Journal of the Operational Research Society (2011) 62, 1391--1402 © 2011 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved. 0160-5682/11 www.palgrave-journals.com/jors/ How to use a systems diagram to analyse and structure complex problems for policy issue papers TE van der Lei, B Enserink ∗ , WAH Thissen and G Bekebrede Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands Many policy problems are complex in the sense that natural, technological, social and human elements interact. Problem exploration and structuring are essential as a basis for deliberate and focused approaches towards problem resolution. The results of problem exploration efforts can be laid down in the form of a policy issue paper. We have developed a systemic, stepwise approach, which has been elaborated and taught for over a decade to hundreds of students. This seven-step approach centers on the construction of a system diagram as a means to provide structure to the conceptualisation of a complex problem situation. The approach is based on a conscious combination of existing relatively straightforward analytical methods including objectives hierarchy, means-ends analysis, causal diagramming, stakeholder analysis, and contextual scenarios. The obtained insights are then summed up in a policy issue paper, which is the basis for further planning and research. Journal of the Operational Research Society (2011) 62, 1391 – 1402. doi:10.1057/jors.2010.28 Published online 28 April 2010 Keywords: OR education; problem structuring; policy issue paper; policy analysis; system diagram; complex problems Introduction Many policy problems are wicked, ill-structured or complex in the sense that natural, technological, social, and human elements interact. As a result, a variety of problem perceptions exists, values and interests may be conflicting, and power and resources to change things are distributed over multiple actors (Rittel and Webber, 1973, Dunn, 1994; de Bruijn and Porter, 2004; Koppenjan and Klijn, 2004). Such complexity is the everyday reality of analysts and problem solvers concerned with such complex socio-technological systems. Exploration of the problem situation and identification and selection of the key issues to be addressed are the first step that must be taken toward tackling the situation. Dunn (1994, p 106) explains this in the following way: Whereas well-structured problems permit analysts to use conventional methods to resolve clearly formulated or self- evident problems, ill-structured problems demand that the analyst first take an active part in defining the nature of the problem itself. ∗ Correspondence: B Enserink, Delft University of Technology, PO Box 5015, 2600GA Delft, the Netherlands. E-mail: b.enserink@tudelft.nl The first three authors work at the Policy Analysis section, the fourth at the Policy, Organisation, Law & Gaming section of the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management of Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands. In such situations analysts are advised to seriously invest in problem formulation activities before jumping to solutions, to prevent the risk of problems half-solved, growing worse or even solving the wrong problem (Quade, 1980). This struc- turing of an unstructured problem and defining an appropriate scope for further analysis and action are essential skills that all policy analysts should master. Therefore, when developing a novel curriculum in Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management (see, eg, Thissen, 2000a), we were faced with the challenge to teach our (undergraduate) students a way of thinking supported by an analytic approach that would prepare them for their later work as practicing analysts. As a starting point, we noted that various authors have proposed to document the findings of problem exploration efforts in a so-called ‘policy issue paper’. Preparing it should force the analyst to address all relevant aspects of a problem situation in an analytically sound way (Ackoff, 1978; Miser and Quade, 1988; Quade, 1989). The policy issue paper helps to reach a joint problem understanding between analyst and client and it proposes a contribution to solving that problem by providing focus and proposing specific further steps. A number of authors have formulated requirements of a policy issue paper (Quade, 1980; Dunn, 1994; Checkland, 1985). All these authors indicate that a broad approach should be taken, looking at the situation from a variety of angles. However, these authors provide little guidance on how exactly to proceed to structure a problem for a policy issue paper. Although Dunn (1994), Quade (1980), and Checkland (1985) provide scarce guidance on how to structure a