pre-organized cavity of a luminescent heteropolynuclear platinum(ii) complex

A U-shaped Pt2Ag2 complex [Pt2Ag2(ppy)2(Ph2pz)4] with a pre-organized cavity (ppy = 2-phenylpridinate and Ph2pz = 3,5-diphenylpyrazolate) and related complexes have been prepared. The Pt2Ag2 complexes react with Ag(I) ions to give the corresponding Pt2Ag3 complexes containing Pt→Ag dative bonds. It became obvious that the existence of the C(ipso) atom in the chelate ligand is important as the driving force for forming Pt→Ag dative bonds. However, once the Pt2Ag3 complex is formed, the trapped Ag(I) ion is mainly stabilized by the Pt→Ag dative bonds, which are stronger than the Ag?C(ipso) bond. The trapped Ag(I) ion can be abstracted from the cavity selectively by adding an equivalent amount of chloride ion into the solution of Pt2Ag3 complexes to reproduce the original Pt2Ag2 complexes.Related illustration appears in this issue\u27s inside back cover. The URL is as follows: http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C7CC90232

A SYSTEMS ANOMALY: CONSUMER DECISION-MAKING PROCESS FOR LUXURY GOODS (MARKETING, SYSTEMS SCIENCES, BEHAVIOR)

Current consumer behavior theories propose two basic models of decision making: the high-involvement and the low-involvement models. The research questions were: (1) Can the current high-involvement model explain the consumer decision-making process for luxury goods? (2) If so, why are consumers of luxury goods willing to spend so much money on them? Is not that a contradiction of the rational and careful consumers proposed in the high-involvement model? (3) If such consumers do not follow the current high-involvement model, is there another decision-making model for luxury goods? The hypothesis of this research was that the consumer decision-making process for luxury goods is different from the current high-involvement model. Leica cameras were used as the research subjects, since they are representative of the luxury camera market. The literature on involvement, consumer durable goods, and pricing were extensively reviewed. Then, Ackoff and Emery\u27s systems approach was incorporated in order to contexualize the consumer behavior in a systems environment. Also, with their choice models, the stylistic and the functional values of the choice model for luxury cameras were developed. Data collection involved two sub-stages: (1) pilot interviews with Leica customers and with the sales force of a photographic retail outlet, and (2) a Leica owner survey with selected current Leica customers of the store. A sequential, judgemental sampling was used. Data were first analyzed with frequency counts, and then with causal path analysis. The results indicated two distinctive consumer decision-making processes among the respondents. The M4-P model seems to be a new kind of model that does not fit the current high-involvement model, while the R4 model basically fits it. Two unexpected problems emerged after data analysis. First, since we unexpectedly found two processes instead of one, the respondents\u27 biographical data turned out to be inadequate to relate the two models to customer profiles. Another problem is the lack of rigorous definition of involvement. Is involvement product-specific, consumer-specific, and/or situation-specific? Refining the definition of involvement seems to be the next research task

A SYSTEMS ANOMALY: CONSUMER DECISION-MAKING PROCESS FOR LUXURY GOODS (MARKETING, SYSTEMS SCIENCES, BEHAVIOR)

Current consumer behavior theories propose two basic models of decision making: the high-involvement and the low-involvement models. The research questions were: (1) Can the current high-involvement model explain the consumer decision-making process for luxury goods? (2) If so, why are consumers of luxury goods willing to spend so much money on them? Is not that a contradiction of the rational and careful consumers proposed in the high-involvement model? (3) If such consumers do not follow the current high-involvement model, is there another decision-making model for luxury goods? The hypothesis of this research was that the consumer decision-making process for luxury goods is different from the current high-involvement model. Leica cameras were used as the research subjects, since they are representative of the luxury camera market. The literature on involvement, consumer durable goods, and pricing were extensively reviewed. Then, Ackoff and Emery\u27s systems approach was incorporated in order to contexualize the consumer behavior in a systems environment. Also, with their choice models, the stylistic and the functional values of the choice model for luxury cameras were developed. Data collection involved two sub-stages: (1) pilot interviews with Leica customers and with the sales force of a photographic retail outlet, and (2) a Leica owner survey with selected current Leica customers of the store. A sequential, judgemental sampling was used. Data were first analyzed with frequency counts, and then with causal path analysis. The results indicated two distinctive consumer decision-making processes among the respondents. The M4-P model seems to be a new kind of model that does not fit the current high-involvement model, while the R4 model basically fits it. Two unexpected problems emerged after data analysis. First, since we unexpectedly found two processes instead of one, the respondents\u27 biographical data turned out to be inadequate to relate the two models to customer profiles. Another problem is the lack of rigorous definition of involvement. Is involvement product-specific, consumer-specific, and/or situation-specific? Refining the definition of involvement seems to be the next research task