Strategy scholars are increasingly attempting to tackle complex global social and environmental issues (i.e. wicked problems); yet, many strategy scholars approach these wicked problems in the same way they approach business problems—by building causal models that seek to optimize some form of organizational success. Strategy scholars seek to reduce complexity, focusing on the significant variables that explain the salient outcomes. This approach to wicked problems, ironically, divorces firms from the very social-ecological context that makes the problem “wicked.” In this essay, we argue that strategy research into wicked problems can benefit from systems thinking, which deviates radically from the reductionist approach to analysis taken by many strategy scholars. We review some of the basic tenets of systems thinking and describe their differences from reductionist thinking. Furthermore, we ask strategy scholars to widen their theoretical lens by (1) investigating co-evolutionary dynamics rather than focusing primarily on static models, (2) advancing processual insights rather than favoring causal identification, and (3) recognizing tipping points and transformative change rather than assuming linear monotonic changes.

战略学者越来越多地试图解决复杂的全球社会和环境问题（即棘手的问题）；然而，许多战略学者以与解决业务问题相同的方式来解决这些棘手的问题——通过建立寻求优化某种形式的组织成功的因果模型。战略学者寻求降低复杂性，重点关注解释显着结果的重要变量。具有讽刺意味的是，这种解决棘手问题的方法将公司与使问题变得“邪恶”的社会生态环境脱节。在本文中，我们认为对棘手问题的战略研究可以从系统思维中受益，这与许多战略学者采用的还原论分析方法大相径庭。我们回顾了系统思维的一些基本原则，并描述了它们与还原论思维的区别。此外，我们要求战略学者通过 (1) 研究共同进化动力学而不是主要关注静态模型，(2) 推进过程洞察而不是支持因果识别，以及 (3) 识别临界点和变革性变化来扩大他们的理论视野而不是假设线性单调变化。