• responsiveness (to cues)
  
• reflexive monitoring of action (against goals or intentions)
  
• deliberative problem-solving (considering alternate responses)
  
• awareness of other agents (through construction of internal representations or models)
  
• meaningfulness/ interpretation, and 
  
• awareness of agency(sense that one is an agent, understanding of constraints on agency) 

[57-58] 

Agency allows us to map the ways in which individuals and collectives affect and/or are affected within a given system – specifically tracing the agency of images, exhibition organizers, and viewers helps us to see how systems of display function. 

Poole's impressive list of how system theory attempts to account for agency, including a "continuum of sophistication"meant to describe the relative ability of agents to involve themselves in goals, problems-solving, or processes. 

I (Matt Pitchford) am interested, however, in how agency is enacted, not just restricted. As in, can agency be further understood in terms of a function of identity? The very perception of agency, and how it is taken up or pushes against the purported "boundaries" of how the system, works in a very real way to shape how individuals interact with and participate in the system itself.

This can be thought of in terms of Meadows' linguistic "intervention points," or what she calls a "Paradigmatic leverage points" (Meadows 162). Perhaps it is important to consider how the paradigm of the system allows for or conceptualizes the very action of the actors within it. Can one intervene, as Meadows would have us, by redefining what it means to have agency in the system?