| Inspired to read some more books? Buy from Amazon .... | Want to search for title, author, or random search starting from a concept ..? |
"What is a System?" is one of the summary pages of "The Art of Systems Thinking : Essential Skills for Creativity and Problem Solving by Joseph O'Connor, Ian McDermott The undersigned finds the concepts on System Thinking very well explained and illustrated by the authors. With their permission, the summary is outlined below, with my own thoughts on the subject. It is hoped that readers of this homepage could read more thoroughly the very book itself. Application of the concepts in actual contextual situation is found in the Internet Knowledge Database - Outsights
A system consists of parts, or elements, or components. Our tendency is to focus on some parts of the system. But the discipline of System Thinking teaches us to focus on the inter-connectivity, inter-relationship and the inter-dependency of the parts. It is such interaction that give rise to the property or phenomena of the whole, i.e. the System.
In the case of ISO 9000 Quality System, there are 20 elements or parts, which make up a Quality Assurance System. Organisations could not harness the full benefit of ISO 9000 if she focuses only on individual parts or elements, without application of the Principle of Synergy to consciously create emerging properties from the interacting elements.
The old smoke-stack Frederick Taylor's management of parts, or the doctrine of "Divide into parts and Manage" is a total failure or misfit in this Information / Knowledge era. However centuries of such management practice has shaped / conditioned our paradigm on all aspects of management. While Reengineering is trying hard to focus on process, prevailing organisation paradigm is still seeing "parts", and not their relationship, although they are wrapped under the framework of Process. For example, some Reengineered organisations do away with typical silo-type of organisation structures, i.e. without departments, but individual members still see themselves as separate and discrete entity or specialist function. Individual as a separate System or entity has his or her own aspiration, want or need, but he or she seldom sees them in relation to that of the others. Commonly it is called no teamwork or no shared vision.
When there is machine problem causing production stoppage, we either focus on the technology problem or human (culprit) problem and not their cause-effect relationship. In this respect, we have not fully understood the working of a System.
Certain interacting parts form a system, which in turn is also another "part" of a larger system. This is an interesting and useful concept. However, the challenge is how do we draw a practical boundary to include some parts (and not everything) for effective management.
Many organisations accredited with ISO 9000 (or ISO 14000) have not applied this concept to add value to their business performance. From external certification body perspective, the Quality System encompass a substantial large scope (that is to be certified), in which the 20 sets of Management Principles are to be applied. For example, clause 4.9 Process Control may be applied to the manufacturing of the product, as one of the important part of the Quality System of the organisation. However, within the manufacturing process, there are many subsystems where processes are involved, and the sound Management Principles of Process Control should also be equally applied. Without such appreciation and understanding, organisations protest to auditors using the said management principles in looking at, say, handling process of repaired engines in the workshop before installation at the manufacturing plant.
The ability to "zoom in and zoom out" or "chop the trees and also see the whole forest" is considered a quality attribute of a leader. More importantly, to experience and comprehend the relationship of the system / sub-system boundaries, makes up the wisdom of the leader.
"The properties of a system are the properties of the whole. None of the parts has them." Read it carefully again. But we continue to act opposite. We see things as parts and we apply logical thinking that if each part behaves properly, then everything (the whole) should behave properly. Isn't that a familiar management paradigm : if every employee is committed and productive, the whole company can make money. But if everyone is committed and productive in his or her own perceived direction, then the company may even go bankrupt! Committed and productive people need to work under a set governing principles and system, which if not appropriate, the end result is still a disaster. But the management assumption is that the system is there, we only need committed and productive people. But the system they refer to are discrete, separated parts that make up the system. For example: marketing department, production department, human resource department; when problem arises, it is classified as machine problem, human problem, training problem. With the belief that if these parts are fixed, the whole is restored! But the properties of a system is NOT the summation of the properties of parts!
We are all expert analysts. Since the birth of Science, breaking thing into molecules and atoms, we continue to do so into electrons, proton etc. Such scientific approach brings about our today prosperity, and also untold complexity and possible destruction to this fragile earth. The same management paradigm prevails. Remember : "When you take a system apart and analyse it, it loses its properties. To understand systems you need to look at them as wholes."
A jigsaw puzzle may have 10,000 parts or pieces, that appear overwhelming. But piece by piece, with patience and time a picture can be constructed. This is detail complexity. However, English chess with 32 parts has great number of permutation and combination in a game. This is dynamic complexity.
In management, distinction needs to be made between detail complexity and dynamic complexity, as each requires different treatment and strategies. As long as the system involves parts which are human being, it is more dynamic complexity than detail complexity. In such cases, management falls trap in using detail complexity treatment, resulting in large bureaucratic system, elaborate documentation of procedures, flow charts, rewards and punishment system, etc. etc.
Each part is connected with others. If each part is taken apart for analysis, its looses its associated properties with the entire system. Hence each part is an integral portion of the whole, and each part has its influence or impact on the whole. But the influence and impact each part exhibits may not have the same magnitude, degree and can vary in its intensity over time. The influence or impact can be positive and / or negative.
But the constant challenge or dilemma to management is "How to identify the part that has greater influence on the whole system?". And the answer often ends in what appear to be most immediate quick fixes, and treating every part as equal with fire-fight behaviour, eventually influence the system negatively. For example: cost cutting, promotion of individual hero and not teamwork, promotion of extrinsic rewards and not intrinsic.
"What is the part of a system that can create positive influence to the whole system?" requires management skills in system thinking, pattern recognition, application of "Pareto Principles", "Statistical Process Control" or "Theory of Constraint" with particular attention to the time factor.
"Side-effects" needs not mean bad, nor good. It is the discipline of System Thinking that calls for awareness of cause-and-effect relationship. However, more often than not, organisation make changes that produce many negative side-effects. It is called "un-intended negative consequences", which are normally realised over long period of time, either by the same management who made the policy, if they are sincere or still around, or by the new management team.
The tendency is when we want to make changes, we have all the justification and rationale. So much so that we only focus on what are the advantages or intended good goals. It takes a lot of discipline to look for potential negative side-effects with effective feedback loop, as the System theory says "When you change one element, there are always side-effects."
It seems like a paradox, but it is also a natural law. A System resists change because it is stable, with their parts tightly interconnected. We need stable systems, otherwise this world will fall apart in no time. Organisation seeks consistent quality products or services, implying a stable system to produce the output. In the same token, organisations that have produced consistent not so good or un-competitive products or services, have stable system ingrained that is difficult to change. A constant complaint is "Resistance to Change" of the people. But "people" is only one of the many parts of the overall system. If the other parts of the system not identified and their relationship understood, i.e. how they are tightly connected to resist change, no amount of effort, slogan, training to tackle the people factor (which is only a part) will produce any desired result.
Hence the loop-sided investment in human resource development programs like leadership, motivation, QCC, Employee Suggestion Scheme, teambuilding etc. in isolation from the core-business bring forth only temporary illusion that everything is fine, or long term frustration that why things still not working all right. Obviously, the trainers, or consultant or HR specialists who put in their sincere effort in training or development have little understanding of the core-business or technology involved that make up the total system.
Likewise the technology specialists, in their problem solving, isolate problems into machines-problem, totally divorced from the human aspects which are inter-connected. To them, it is HR issue, not engineers'.
Another similar Part Management paradigm prevailing is the recent boom in management consultancy : ISO 9000, Benchmarking, ReEngineering etc. where the emphasis is on documentation and report (on which the consultant get their fat fees) and their new management theories or concept. These documentation and theories form another part, (although the most important part to the consultant and to the mis-guided organisation), divorced from the human aspects like the HR concerns, and to a large extend the core business. In theory and in documentation, the core-business is addressed. But they have only taken a snapshot of the reality, assumed and being operated on as if it is absolute and whole. And in organisation, they form separate structure, department or committee on such programs like ISO 9000, Benchmarking, Reengineering etc. while they continue with the old management practice of existing structures, department or committee like management committee of their usual agenda, department meetings of the frequent fire-fighting issues etc.
"Systems resist change because the parts are connected." In the above cases, parts are separated without understanding the connectivity and relationship. Organisation will continue to face with dilemma and conclusion that there is Resistance to Change, in spite of their sincere effort and investment.
"There will be particular places where you can effect large changes with very little effort once you understand the system. This is known as leverage." The Leverage come about when there is profound understanding of the interconnectivity, interrelationship and interdependency of all the interacting parts by the concerned parties.
| Inspired to read some more books? Buy from Amazon .... | Want to search for title, author, or random search starting from a concept ..? |
By Andrew Wong, 31st August.1998
COPYRIGHT @ 1998
Go to Titles || Go to Home� 1998 eMail-Andrew Wong
Get your own Free Home Page