Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
The concept of systems thinking and its connection to strategic thinking in organizational contexts. Systems thinking is a holistic approach to understanding complex systems and their interrelationships. the importance of systems thinking in strategic decision making, particularly in complex and dynamic environments. It also touches upon the role of tools and frameworks in strategic analysis and evaluation. based on literature reviews and theories of complex systems.
Typology: Assignments
1 / 10
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Katumbu Sabina Ndjamba
Deliberate/Intended and Emergent Strategy Johnson & Scholes further explain that strategy can either be deliberate or emergent. Deliberate strategy which he describes as the rational or analytical view of strategy development, is developed based on some tools, techniques and frameworks for strategic analysis and evaluation (Johnson, 2011). When deliberate strategy has failed then emergent strategy come in place and is not developed based on any long term planning. Which clearly indicates that once what you intended to accomplish does workout, then you need to apply an urgent plan that will enable you to accomplish that target.
In my organization the spreading of the gospel cannot be accomplished by pastors only, due to the fact that they are few who are placed in various districts. Financially the organization is limited in such a way that management is not able to employ more field workers such as pastors. Hence the strategy had to include how lay members to e equipped with skills on how to be involved in soul winning.
System Thinking According to Reisman (1979) indicates that “A system is a set of resources-personnel, materials, facilities, and/or information – organized to perform designated functions, in order to achieve desired results.” Success depends upon organization or individuals putting up systems that will enable positive outcomes, only once the systems have been understood in the organization will it results in Systems Thinking.
Systems thinking is a way of thinking about, and a language for describing and understanding, the forces and interrelationships that shape the behaviour of systems (Senge, 1993).
Systems thinking elements are interrelated, interconnected, the elements emerge from each other. The mutual causality of the elements is now imbedded within and between the levels of parts. Therefore due to the fundamentals of systems thinking it becomes difficult to isolate a part and expert the system to achieve a desired results.
According to the car example described by Proffessor’s Ackroff video helps us to make sense of systems thinking. Regardless of the best auto parts that has been identified from all the best auto motors, no anticipated results will be attained. This is simply because car parts do not relate to each other and no mutual causality between the elements, the parts do not complement each other. Therefore existence of core fundamentals of systems thinking is very crucial in a system.
Contextualizing this in the organization setting, when organizing the working teams or committees, the managers have to know the roles each will play in regard to their strengths to make the best output and they have to be encouraged to work collectively as a team not in isolation. The team players should complement one another.
In addition, Pearl (2017) adds that system thinking is very interrelated term to strategic thinking since we cannot have a strategy without first understanding the system, yet we cannot have a system without first developing a strategy.
Approaches to Strategy Through the years the approaches to strategy have been changing since the time Mintzberg and Lampel (1999) has developed these approaches. Therefore, we are going to look at the summarized version of the ten schools of thought in regard to strategy development.
This approach is responsible simply for formation of the SWOT analysis model. Management has to scan the environment by looking at the Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats that surround the organization. By doing this it will enable the management to come up with a better approach on the strategy they intend to develop. The strategy that will be formed will have to fit between the internal capabilities and the external potentials of the firm.
This approach the process runs towards planning the entire strategy in a difficult manner. Though the strategy is mostly for the top management, later just to be passed on to the employees regardless of the fact that they do not own the strategy.
The process involved in this approach it is more analytical. Whereby companies chooses among the three generic strategies such as cost leadership, differentiation or focus. This approach is biased due to the fact that only big companies are able to position their business, smaller companies will not achieve much since they do not have major factors that affect their companies.
This approach requires leaders that are visionary. Capable of bringing innovative products and service in the market. Intuition plays an important role in this approach. In addition the leader should be able to maintain control in regard to implementation of the vision that has been formulated.
Mental process is one that plays an important aspect especially in this approach. Whereby organization will mostly depend on mental maps. In reality a firm can not only depend on ideas, surveys to come up with new ideas or to reach their potential customers.
Complex Perspective According to Murray Gel Mann traces the meaning from the root of the word. Plexus is defined as braided or entwined, from which we get complexus that is being interpreted as braided together, this brings us to the English word complex that is derived from Latin. In a system we have elements that are interrelated or interconnected within the system and that is where complexity is associated with when it comes to the system and the environment.
Furthermore, McKelyey (1999) states that “A complex system is a system (whole) comprised of numerous interacting entities (parts), each of which is behaving in its local context according to some rule(s), law(s) or force(s).”
There are theories that contributes to the generic characteristics of complexity as follows: connectivity, far from equilibrium, self-organization, emergence, interdependence, feedback, exploration-of-the space-of possibilities, co-evolution, hysteresis and lastly increasing returns.
Connectivity is one of the theories that is dominant in the Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) World church organization. This is simply because when it comes to human system in terms of connectivity, means that whatever decision or action that is made by an individual this can be a group or an organisation. The decision that has been voted will affect everyone in the system. The SDA highest organisation every after five years has to pass the strategic plan to all organisation until it reaches the local church system to implement it. Regardless of the environment or the pace an organisation may take to roll it out, the bottom line is that uniformity should be maintained in the system. Though many at times it might not have the equal or uniformity impact.
Complexity systems is all about how one thinks or sees the environment. Managers focus mostly on solving problems however it is about time, they start paying more attention to the theories of complex systems in order to come up with ways that will enhance and support the organization.
Complex Adaptive Systems According to Uhl-Bien, Marion, McKelvey (2007), describes Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) as “Neural-like networks of interacting, interdependent agents who are bonded in a cooperative dynamic by common goal, outlook, need, etc. They are changeable structures with multiple, overlapping hierarchies, and like the individuals that comprise the, CAS are linked with one another in dynamic, interactive network.”
The most important aspect of an organization or a system is to ensure that the goal has been achieved. Therefore neural-like networks refers to teams or groups within the system and the interdependent can be viewed as members of that team. The members are not idle but interacting with one another to ensure the goal is achieve.
CAS comprises of six main roles which are as follows: CAS drives in an open systems, CAS is self-organizing, CAS works on the edge of chaos, CAS adjusts to external changes, and CAS needs connections with individual agents and eventually resulting in a new emergent joint or product.
As stated before that organization are systems which results to be adaptive systems. This makes the Seventh-day Adventist Church organization a complex adaptive system. This is because it is made up of individuals with various preferences, background, experiences, tribe, age and most of all have the right to make a decision regardless of our limitations as human systems.
Strategy as Practice (SAP) According to Whittington (2006) proposes that there are three elements of a theory of practice that may be isolated as follows: praxis, practices and practitioners. Praxis simply means human action, while practices defined as a routinized types of behaviour which consists of various elements, interconnected to one another and lastly practitioners refers to actors that develop the strategy.
SAP marks the final theme when it comes to systems thinking, since it refines the existing organizational strategy depending on the environment the system is operating in. Therefore strategy as practice seeks to respond to the following five questions according to Jarzabkowski, 2004 and Whittington, 2006.
To answer to the first question, Jarzabkowski (2004) conceptualizes strategy as “socially accomplished activity, constructed through the actions, interactions and negotiations of multiple actors and the situated practices upon which they draw.” To attempt the second question, strategist are simply the practitioners that tend to carry out the human action (praxis) depending on what has happened in the past, who they are and the position they are at. Strategic decision depends on which position the practitioner is operating.
Generally practitioners differs in making decisions since it is all about the type of tools they intend to use depending on the system. Managers need to familiarize themselves with the various tools used for scanning both internal and external environment. There are various strategic tools for analysing the environment according to Jarrat and Stiles (2010), namely SWOT analysis and BCG.
SWOT analysis is a popular tool that strategist can use to evaluate the internal Strength and Weaknesses of a firm and the environmental Opportunities and Threat facing the system.
BCG it’s a portfolio technique, developed by the Boston Consulting Group that assists strategists to balance the flow of income resources while looking out for basic strategic purpose in regard to the overall portfolio.
References
