Working Smarter with Systems Thinking
From Asset Management to System Performance
April - July 2025
Group Project · Master Level · Transdisciplinary Master-Insert programme
Course: Leading Systemic Change
An interdisciplinary master's course focused on understanding and navigating complex engineering systems. It combines systems thinking, change management, and real-world application to analyse systemic behaviours and develop strategic interventions for long-term, sustainable change.
Stedin, a Dutch regional grid operator, is struggling to meet rising energy demands amid grid congestion and limited maintenance capacity. This project supported Stedin’s Asset and System Performance Management (ASPM) department in shifting from an asset-based to a systems-thinking approach. We introduced a new KPI to prioritise maintenance based on network impact, along with structural and process recommendations to improve decision-making. Due to a signed non-disclosure agreement, technical details are not shared.
Methodology
A systems‑thinking approach was applied to Stedin’s Asset & System Performance Management (ASPM) department to trace how maintenance, expansion and reliability interact over time. This combined an organisational structure review, stakeholder influence mapping, and a causal loop diagram (CLD) to surface reinforcing and balancing feedbacks that drive backlog, asset strain and decision delays. Co‑design sessions with employees, interviews and internal materials grounded the analysis and shaped practical options.
Findings
Operational decision‑making remained anchored at the asset level despite a strategic intent to manage performance at the system level, leaving KPIs and handovers misaligned with network outcomes. Structural constraints, most limited cross‑team bridging, reinforced the asset bias and contributed to coordination gaps and delays. A hard capacity constraint was the shortage of certified mechanics. To meet rising demand, redundancy was increasingly used as regular capacity, increasing load on existing assets and lowering overall reliability; trade‑offs between expansion and maintenance amplified backlog. The CLD highlighted the conflict between expansion and maintenance as a central dynamic, with insufficient maintenance capacity and redundancy weakening stabilising loops.
Final Design & Recommendations
The project recommends introducing a KPI framework that prioritises maintenance tasks based on their system-level value. The KPI is designed to reflect not just the condition of individual assets, but their role within the wider network, embodying a shift from isolated asset management to systemic performance thinking. To ensure practical use, the KPI is normalised by task duration and applied within boundary conditions like geography, certification level, and voltage, ensuring comparisons remain operationally realistic. Two new roles are proposed: a KPI designer to maintain and adapt the metric based on network feedback, and an area-level optimiser to apply it in daily planning. This approach moves beyond technical fixes to address structural decision bottlenecks and resource trade-offs—making it a form of system-level change-making. Implementation is guided by ADKAR (to build individual readiness) and Kotter’s 8-Step model (to drive organisational adoption), ensuring that the changes are not just introduced but embedded. Together, these interventions enable more coherent, network-aware decisions across the organisation. Technical details are not disclosed due to a signed non-disclosure agreement with Stedin.
Personal Contributions
My main contribution to this project focused on identifying and understanding the current system within Stedin’s ASPM department through a systems-thinking lens. I took initiative in mapping out the dynamics of the organisation, with particular attention to developing the causal loop diagram (CLD). This involved tracing feedback loops, identifying structural bottlenecks, and pinpointing areas where targeted change could have the greatest systemic impact. In addition to this analytical work, I participated in interviews and co-design sessions, helping to gather grounded insights from within the organisation. I also led the visual side of the project—creating the initial sketches, designing the graphic representations used throughout the report, and producing the public-facing project poster to communicate our findings more broadly.