MODERN MANAGEMENT OF ORGANIZATIONS.

Systems approaches to Management of organizations.

Introduction

Classical approaches to management conceptualized an organization as machines that are

predictable and full of replaceable parts (organization without people).Human relations
emphasize on psychological and social aspects and consideration of human needs. However,
many theorists found these metaphors unsatisfying and believed that organizations to a large
extent didn’t behave in predictable and machine like manners. Another systems or organism
metaphor has thus emerged to explain organizations in a different approach; System school
approach, developed in late 1960’s it views organizations not as self contained and self-
sufficient machines but as complex organisms that must interact with their environment to
survive. Morgan (1986). A system is an entity made up of two or more interdependent parts that
interact to form a functioning organism

System approach is based on the generalization that everything in an organization is inter-related

and interdependent.It encourages managers in organizations to view the organization both as a
whole and as part of a larger environment; any part of an organization’s activities affects all
other parts. The following are major contributions to this school of thought.

Systems theory- Ludwig Von Bertalanffy (1950)

It was founded by Austrian theoretical biologist Ludwig Von where he used the term ‘systems
theory’ in an article published in 1951 and also accredited for having developed the outline of
General Systems Theory. He believed that general systems model could be used to unite science.
The systems theory focuses on understanding organization as an open system that transforms
inputs into outputs. It sees an organization as set of interrelated and interdependent parts that
interacts with its environment to survive. This theory began to have strong impact on
management in the 1960s as a way of thinking about managing techniques that would allow
managers to relate different specialties and parts of the company to one another as well as to
external environmental factors. Chester Barnard, George Homans, Philip Selznick and Herbert
Simon are some of the advocates of the systems theory. Systems theory is used to measure

1
performance, control and compute interactions among individuals in each department in
organizations.

The study of systems was eagerly adopted by organizational theorists after Ludwig published
his book “ General Systems theory”. The following are the organizational theorists who applied
systems theory approach;

i. The most influential application of systems theory to organizational processes

appeared in 1966 with Daniel Katz and Robbert Kahn publication of The Social
Psychology of Organizations. Katz and Kahn (1978) argue that organizations should
be conceptualized as complex open systems requiring interaction among component
parts and inter-action with the environment in order to survive.
ii. Another early and influential application of systems theory to organizational functioning
is James Thompson (1967) in his publication, Organizations in action. He considers
individuals behavior only in the extent that it helps explain the nature of organizations
classifying organizations according to their technologies and environments. Thompson
saw technology as a dimension in understanding the actions of complex organization.
Other contribution that emphasize the aspects of systems theory.
iii. Cybernetic system theory- Norbert Wiener( 1948,1954)
Cybernetics in itself is the science of communications and automatic control systems in both
machines and living things. The term cybernetics derives from the Greek word for boat’s
steersman. Cybernetic system theory deals with the process through which physical, natural and
organizational systems are steered toward reaching system goal. Norbert Wiener (1948) defines
cybernetics as the scientific study of control and communication in the animal and the machine.
It is applicable when a system being analysed incorporates a closed signalling loop or a circular
relationship that is where action by the system generates some change in its environment and that
change is reflected in the system in some manner of feedback that triggers a system change.

A cybernetic system consists of several interrelated components that are the system goal (a target
for a particular aspect of system operation) located in the control centre, system mechanisms
(these help maintain the system goal), system behaviour and feedback (this is what is sent back
to the control centre and compared to the goal). Cybernetics is relevant in social systems like
organizations. This is because the goal of cybernetics theory is to define and understand the

2
functions and processes of systems that have goals and participate in circular, causal chains that
move from action to sensing to comparison with desired goal and again to action. It focuses on
how these systems process information reacts to information and changes or can be changed to
better accomplish the first two tasks. Cybernetic theory emphasizes some aspects of systems
theory and de- emphasizes others. This is because it emphasizes on the role of feedback
especially corrective feedback in maintaining system function. It also emphasizes the
interdependence of system parts, because the mechanisms are intimately related to the goal.
However, it de-emphasizes some aspects of system functioning like not accounting for the
growth of systems or the role of the environment in influencing the system process.

iv. Karl Weick’s Theory of Organizing (1979, 1995).

Weick says that organization exists in an informational environment. In defining organization,
Karl Weick says that word organization is both a noun and a myth. He opines that, you cannot
put a finger on an organization in the same manner you would a cup or a spoon. He describes
organizations as events linked together that transpire within concrete walls. The sequences, their
pathways, their timing, are the forms we erroneously refer into a substance we call organization.

Viewed from Weick’s point of perception, the organization encompasses parameters that are less
bound by concrete, wood, and structural restraints. Rather organizations are bound by the ability
to serve as repository where information consistently and effectively channeled. Taking this into
account, information which happens to be the lifeline or the soul of an organization will depend
on the proper channel execution, which will rely on the maximization of messaging clarity,
context, delivery and evolution through the system.

Weick gives an example on how interactions in an organization might unfold what he refers to as
“double interact loop” which he considers the building block of any organization. This describes
interpersonal exchanges that inherently occur across organization chain of command and in life
itself. An example would be: An Act occurs when one says something like “would you like to
have some coffe?” An interact occurs when one says something and the other party respond. I n
this case, “coffee would be too strong for me in this hot weather.” An interact occurs when one
person says something, the other one responds and the first person says something in response
adjusting the first statement. In this case, “well then, how about a glass of juice?”

3
Weick envisions the organization as a system taking in equivocal information from its
environment, trying to make sense of that information, and using what was learned for the future.
As such, organizations evolve as they make sense out of themselves and the environment. He
proposes that members use assembly of rules (policies/procedures) and communication cycles to
reduce equivocality. They introduce and react to ideas that help to make sense of the equivocal
environment.

System components or Parts, in this case organizational system.

A system is assemblage of parts or components. In an organizational system, these components
are the people and departments that make up the organization. You can also think of a large
society as a system, in this case the parts would be organizations and institutions that make up
the society. The following three concepts characterize system components;
Hierarchical Ordering; Organizational components are arranged in highly complex ways that
involves subsystems and super systems, hierarchical ordering. Think about your body as a
system, your body is made up of a number of subsystems, cardiovascular system, digestive
system, neurological system and reproductive system. These systems are made up of subsystems
for example; the cardiovascular system includes the heart, lungs and blood vessels. The same
hierarchical ordering can be seen when viewing an organization as a system. For instance, take a
health care industry as an organizational system. It’s made up of hospitals, clinics, insurance
companies and pharmaceutical companies which are super systems. A hospital also has
departmental sub systems which include surgical units, recovery units, laboratories, emergency
rooms and offices.
The concept of hierarchy in systems theory differs with the hierarchy concept in classical
management theorists. Classical theorists see hierarchy as relatively lines of authority
represented in organization. In contrast, hierarchical ordering within systems theory means that if
you look at any system, you can see how that system is made up of smaller subsystems and is
embedded within a larger super system.

Interdependence; this component implies that the functioning of one component of a system
relies on other components of the system. The human brain needs a constant supply of blood in
order to function. Thus the heart relies on the lungs to bring in the oxygen that fuels the blood.

4
Just like an organization, the systems are highly interdependent. In the hospital for instance, the
surgical units could not function effectively without laboratories to provide important test results.
Permeability; this component sates that organizational systems have permeable boundaries that
allow information to flow in an out. Permeability varies form system to system, some are open
others are closed. In the hospital instance, the hospital must be open to its larger environment so
that patients, information and resources can move in and out of the organization. Similarly,
hospital units must be open to each other to facilitate the flow of people, information and
materials.
Characteristics of Organizations as systems.
Input-Throughput- Output process; these interrelated processes form the basic model of
systems functioning. Input (for example, people, capital, managerial and technical skills) is
something put into a system or expended in its operation to achieve output or a result. Output
(products, profits, servces or satisfaction) is the information produced by a system or process
from a specific input.Throughput is the transformation process, it occurs when the parts of a
system or subsystems transform the material or energy into product or service.
Systems, Subsystems and Super systems; Systems are a set of interrelated parts that turn input
into output through processing. Subsystem is the step that does the processing of objectives
within an organization. Super systems are other systems in environment of which the survival of
the focal system is dependent.
Feedback; its reaction from the environment in an organization. These can be comments from
clients or customers using a product. Feedback is necessary to promote a balance of inputs and
outputs between the system, subsystems and the environment. Feedback measures output against
a standard in some form of cybernetic procedure that includes communication and control.
Feedback may be positive or negative, routine or informational. Positive feedback reinforces the
performance of the system. Negative feedback generally provides the controller with information
for action.

Boundaries; These are the parts of the organization that separates it from its environment.They
determine which parts are internal and which are external. There are four types of boundaries
according to Becker (1997). Physical boundary which can be the security system, linguistic
boundary which involve use of jargon or specialized language to separate members from non
members, systemic boundaries which are rules that regulate how members interact with non

5
members and psychological boundaries which are stereotypes, prejudices and biases that
members hold towards others that serve to restrict communication. For instance, members of
sales department may believe that members of manufacturing department are not refined as
they are and as a result they treat them with contempt.

Communication; In systems theory, communication act as a system binder. It binds the parts of
the organization together and binds the organization to its environment. Communication
mechanisms must be put in place for organizational systems to exchange relevant information
with its environment.

Goal directedness; systems are goal oriented and engage in feedback in order to meet the goals
of the organization. Also, every part of the organization is interdependent with each other
working together towards the goal. They strive to reach their central objective though different
routes (equifinality).
Contingency Theory-- Fred Edward Fiedler (1964).
Many ideas inherent in the systems school formed the basis for the contingency school.
Contingency approach is an extension of systems theory into management practice. It was
proposed by the Austrian psychologist Fred Edward Fiedler with his contingency model of
leardership. It states that that there is no best way to organize a corporation, to lead a company,
or to make decisions. Instead, the optimal course of action is contingent (dependent) upon the
internal and external situation. A leader should be appointed who can mke decisions based on the
situation and relative conditions. Management in this approach is considered to be dependent
variable.
The appropriate management actions and approaches depend on the situation. Managers with a
contingency view use a flexible approach, draw on a variety of theories and experiences and
evaluate many opinions as they solve problems. This management recognizes that there is no one
best way to manage. Managers are faced with the task of determining which managerial
approach is likely to be most effective in a given situation.

Conclusions.

Systems advocates envision the organization as being made up of interdependent parts that
interact with the environment to survive, they are not self content. Therefore, systems approach

6
is very crucial for organizations for its existence in business scenario and economic environment
in order to face all cyclic circumstances and move step ahead to achieve organizational goal.

7
 REFERENCES

Ashby, H.R. 1958. General Systems Theory as a New Discipline. General Systems (Yearbook of
the Society for the Advancement of General Systems Theory). 3, 1-6.

Boulding, K. 1956. General Systems Theory - The Skeleton of Science. Management Science.
2(3), 197-208, reprinted in General Systems, Yearbook of the Society for General Systems
Research, 1. Brownlie, D. 1994. The Marketing Book, III ed. Baker. 139-192.

Danie l Katz . The Functiona l Approach t o the Study o f Attitudes , Public Opinion Quarterly ,
2k, I960 , 163-204,
Danie l Kat z and Robert L . Kahn . Some Recent Finding s i n Human Relation s Research, pp .
650-665 i n Readings i n Socia l Psychology , eds. Guy E. Swanson, Theodore Newcomb, and
Eugene Hartley , 2nd edition , New York : Henry Holt , 1952.
Danie l Kat z and Robert L . Kahn . Human Organization.an d Worke r Motivation , pp . 16—
171 i n Industrial Productivity. Industrial Relation s Research Association , 1952

Hodgetts, Richard M and Altman, Steven, (1981). History of Management Thought In Mali, Paul
ed. Management Handbook: Operating Guidelines, Techniques and Practices. New York: John
Wiley.

McFardland, Dalton L. (1974). Management: Principles and Practices. 4th ed. New York: Mac
Millan Publishing.

Mandy, R Wayne, Sharplin, Arthur and Fllippo, Edwin B. (1988). Management Concepts and
Practices. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn And Bacon.

Robert L . Kahn and Danie l Katz . Leadership Practices in Relation to Productivity and
Morale , pp . 612-628 (chap . Ul) i n Group ' Dynamics, eds. Dorwin Cartwrigh t and Alvin
Zander, Evanston , 111.: Row, Peterson and Co, 1953.

8
 REFERENCES.
Ashby, H.R. 1958. General Systems Theory as a New Discipline. General Systems (Yearbook of
the Society for the Advancement of General Systems Theory). 3, 1-6.

Boulding, K. 1956. General Systems Theory - The Skeleton of Science. Management Science.
2(3), 197-208, reprinted in General Systems, Yearbook of the Society for General Systems
Research, 1. Brownlie, D. 1994. The Marketing Book, III ed. Baker. 139-192.

Danie l Katz. The Functiona l Approach t o th e Study o f Attitudes , Public Opinion Quarterly ,
2k, I960 , 163-204,

9
Danie l Kat z and Robert L. Kahn. Some Recent Finding s i n Human Relation s Research, pp.
650-665 i n Readings i n Socia l Psychology, eds. Guy E. Swanson, Theodore Newcomb, and
Eugene Hartley, 2nd edition, New York: Henry Holt, 1952.
Danie l Kat z and Robert L. Kahn. Human Organization.an d Worke r Motivation, pp. 16—171 i
n Industria l Productivity • Industria l Relation s Researc h Association, 1952
Hodgetts, Richard M and Altman, Steven, (1981). History of Management Thought In Mali, Paul
ed. Management Handbook: Operating Guidelines, Techniques and Practices. New York: John
Wiley.

McFardland, Dalton L. (1974). Management: Principles and Practices. 4th ed. New York: Mac
Millan Publishing.

Mandy, R Wayne, Sharplin, Arthur and Fllippo, Edwin B. (1988). Management Concepts and
Practices. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn And Bacon.

Robert L. Kahn and Danie l Katz. Leadership Practices in Relation to Productivity and Morale,
pp. 612-628 (chap. Ul) i n Group ' Dynamics, eds. Dorwin Cartwrigh t and Alvin Zander,
Evanston, 111: Row, Peterson and Co, 1953.

10