Historically, systemic design (SD) has drawn on methodological aspects of system thinking. However, this is challenged by technology—which is simultaneously today’s milieu and methodology. Given this, we need a new composite of foundations and practices before SD can provide effective technological or design governance. I also discuss a modern update to boundary framing and microservices as a bridge to enriched practice alongside key movements like Penrosean rents and Wintelism.
KEYWORDS: boundary framing, critique, dynamic governance, microservices, systemic design