#2 – Why I Start with the System, Not the Solution (Thiel’s Blindspot)
- Simone Pinto
- Sep 14
- 3 min read
Everyone quotes Peter Thiel. Zero to One is gospel in tech circles.
And to be fair, it’s inspiring. Thiel tells founders:
Think boldly.
Build what no one else dares.
Define the market instead of asking for permission.
But here’s the blindspot: vision isn’t the same as clarity.
Thiel vs. Checkland: Two Views on Innovation
Thiel:
Build defensible monopolies.
Power comes from vertical leaps.
Assume vision is clear and the world will catch up.
Checkland:
Begin with human activity systems.
Innovation is a response, not a decree.
Assume ambiguity is normal, and clarity must be co-created.
Thiel is tech-led. Checkland is people-led.
One celebrates disruption. The other celebrates understanding.
What Checkland Taught Me About Discovery
I was first introduced to Peter Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) in the 1990s, during my electrical and electronic engineering degree, back when we were still trying to figure out what the arrival of the home computer would mean for society.
For me, it just made sense. As someone who naturally thinks in processes, systems thinking felt intuitive, almost like being bilingual. I didn’t know any other way, so from the start I was a “cradle systems advocate”.
Over the years, I’ve been challenged by brilliant voices like Peter Thiel and Eric Ries.
Their perspectives sharpened mine; but I’ve always stood firm in my belief that SSM gives us the discipline to draw the mess before trying to clean it up.
It asks you to map perspectives, surface assumptions, and define purpose before jumping into solutions. Tools like Rich Pictures and CATWOE analysis make space for the messy, human dynamics that derail even the smartest tech.
Some of my biggest client breakthroughs have come from exactly this: spotting contradictions in a Rich Picture, or realising in stakeholder mapping that the loudest voice wasn’t actually the most important.
That’s systems thinking at work — a way of seeing that’s been with me since the beginning.
Why This Matters Now
In 2025, speed is worshipped. AI promises shortcuts. Lean Startup encourages rapid pivots. Tech accelerators celebrate build-fast-fail-fast.
But moving fast without context isn’t innovation ... it’s gambling.
And that’s why this perspective I’ve carried since the 90s feels more urgent than ever: when speed is everything, context is often ignored.
Thiel says:
move fast, define the future.
Checkland says:
slow down, understand the present.
And the truth is, both matter. But if you skip the systems step, you risk building elegant solutions to the wrong problem.
A Quick Case Example
I once worked with a non-profit that wanted a new digital platform. Their leadership team’s vision was ambitious: “redefine engagement for young people.”
Had they taken Thiel’s path, they’d have built quickly, assumed scale, and trusted their instinct.
Instead, we ran a systems-led discovery. What surfaced was a clash of worldviews:
Young people wanted community, not content.
Staff wanted efficiency.
Funders wanted measurable outcomes.
Parents wanted safety.
The “big idea” was only half the story. Mapping the system revealed that success meant balancing four conflicting needs. Without that clarity, the platform would have failed before launch.
Final Word
Peter Checkland doesn’t trend on Twitter.
But his approach taught me that the best solutions aren’t born from brilliance, they’re born from deep listening.
That’s why I start with the system, not the solution. Because if you understand the system, the solution becomes obvious.
⚡Vision is fuel. Systems are the map.
If your feeling clearer on the solution than on the problem or idea itself, let’s talk. Book a Call to zoom out together — so you can see the bigger picture before moving forward. ✒ Sign up for the full 9-part blog series 'From Vision to Value: A Systems-Led Discovery Series' and see how we break down the traps, myths, and blindspots — from Zero-to-One to Lean to AI — and show how systems thinking ties it all together.
📸 *Image adapted from Sustainability (MDPI, 2018), doi.org/10.3390/su10072295. Licensed under CC BY 4.0.