The Four Dimensions of Complexity
has failed to deliver any tangible tools that may be used to analyze complex systems . Richardson , Cilliers , and Lissack ( 2001 ) cited that any attempt to operationalize such a complexity-based epistemology should be done so from a skeptical point of view . They also state , however , that from a pragmatic point of view , such frameworks are essential in providing at least a focus or starting point for analysis ( Richardson , Cilliers , & Lissack , 2001 ). “ Framing ” is that starting point
U . S . poverty is a complex twentyfirst century problem that exhibits four dimensions of complexity . This kind of problem requires abductive thought for policymakers to develop solutions that are in lock step with its changing nature . In policymaking , ultimately success or failure must be assessed primarily on whether the addressed problem exists after the policy is executed . Framing is a tangible , twentyfirst century problem-solving construct that is complex and adaptive enough to bring resolution to twenty-first century problems . The following literature review describes and characterizes the wicked nature of the complex problems .
Literature Review
Wicked problems are adaptive
and inherently different from problems in the Newtonian sciences ( Rittel & Webber , 1973 ). Problems in the natural sciences are definable , separable , and have solutions that are findable ( Rittel & Webber , 1973 ). Problems of social- or policy- planning , such as poverty in the U . S ., are ill defined and wicked . Often in solving wicked problems , not all factors are knowable at any one time . Solving a wicked problem requires ingenuity of viable solutions that may not be readily available . In other words , the solution may be known at a specific time but cannot be accessed at that time . Wicked problems can never be solved , only re-solved repeatedly , until the leader solving the problem runs out of time , patience , or money ( Rittel & Webber , 1973 ).
Solutions to wicked problems , such as those related to poverty in the U . S ., are never absolute . Better versus worse more accurately characterizes the nature of solutions to wicked problems . Each attempt by policymakers to solve poverty in the U . S . is a serious matter of concern for those that are poor . When dealing with affected or vulnerable populations , policymakers must not use the poverty issue as opportunity to learn problem solving through trial-and-error ( Rittel & Webber , 1973 ). Policymakers must act in earnest when attempting to solve poverty in the U . S .
Pundits in the national media commentate that poverty exists because people do not have enough money , enough jobs , or enough motivation to work . This type of oscillation around a problematic issue is indicative of the nature of a wicked problem ( Rittel & Webber , 1973 ). How policymakers choose to explain poverty exposes their understanding of the problem and determines the nature of how problem resolution is attempted . Some policymakers say poverty occurs because there are too few jobs or too many people living in poverty . Others cite inadequate assistance programs as the cause of poverty . Each explanation offers a different direction for policymakers to address poverty in the U . S .
Dörner ( 1996 ), in his seminal work , The Logic of Failure , reasons that policymakers who fail at solving wicked problems often employ logic that is as sound as the logic used by those who achieve
85