THE ORGANIZATION AS A SYSTEM - AN OVERVIEW

WHAT IS A SYSTEM?

A system is a collection of parts (or subsystems) integrated to accomplish an overall goal (a system of people is an organization). Systems have input, processes, outputs and outcomes, with ongoing feedback among these various parts. If one part of the system is removed, the nature of the system is changed.

Carter McNamara in his article titled ‘Thinking about Organizations as System’ noted that a Systems range from very simple to very complex. There are numerous types of systems. For example, there are biological systems (the heart, etc.), mechanical systems (thermostat, etc.), human/mechanical systems (riding a bicycle, etc.), ecological systems (predator/prey, etc.), and social systems (groups, supply and demand, friendship, etc.).

Complex systems, such as social systems, are comprised of numerous subsystems, as well. These subsystems are arranged in hierarchies, and integrated to accomplish the overall goal of the overall system. Each subsystem has its own boundaries of sorts, and includes various inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes geared to accomplish an overall goal for the subsystem.

A pile of sand is not a system. If one removes a sand particle, you've still got a pile of sand. However, a car is a system. It is a collection of components which put together in a particular way, will transport you. Individually these components cannot achieve much if anything - a spark plug or petrol tank on its own will not take you far. Remove the carburetor and you've no longer got a working car. Again, if one component is faulty or stops working then this can have a massive impact on the whole system. e.g. a flat tyre.

THE ORGANIZATION AS A SYSTEM
The organization is a system - made up of components which work together to achieve an overall goal. These components can be defined in any number of ways, but you could see them as different functions. For instance, the HR team could be one component; the Marketing Unit another component; the service delivery staff another component; the Accounting Unit another component, the Cleaning Unit another; the Security Unity another; the IT unit another component and so on. The organization is also a system of people.
All these different functions are dependent on each other. A great HR team on its own does not make a great organization in the same way that a petrol tank on its own does not make a car. You may have a great team of staff delivering services, but if your finance processes and procedures stop working the whole organization suffers.

Lakshmi Anand K (2008) in his article titled ‘Organization as a system’ posited that management theorists have seen organization in different views and perspectives. They have identified more elements in the systems besides the people. The choice of technology and structure as additional three elements of the organization system. Noting that the task, technology, people and structure are dependent on each other and their signification cannot be ignored as elements of the system. The arrangement of task in terms of process and work design is dependent on the people. The choice of technology of handling the task is dependent on the people. You may choose the best technology and well-designed task, but they have to be suited for the people.
Over and above these are to be arranged in proper structure. Further a fourth Element has been added as culture. According to Leavitt an organization should be viewed as a socio- technical system consisting of people, task, technology, culture and structure. The modified Leavitt’s model is shown in Fig.

In view the nature of the task the organization is supposed to carry out it has to be designed as an open system capable of adjusting itself to the changing environment. The organization continuously exchange the information with the environment and is influenced by the changes in it and therefore built in such a fashion that it adjusts with the changes in the environment and the goals and the objectives are achieved.

IMPORTANCE OF LOOKING AT ORGANIZATIONS AS SYSTEMS
Carter McNamara opined that the effect of this systems theory in management is that writers, educators, consultants, etc. are helping managers to look at organizations from a broader perspective. Systems theory has brought a new perspective for managers to interpret patterns and events in their organizations. In the past, managers typically took one part and focused on that. Then they moved all attention to another part. The problem was that an organization could, e.g., have wonderful departments that operate well by themselves but don't integrate well together. Consequently, the organization suffers as a whole.

The organization is a socio-technical system whose sub-systems are task people technology culture and structure each having its own input and output satisfying at first its own objective and eventually the corporate organization goals and objectives. If the sub-system's goals and objectives are not congruent with the goals and objectives of the corporate organization poor performance resistance to change and non-attainment of corporate goals will be the consequences.

The systems and their goals are not stable. The goals change in response to the changes in the business focus the environment and in the people in the organization. A significant change calls for change in the organization structure a goals displacement is said to have occurred when the system goals significantly. Another reason for goals change is fue to the Natural process of growth and decline. All organizations and their business go through the different phases of growth cycle in stages as Introduction Growth Maturity and Decline. Each phase generates new goals to be served if the changed or displaced goals are not reflected in the organization is bound to suffer from decay.

Recent studies have revealed that more managers are recognizing the various parts of the organization, and the interrelations of the parts, e.g., the coordination of central offices with other departments, engineering with manufacturing, supervisors with workers, etc. Managers now diagnose problems by recognizing larger patterns of interactions and not by examining what appear to be separate pieces of the organization. Managers maintain perspective by focusing on the outcomes they want from their organizations. Now managers’ focus on structures that provoke behaviors that determine events -- rather than reacting to events as was always done in the past.

SYSTEMS THEORY, SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND SYSTEMS THINKING
Carter McNamara asserted that one of the major breakthroughs in understanding the complex world of systems is systems theory. The application of this theory is called systems analysis. One of the tools of systems analysis is systems thinking. Very basically, systems thinking is a way of helping a person to view the world, including its organizations, from a broad perspective that includes structures, patterns and events, rather than just the events themselves. This broad view helps one to identify the real causes of issues and know where to work to address them.

Systems Principles -- Some Examples
Systems theory has identified numerous principles that are common to systems, many of which help us to better understand organizations. One of the best descriptions of systems principles is in the booklet "Systems 1: An Introduction to Systems Thinking" by Draper L. Kauffman, Jr., edited by Stephen. A. Carlton (from The Innovative Learning Series by Futures Systems, Inc., 1980, Stephen A. Carlton, Publisher, Minneapolis, MN (612) 920-0060). The following is adapted from that booklet.

The system's overall behavior depends on its entire structure (not the sum of its various parts). The structure determines the various behaviors, which determine the various events. Too often, we only see and respond to the events. That's why, especially in the early parts of our lives, we can be so short-sighted and reactionary in our lives and in our work. We miss the broader scheme of things.
Too often in organizations (and in management training programs), we think we can break up the system and only have to deal with its parts or with various topics apart from other topics. Systems theory reminds us that if you break up an elephant, you don't have a bunch of little elephants.

There is an optimum size for a system. If we try to make the system any larger, it'll try to break itself up in order to achieve more stability. Too often in our organizations, we continually strive to keep on growing -- until the reality of the system intervenes. At this point, we again only see the events, not the behaviors or the structures that cause them. So we embark on short-sighted strategies to fix events, often only causing more problems for ourselves and others. There are numerous other systems principles, e.g.

• Systems tend to seek balance with their environments
• Systems that do not interact with their environment (e.g., get feedback from customers) tend to reach limits

IMPLEMENTING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
What does a system mean when you are implementing organizational change? Taking an analogy of a functional car as a system, if you decide to change the tyres, or swap the spark plugs, it might seem relatively minor but it will affect the whole performance of your car. When you are planning organizational change consider how those small changes to components might affect the ability of the whole organization to achieve its goals. For example, changing the working hours of your clerical cum administrative staff might not seem a huge change but think through the implications as it could have big changes to the organization as a whole.

A circular relationship exists between the overall system and its parts. Organization managers should learn to treat all cadre of their workforce with equal respect and due recognition. Even the least cadre of staff plays a significant role for organization to effectively function as a system. It takes the services of the Cleaner for the organization to project an immaculate aesthetics and thus such categories of staff should not be treated as ‘ordinary cleaners’ as the organization depends on their services to pride itself as a wholistic functional system.