Case Study: Designing from the Whole, Not Just the Parts!
- Katie Shearn
- Jul 27
- 9 min read
How systems thinking turned a complex energy deal into a collaborative, future-ready system (With Examples)
Stepping Into Uncharted Territory
In today’s Information Age, data isn’t just a tool, it’s one of the most complex challenges organizations face. And this deal was no exception.
This wasn’t just another software rollout. It was a one-of-a-kind retail energy contract: bold in design, but tangled in its execution. On paper, it looked like the future—multiple data sources, hourly metering, and intricate monthly invoicing language. But behind the scenes, the infrastructure was anything but streamlined.
Data arrived in different formats from multiple sources, with no standardization. One critical input came manually: an emailed Excel spreadsheet from a utility company each month. That’s right: a cutting-edge energy contract partially depended on someone remembering to send a file by email once a month. Other inputs came through an ISO interface that was automated, but limited in scope. The third-party data platform we relied on was solid in its narrow lane but couldn’t scale to meet the volume and variety of data required to run this deal effectively.
We weren’t just building infrastructure…we were racing time. Once the contract was executed, the countdown began. By the commercial operation date (COD), all systems from data sourcing and formatting to big data query management, payment structures, and operations had to be functioning smoothly. And there was no existing map to follow.
It was clear the complexity would overwhelm even the most talented teams if left unmanaged. Balls would be dropped, pieces missed. It really did take a village. I wasn’t the only player, but my role centered on how our team’s portion could be managed in a way that supported the whole.
That’s where systems thinking became essential.
This wasn’t about solving everything alone. It was about dividing and conquering—not to work in silos, but to share ownership of the system and build cohesion between parts. And it worked. That’s not to say we didn’t hit roadblocks but managing uncertainty became more efficient. Other teams helped bridge the gap between this newly structured deal and their own internal operations.
For example, collaborating with the operations team revealed how their knowledge of ISO grid data systems could influence how we managed our own data structure. This deeper integration of interpersonal professional relationships became part of the system’s strategy itself, proof that people, not just processes, are part of any sustainable ecosystem.
This is where I began mapping the environment and not to control it, but to bring clarity and stability to the complex landscape we were blindly navigating.
Laying a Systems Foundation
With multiple departments touching this deal in one way or another: finance, operations, risk, commercial, and more, I knew the only real path forward was a systems thinking approach.
Systems Thinking Principle: To truly improve the parts, you must first understand the whole.
That principle became my guiding light. I didn’t have control over the entire system, but I could lead from where I stood and design with the whole in mind.
So rather than jumping into reactive fixes, I started by mapping the full environment and building clarity from complexity, for example:
Where data came from and where it flowed
What was within our control—and what wasn’t
Who used the data, in what format, and why
Which tools supported short-term needs, and where long-term scaling might be required
I created diagrams that became our shared language and cutting across departments, technical fluency, and even ways of thinking. These weren’t static visuals. They were living artifacts of our system. What once felt overwhelming became navigable. What once felt chaotic became connected.
And once teams began to see how their work impacted the broader system, something shifted: Creative solutions started to flow naturally.
Information began to move in both directions; like a grid shifting from one-way DC to adaptive AC. These feedback loops weren’t forced. They were emergent.
And here's what made it even more powerful: all of this was done using the existing tools and resources we already had. Systems thinking didn’t require new investments to be effective, it simply made the most of what was already in motion. Of course, as we matured, investment became necessary for growth and efficiency. But now we had a map that could guide us and so future investments would benefit the entire system, not just one department.
Side Bar:
Sidebar: A common misconception in organizations is that repeated meetings or shared goals equal collaboration. But without a systems lens, departments often end up working alongside each other and not with each other.
It’s like two boats headed in the same direction without realizing their waves are pushing each other off course. Without understanding how each part affects the whole, efforts become disconnected, and innovation gets stifled.
Systems thinking, especially through visual mapping, restores that clarity. It turns fragmented strategies into fluid ecosystems. And most importantly, it opens the door to creativity, not by scripting every move, but by making it easier to ask better questions and design smarter together.
Leading with the Long View
From day one, I designed this system with the mindset:“If I got hit by a truck tomorrow, this still needs to work.”
That was my unofficial motto. But the philosophy behind it was real: this couldn’t be a duct-taped solution. It needed to be alive, adaptable, and designed to evolve. Not a brittle machine dependent on any one person or process, but a living structure others could build upon.
Systems thinking let us create something that didn’t just meet today’s needs but could adapt to tomorrow’s unknowns.
Systems Thinking in Motion
As the scope of the contract became clearer, it also became obvious that our internal tools and ad hoc workarounds wouldn’t hold long-term. We needed a dedicated IT team. But rather than come to them with a chaotic list of complaints like many departments did, I came to them with a map.
And that changed everything.
Because the environment had already been visualized, the IT team could immediately see:
The system architecture: both functional and broken bottlenecks
The cross-departmental impact points
Where automation could be implemented now, and where strategy was still needed
We moved fast and we moved smart.
Our team quickly began collaborating with IT, using tools like Microsoft Power Automate to pull data from emails and external system interfaces, deposit it into structured SharePoint folders, and eliminate the burden of repetitive manual tasks. This wasn’t just about speed, it was about freeing people up to do the work that mattered, what I call shifting low-value activity to high-value activity.
We also identified other low-value activities, like manually reformatting inconsistent data inputs just to generate invoices and began automating those with Microsoft Power Query. These were what I considered short-term bridges: tactical fixes that allowed us to meet immediate contract demands while still designing for long-term scale.
And that’s where systems thinking truly paid off.
Because we had already mapped how our system connected to others, the IT team could clearly see not only our immediate needs but also how solving them would unlock ripple effects across the organization. This elevated perspective gave IT a distinct advantage and enabling them to design solutions that extended beyond our department and strengthened the system as a whole. And that, from the very beginning, was the goal.
For example, one of our automations created a structured archive of timestamped invoice data that was initially built just to support monthly billing. But as the system matured, the grid operations team began using that same data flow to reconcile forecasted versus actual generation and cutting down hours of manual cross-checking they had been doing each month.
Without a single meeting or formal handoff, a pain point in a completely different department found relief because the system we built wasn’t just functional, it was visible and designed with the whole in mind. That’s the ripple effect of systems thinking.
This clarity allowed IT to step in with long-term architecture planning and not just for our team, but for every team that touched our data environment. They could begin designing cross-functional solutions because they finally had a shared map of a systems-wide view of what had previously been hidden in silos.
Most importantly, we weren’t forced to choose between short-term reaction and long-term strategy.
We did both.
At the same time.
Iteratively.
Examples of Systems Mapping:
Visual content is protected for confidentiality, but the overall structure and approach are represented clearly below.
The Ripple Effect
You could see the difference in every meeting.
While other departments showed up to IT saying, “Here are our problems, what do you have for us?” our team came with a visual narrative. We didn’t just present symptoms. We brought the full context:
What systems were interdependent
Where the real bottlenecks were
Who needed access and when
How information was flowing
What solutions we had immediate access to
What long term solutions could bring to the table
That clarity positioned us miles ahead.
Not because we had all the answers but because we took a different approach and chose to see the whole system. We realized that solving our data problems would improve visibility, speed, and decision-making across the entire organization and not just within our silo.
That’s what made this systems thinking approach a force multiplier. It gave us a shared language to collaborate across teams, and a clear structure to iterate solutions in real time.
It also gave us permission to improve the system as a whole—not just our individual pieces of it.
We didn’t need step-by-step guidance from leadership to do it either. In fact, this was largely a shot in the dark. C-suite leaders weren’t equipped with the tools or visibility to lead this level of systemic integration—but we were. By working from the ground up with systems thinking, we created clarity where there had been none, and moved the entire organization forward without waiting for top-down direction.
What Happens Without a Systems Lens?
Let’s be honest...some departments resisted this approach. They saw mapping as “extra work” or a delay. “We just need to fix X,” they’d say.
Others leaned on their years of experience, assuming they already knew the environment well enough without needing a visual map. But it’s often these unchecked assumptions that quietly lead to the most unimpactful solutions—ones that address surface symptoms rather than the root cause.
When we rely on narrow viewpoints, we miss the full picture. And when we miss the picture, we end up solving the wrong problem altogether.
Here’s what that looks like when you don’t see the whole system:
One department updates how data is reported for invoicing, great.
But they don’t inform others who rely on that same data.
Grid operations’ reports are now off by hours, triggering ISO compliance concerns. They scramble to resolve the issue on their own and end up changing internal data feeds without notifying risk management.
Meanwhile, risk management gets pulled in to investigate misaligned hedge positions caused by those discrepancies.
Risk flags the delay, but it stalls because no one is tracking accountability across the system.
And we’re back where we started: treating symptoms, not systems.
People are working hard but working against each other without realizing it. Efforts are duplicated. Problems compound. The system stays foggy, inefficient, and disconnected.
That’s a weak feedback loop; a cycle of quick fixes that create more confusion than clarity. Systems thinking breaks that cycle.
It brings strength to complexity by making what’s invisible, visible.
Leading Like a Systems Innovator
Working with systems thinking principles isn’t just about making better diagrams, it’s about redefining what leadership really looks like.
True leadership isn’t about having all the answers. It’s about asking the right questions, the higher-order questions that uncover what’s really going on beneath the surface.
It’s what C-suite thinking should be: not just linear plans and siloed expertise, but a deep understanding of how every decision ripples across the whole. And let me be clear, experts are essential but their insight becomes far more powerful when they operate with systems awareness.
This kind of leadership pairs long-term vision with short-term action.It holds complexity without collapsing under it. It translates between teams, and it guides through alignment, not control.
When you lead this way, you're not just managing tasks.
You're designing change.
You're creating clarity.
You're building capacity.
You're laying the foundation for something stable, scalable, and alive.
Systems Thinking as a Map to Creativity
One of the biggest misconceptions about systems thinking is that it’s rigid or overly structured and that it slows things down or overwhelms with complexity. But in my experience, it’s the opposite.
Once we could see the full environment, we stopped reacting and started imagining. We weren’t throwing guesses at a problem, we were designing possibilities.
A good systems map doesn’t act like a rulebook. It acts like a launchpad. It gives you just enough structure to know where you’re standing, and just enough visibility to see where you could go next.
Systems thinking gave us the clarity to ask better questions and from those questions, an infinite range of creative solutions began to emerge.
Final Takeaway
In the Information Age, data isn’t just numbers—it’s the nervous system of your business. And without visibility into how that system works, even the best teams can end up solving the wrong problems.
Systems thinking changed that for us. It turned confusion into clarity, disconnected tasks into collaborative flow, and rigid expectations into a flexible, living blueprint.
When you apply systems thinking—especially in complex environments like data infrastructure—you unlock:
More reliable, interconnected systems
Smarter, faster decision-making
Clearer communication across silos
Fewer fire drills, more meaningful progress
And you don’t need all the answers at the start.
If you can map what’s true, stay curious, and create space for better questions, the system itself will begin to reveal its solutions.
That’s not just efficient. That’s regenerative.
That’s not just innovative. That’s sustainable.
That’s how you build the future—and the future lives in systems.
Comments