{
  "_description": "本文件由 data/ 生成：请改动来源文件，不要改这里。各字段的证据边界见接入指南。",
  "schemaVersion": "1.0.0",
  "kind": "entry",
  "locale": "zh-CN",
  "id": "systems-thinking",
  "name": {
    "zh": "系统思维",
    "en": "Systems Thinking"
  },
  "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/systems-thinking/",
  "self": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/systems-thinking.json",
  "alternates": {
    "zh-CN": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/systems-thinking.json",
    "en": "https://designvocabulary.com/en/entries/systems-thinking.json"
  },
  "site": {
    "catalogSchemaVersion": "0.1.0",
    "entries": 158,
    "index": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/entries/index.json",
    "query": "https://designvocabulary.com/api/query?lang=zh",
    "guide": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/agents/",
    "llms": "https://designvocabulary.com/llms.txt"
  },
  "provenance": {
    "sourceBacked": [
      "entry.definition"
    ],
    "editorial": [
      "entry.boundary",
      "entry.signature",
      "entry.when",
      "entry.when_not",
      "entry.tradeoff",
      "entry.comparison",
      "entry.rules",
      "entry.relations",
      "entry.implementationNote",
      "entry.philosophy"
    ],
    "scope": "定义参考以上来源；数字界面示例、选择建议、条件关系及配方由本样例编辑，尚未经用户研究验证。",
    "editorialStatus": "drafted",
    "specimenData": "fictional",
    "specimenNote": "示例为原创虚构界面；定义附来源，用法与配方为编辑建议。",
    "sources": [
      {
        "id": "meadows-leverage-points",
        "url": "https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/",
        "title": "Donella Meadows · Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "status": "available",
          "confirmed": true,
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916130931/https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/",
          "capturedAt": "2026-09-16T13:09:31Z",
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "ixdf-systems-thinking",
        "url": "https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/systems-thinking",
        "title": "Interaction Design Foundation · Systems Thinking",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "status": "available",
          "confirmed": true,
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260312053012/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/systems-thinking",
          "capturedAt": "2026-03-12T05:30:12Z",
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/systems-thinking"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "meadows-systems-thinking-resources",
        "url": "https://donellameadows.org/systems-thinking-resources/",
        "title": "Donella Meadows Project · Systems Thinking Resources",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "status": "available",
          "confirmed": true,
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916055534/https://donellameadows.org/systems-thinking-resources/",
          "capturedAt": "2026-09-16T05:55:34Z",
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://donellameadows.org/systems-thinking-resources/"
        }
      }
    ],
    "lists": [
      {
        "id": "H-C",
        "edition": "classic",
        "seat": 10,
        "origin": "issue-1-ledger",
        "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-C/",
        "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-C.json"
      },
      {
        "id": "H-Y",
        "edition": "2026-focus",
        "seat": 10,
        "origin": "issue-1-ledger",
        "page": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-Y/",
        "json": "https://designvocabulary.com/zh/lists/H-Y.json"
      }
    ],
    "ordered": false,
    "listDisclaimer": "席位号是编辑位置，不是评分、排名或人气统计；清单未收满时保持原样，不补足。"
  },
  "entry": {
    "id": "systems-thinking",
    "type": "philosophy",
    "name": {
      "zh": "系统思维",
      "en": "Systems Thinking"
    },
    "aliases": [
      "系统性思维",
      "Systems Approach",
      "Systemic Thinking"
    ],
    "granularity": "experience",
    "intents": [
      "assess-impact",
      "consider-non-users"
    ],
    "tags": [
      "系统思维",
      "反馈回路",
      "二阶效应",
      "利益相关方",
      "指标优化"
    ],
    "definition": "把产品看作嵌在一个由人、激励、反馈回路组成的更大系统里，而不是一组孤立的界面或功能；干预前先追问一个改动会如何通过系统的结构和反馈回路波及整体行为，而不是只看它对眼前任务的直接效果。",
    "boundary": "系统思维不是设计系统（design system，即组件库与样式规范的集合）；两者中文和英文名称都容易混淆，但讨论的对象完全不同——设计系统关心界面元素的一致性，系统思维关心产品所处的人、激励和反馈结构会如何因改动而变化。系统思维也不等同于把所有相关方画成一张图就算完成；它要求持续追问改动的连锁后果，而不是一次性的映射练习。",
    "signature": [
      "在改动上线前，明确至少一个二阶效应，以及谁会承担这个效应",
      "评估影响范围时把不直接使用产品、但会被产品影响的人也纳入考虑",
      "追问一个被优化的指标可能挤占了系统里的哪些其他目标"
    ],
    "when": [
      "改动可能触发反馈回路，或影响团队、平台生态、不直接使用产品的人",
      "团队被要求优化单一指标（如次日留存、点击率、转化率）而缺少对副作用的讨论",
      "决策的后果会在较长时间尺度上显现，短期可用性测试难以覆盖"
    ],
    "when_not": [
      "把系统思维当作借口，无限期搁置一个局部、可逆、可直接验证的小改动",
      "只画一次利益相关方地图就宣称已完成系统思维分析，此后不再追踪连锁后果",
      "以系统复杂、难以预测为由，回避为某个具体决策的直接后果负责"
    ],
    "tradeoff": "追踪反馈回路、二阶效应和非用户影响需要更多分析时间与跨团队协调，会拉长决策周期；即便如此也不能保证预见到所有长期后果，系统的行为本身具有反直觉之处。",
    "comparison": {
      "focus": "一次改动如何波及产品之外的人、激励结构与反馈回路，而不只是它对当前任务界面的直接效果",
      "mechanism": "识别系统里的变量、反馈回路与杠杆点，追问干预会在哪里产生连锁反应",
      "cost": "需要跨职能协调与更长的分析周期，且系统行为的反直觉性意味着分析仍可能遗漏后果"
    },
    "sources": [
      {
        "id": "meadows-leverage-points",
        "title": "Donella Meadows · Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System",
        "url": "https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/",
        "claim": "把系统里的干预点按影响力强弱排出层级，指出人们常常在正确的方向上用错力气；单纯追求增长等单一目标而不计入其代价，会制造出原本想解决的一系列问题，支持本条目关于二阶效应与指标挤出的表述。",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/",
          "status": "available",
          "checkedAt": "2026-09-16T13:09:04.583Z",
          "jobId": "spn2-32c2eb4d759bb1332bf0557a1a53d8820866b513",
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916130931/https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/",
          "timestamp": "20260916130931"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "ixdf-systems-thinking",
        "title": "Interaction Design Foundation · Systems Thinking",
        "url": "https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/systems-thinking",
        "claim": "把系统思维定义为分析产品所处整体环境的方法：传统做法优化具体触点（按钮、流程），系统思维则考察产品、用户与环境如何跨平台、跨政策、跨社会情境相互影响，并明确指出相关方范围要扩展到社区、跨职能团队、后端系统和政策，而不只是直接用户，支持本条目关于非用户影响的表述。",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/systems-thinking",
          "status": "available",
          "checkedAt": "2026-09-23T12:02:48.586Z",
          "jobId": "spn2-61a9b0e78c3dbd2c6d1d65bbf540a2ee947c7910",
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260312053012/https://ixdf.org/literature/topics/systems-thinking",
          "timestamp": "20260312053012"
        }
      },
      {
        "id": "meadows-systems-thinking-resources",
        "title": "Donella Meadows Project · Systems Thinking Resources",
        "url": "https://donellameadows.org/systems-thinking-resources/",
        "claim": "以冰山模型说明应把表面事件放回系统的结构、模式与心智模型中理解，倡导针对系统结构做出改变，而不是对单个环节做短期、孤立的反应，支持本条目关于不孤立优化单一部分的边界表述。",
        "checkedAt": "2026-09-15",
        "archive": {
          "lookupUrl": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260915*/https://donellameadows.org/systems-thinking-resources/",
          "status": "available",
          "checkedAt": "2026-09-23T12:02:49.835Z",
          "jobId": "spn2-f5b69789cdbeaa037ca75b296477ff1af1555f97",
          "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20260916055534/https://donellameadows.org/systems-thinking-resources/",
          "timestamp": "20260916055534"
        }
      }
    ],
    "relations": [
      {
        "target": "human-centered-design",
        "kind": "composes_with",
        "condition": "定义谁会被一项改动影响、需要理解哪些情境",
        "reason": "以人为中心的设计要求理解用户与情境，系统思维把这种理解扩展到产品之外的人、激励与反馈回路。",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "target": "trust-calibration",
        "kind": "informs",
        "condition": "决定一个自动化功能的置信度信号该如何呈现",
        "reason": "系统思维提醒设计者，误导性的信任信号不只影响单次任务，还会通过用户行为反馈回整个信任关系，需要在系统层面权衡。",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "target": "universal-design",
        "kind": "related",
        "condition": "决定设计覆盖范围时是否只看典型用户",
        "reason": "两者都要求把评估范围扩大到更广的人群，但通用设计关注同一方案是否可被不同能力的人直接使用，系统思维关注改动如何波及包括非用户在内的更大系统。",
        "basis": "editorial"
      }
    ],
    "rules": [
      {
        "when": "一项改动即将上线",
        "instruction": "明确说出至少一个二阶效应，以及这个效应主要由谁承担；如果说不出来，先补上这一步分析再决定是否上线。",
        "strength": "recommend",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "when": "决定优化某个单一指标",
        "instruction": "不要在没有说明它可能挤占哪些其他目标或群体利益的情况下就去优化这个指标。",
        "strength": "must",
        "basis": "editorial"
      },
      {
        "when": "评估一项设计决策的影响范围",
        "instruction": "把不直接使用产品、但会被产品的存在或运行影响到的人也纳入评估对象。",
        "strength": "recommend",
        "basis": "editorial"
      }
    ],
    "philosophy": {
      "values": [
        "整体优先于局部",
        "对二阶效应负责",
        "承担者可见"
      ],
      "tension": "系统层面的整体考量与局部、可快速验证的迭代速度之间的取舍",
      "questions": [
        "这个改动会通过哪些反馈回路波及系统的其他部分？",
        "被优化的这个指标，会以谁为代价？"
      ]
    },
    "demo": null,
    "version": "0.1.0",
    "editorialStatus": "drafted",
    "requirements": [],
    "demoCapabilities": [],
    "implementationNote": "尚无可操作样例；插图为编辑示意，图中的反馈箭头是概念示意而非某个具体系统的真实结构图。应用到产品时仍须核实：团队是否真的为改动列出了具体的二阶效应及其承担者、优化单一指标的决策是否记录了被挤占的目标、以及非用户影响是否被纳入了实际的评估流程而不只是文档中的一句话。",
    "image": {
      "src": "/images/systems-thinking.webp",
      "alt": "一个名为 FIELDNOTES 的虚构产品节点，用反馈箭头连接到代表人、激励与下游影响的周边节点，其中一条箭头绕回自身形成闭环。"
    },
    "searchTerms": [
      "systems thinking",
      "feedback loops",
      "second-order effects",
      "stakeholders",
      "metric optimization"
    ]
  }
}