Systems Thinking Is Dialectical
Organizations keep advocating for change through pressure and correction, and then seem confused when nothing shifts. I’ve marveled at this pattern for years.
The iceberg model in systems theory places observed behaviors above the waterline. Underneath are the protection patterns, learning histories, values, beliefs, and assumptions that generate those behaviors.
Most leadership development targets what's above the waterline. And, most don’t sustain change.
Addressing behavior without addressing what generates it keeps the protection patterns underneath intact – producing the next iteration of the same problem.
Understanding the why is the entry point to everything underneath.
We don't update our thinking under threat; we close. Genuine understanding changes that physiology. Defensiveness decreases and flexibility opens – and not just for the other person, for you too.
I’ve watched it happen in leadership meetings repeatedly – someone raises a concern, another person immediately corrects the behavior, and the room closes. The position hardens, and everyone becomes more defended.
I’ve done this myself. Trying to correct behavior before understanding what generated it never produces the openness I think it will.
What loosens ingrained thinking is feeling seen. It surfaces the fear underneath that's been running the show. Once it's named, the real work starts.
The core issue is binary thinking. Underlying beliefs sort the world into fixed categories – good/bad, right/wrong, safe/dangerous. Present new evidence, and the framework absorbs it into existing groups. The frame doesn’t change – it misreads the data.
What actually moves a frame, as George Kelly says, a whole new pair of goggles.
Beliefs don’t need to be updated. They need to be expanded.
That means holding what you know while integrating what you learn, long enough for something new to emerge. Adam Grant calls this the scientist mindset. Marsha Linehan built an entire therapy on it.
Systems thinking is dialectical, and dialectics is the foundation of DBT.
Two opposing things can both be true at the same time, and the work is to hold both long enough for synthesis to emerge.
Systems thinking means understanding – and validating – behavior in context. The parts only make sense in relation to the whole.
Rethinking requires feeling safe enough to tolerate uncertainty.
Getting someone there takes patience, curiosity, and the willingness to validate what’s already true before asking for anything to expand.
Charles Swenson, a leading expert in DBT, recently connected this systems view to cell biology. A cell functions optimally when it's attuned to surrounding processes – adapting as needed to sustain life.
Humans work the same way.
We are in constant exchange with the world around us. Recognizing that we function in synchrony with others generates empathy – and clarifies what we can do together that we cannot do alone. Identity is relational, and influence is reciprocal.
The task is to search for what individual explanations miss: the current environment, the learning history, and the social, economic, and political context that shapes how someone makes sense of the world.
The architecture of DBT addresses individuals, groups, and the systems that connect them. Regulated Leadership applies the same lens to organizations – examining how systems produce misalignment, and building the conditions for greater alliance.