The concept of interpenetration implies that, however important logical closure may be as a theoretical ideal, empirically social systems are conceived as open systems, engaged in complicate processes of interchange with environing systems (an outline of the social system). The environing systems are cultural, personality systems, the physical environment and the behaviour of the other subsystems. This idea also applies to social systems and their subsystems each of which is an open systems changing with the environing subsystems of a larger system. Parsons believes that society is a system that is bigger than the individual person and as we come and go, are born and then die society will always exist. Society will continue to grow and expand long after we are gone.
One goal of systems thinking (systems dynamic) is to provide tools to transform the perspectives and mental models so that actions lead to real sustainable long-term improvements (Gabriel, 2013). A systemic approach is relevant because many of the various types of shocks that affect households are becoming increasingly covariant, i.e. affecting groups of households even entire communities (Choularton et al., 2015). In situations where the vulnerability of individuals is intensified by their social and economic dependence on others (affected by the same disaster and shocks), system components are particularly
The systems approach: Systems theory is one of the dominant organizational theories in management today. It treats an organization as either an open or closed system. A system is a set of distinct parts that form a complex whole. A closed system is not affected by its environment, while an open system is. Today nearly all systems are open as they all interact with their environment.
This is seen in the concept of co-creation, which in nature is the idea that “the environment of a organism is composed of other organisms” (63). So in dealing with organizations, we must recognize that if the environment of an organization is made of other organizations, then we can determine that these organizations can “influence the nature of their environment and play an active role in shaping their future” (63). If organizations within the same industry work together, they can work together to protect their shared interests, creating cartels. Cartels are a collaboration of organizations that work together to control a market (63). An example of a cartel would be OPEC, or The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which works together to regulate and set oil prices.
A balance of these three components is critical for effective functioning of the organization. The situational approach postulates that organizational systems are affected by the environments in which they are set in; therefore different environments require different organizational approaches and relationships for effective working Systems approach; Systems theory was pioneered by Ludwig von Bertalanffy in 1951, he compared open system to anatomy that is composed of skeleton, muscles, circulatory system etc. the systems approach portrays an organization as a system composed of a set of inter-related - and inter connected web. Skyttner (1996) as cited by Enoch, C.N. (2013), notes that a system is comprised of elements that are part of an integrated piece that is envisioned to function, thus displays some level of order, pattern and purpose.
System thinking has its foundations in the field of system dynamics, founded in 1956 by MIT Professor Jay Forrestor recognized the need for a better way of testing new ideas about social systems, in the same way we can test ideas in engineering. Systems thinking allows people to make their understanding of social systems explicit and improve their understanding of mechanical systems. Too often, today’s problems are solved by utilizing easy and comfortable approaches to obtain simple solutions. In reality as many discover simplicity and common approaches are far from effective in dealing with complex, dynamic and diverse problems. Despite the initial apparent ease and comfort, focus tends to be on the elements of the problem,
This is a static and passive vision of the organization. The organization is not just a machine of processing of information, but an entity that creates knowledge through the action and of the interaction. To create knowledge is the actors embrace their environment and make tacit and explicit
The following are the four major alternative definitions. 1) The organization is temporary human organisms with no particular optimum structural design such as the classical triangle. 2) That these temporary organisms, particularly those which are very large and complex, address themselves to many rather than one organizational goal. 3) The human organizations exist within and constantly interact with their environments such that essence of organization is to a large extent defined by its environment. 4) That human organization act as the throughput subsystem with the environment providing input and accepting output, and, thus these organizations might be defined in terms of their systematic relationship with environment.
Approaches to decision making A fundamental distinction has to be made regarding the approaches to decision making. Normative theories involve the so-called decision-science, the development of formal models about how people should think and take decisions. Such theories are strongly based on the concepts of “rational” people, perfect information and optimisation, and are therefore highly formalised. Descriptive theories study and suggest models about how people in real context really think and take decisions, therefore addressing the main critics to the first kind of theories. Finally, the integrative approach blends insight from both theories, striving to develop formal models and principles, but taking into consideration the complexity of