Systemic View of Organizational Structure - Term Paper Example

Systemic View of Organizational Structure Introduction A system is any entity that is can be considered to bea coherent whole and not merely as the total of its constituent parts (Skyttner 1996, p.16); understanding the interactions and relationships between parts is key to understanding the organization, functioning as well as outcomes of the entity. Systems can be found virtually everywhere in nature, in society, in economic contexts and within information systems, among other places; numerous systems perspectives have evolved over time, given the simultaneous development of the systems theory in numerous disciplines. The systemic theory is founded on the conceptual framework created in the systems theory, which holds that the underlying and perpetual interrelations that define human relations are a key object to be focused in the therapy and its emerging interpersonal systems. The model has been the driver for numerous of changes in the field of applied psychology as well as human science more so in its engenderment of the integration of various scientific disciplines. This paper seeks to discuss the systemic theory by applying its various concepts to a practical organization within which the writer has been actively engaged in retrospectively. This discussion will be fronted by a background description of the general systems theory upon which the open systems theory and its key concepts are based. This exposition will then form the basis for the discussion of the systemic therapy alongside its multiple concepts as applied in family, in community and in organizational system settings. Moving forward, this paper will introduce the case of a state-funded charity organization, its objectives as well as what it stands for, and the various roles played by the people side of that organization. Having expounded on the basic structure and organization of the organization as well as its goals and objectives, this paper will attempt to apply the various concepts applicable in systemic therapy to the organization. All along, this paper will be drawing upon existing literature and personal reflections, to demonstrate some of the many benefits of applying systemic theories in the organization. The General Systems Theory For many years, theories about organizational structure and how to improve organizational performance have abounded; application of these theories has had a significant influence on the manner in which organizations have allocated their resources and defined their bottom line. Organizational theories describe how organizations interact with their environment; while early theories of organizational structure were primarily bureaucratic, recent developments have given rise to organizational theories that apply in a vast range of dynamic situations. One such approach is the general systems theory, which was popularized by Von Bertalaffy and his colleagues (Montgomery & Oladapo 2014, p. 174). The general systems theory is an interdisciplinary perspective of “systems in nature, in society and in many scientific domains” (Mele, Pels & Polese 2010, p.127), as well as a basis for the study phenomena from a universal perspective. Systems’ thinking reflects a shift in focus, from the constituent parts to the whole, following Aristotle’s claim that true knowledge results from an understanding of the whole rather than the single parts of an entity. At the core of the general systems theory, is the focus on interactions, which is informed by the theory’s fundamental principle that the behaviour of an autonomous part varies greatly from its behaviour when it is interacting with other parts in an entity (Brown 2010, p.473). The theory also makes significant distinctions between the so-called open, closed and isolated systems; “in open systems there are exchanges of energy, matter, people and information with the external environment” (Mele, Pels & Polese 2010, p.127). Contrariwise, there are no exchanges of information and matter in closed systems, except for the exchanges of energy; unlike in open and closed systems, there is totally no exchange of elements in isolated systems. Many approaches that were offshoots of the general systems theory have emerged over the years, including the open system theory, the viable system model and the viable system approach. The Open Systems theory The open system theory, which forms the focus of this paper, interrogates the relationships between organizations and their environments; similarly, the open system theory focuses on the ability of organizations to adapt to changes in their immediate environment. The fundamental assumption of this theory is that entities that are capable of processing information about their own surroundings are better at coping with any shifts in their environmental conditions. Two orders of adaptive levels, counteraction and amplification, are distinguishable in the open systems theory; the first level, counteraction entails processing information from the environment while the second level, amplification, relates to the constructivism theory. When viewed through the open systems lens, the organization is seen as a system established by energetic input-output; the energy released from the output re-energizes the system. Due to their material exchanges with the external environment, social organizations can be accurately categorized as open systems. Given that an open system exchanges energy, matter and information with the environment, these exchanges lead to internal processes of transformation (Mele, Pels & Polese 2010, p.129). These basic concepts are significant to some systems; homeostasis relies on the exchange of information between the system and its external surroundings, thereby allowing the system to maintain a stable balance all the time. Self-regulation, on the other hand, is an adaptive mechanism, which enables the system to maintain its own balance within the scope of its structure and through information exchange with the external environment. Equilibrium or balance refers to the attitude and capacity to contribute effectively to the fulfilment of all the needs of some or most of the parts inherent in the structure of a system. Autopoiesis refers to the self-organizing feature of systems, which triggers a selective mechanism that aligns the internal intricacy of the system with the multifaceted external environment within which it exists. The concept of equifinality is a principle that describes open systems capacity to achieve the same final state beginning from a set of contextual factors and/or taking diverse routes. On the other hand, common finality is particularly significant for the survival of a system and regards organizations as a set of integrated parts that are ordered and managed to arrive at the same end state. Systemic therapy Systemic psychology is the integrated approach to therapy, which uses complex systems to interrogate the patterns of behaviour and human experience based on the systems perspective (Von Sydow, et al., 2010, p.457); under this approach, individuals are regarded as always seeking homeostasis. Systemic therapy seeks to explain crucial contribution of every individual as it relates to the healthy functionality of the whole system; this systems therapy can be applied to couples, families, communities and even organizations. The basic strategy of this technique is identifying key behaviour patterns and the manner in which every member reacts to change within the dynamic, thereby enabling every participant to comprehend and change their patterns to more appropriate and beneficial behaviours. Systemic therapy aims to help the members of a group to establish positive and stable relationships that contribute to the group’s wellbeing as well as their inter-relational experiences; consequently, systems therapy has proved to provide solutions to a vast majority of conflicting situations and issues in group relationships (Sexton 1994, p.249). Case Study: State-sponsored Charity Organization This section examines the internal structure, organization and scope of activities of a state-funded charity organization; as a state-sponsored charity, the organization in question is neither strictly private nor public since it straddles the middle ground in regards to funding and administration. While majority of the clients are referred to the organization by government hospitals, quite a good number come from private practice. Among the many other services offered include CBT, couples and family therapies as well as a range of psychodynamic therapies; in addition, there are numerous playrooms filled with toys designed for child therapy. The organization’s internal environment has a basic structure along which its management is systematically organized; at the helm of the organization is a manager, who is assisted by a secretary in supervising all the paperwork and the legal side of the organization. At the core of the management structure are eight therapists working collaboratively, to achieve organizational goals and objectives. Four students that practice their therapy skills also assist these therapists; each of the four students is supervised directly by one of the therapists to whom they report directly. Applying systemic therapy concepts One of the key systemic therapy concepts that can be applied to the organization is the view of a organization as a system of integrated relationships between members of the organization who collaborate towards ensuring the healthy functioning of the organization as a whole. Systemic therapy focuses on the system, which can be thought of as the organization or the wider family network including friends and other people in it, rather than the individual because at the core of its practice is the thinking that difficulties in the system arise, not from individuals themselves. However, in the relationships, interactions and language that emerges between individual members of the system (Stewart & Ayres 2001, p.79). In that respect, systemic therapy helps in the prevention of long term adverse effects that may arise because of stresses and pressures on the group dynamics such as developmental conflicts by recognizing and supporting individual members during transition and change. Other key systemic therapy concepts that can be applied to the organization include the concepts of life cycles, organization rules, as well as circularity and interconnection. In the organization in question, a recognizable organizational culture has emerged over the years, which basically encapsulates the organization’s way of doing things in providing quality services to its clients. This organizational culture is enshrined in the organization’s codes of conduct, which clearly stipulate the manner in which every member of the organization should act both in individual and group settings in the creation of value. The organization has a client-focus, which implies that it strives to provide the best therapy and support services to all its clients, to ensure that they receive value for their money; every member of the organization is expected to abide by the set rules and regulations that define how people should behave in specific situations. The concept of circularity focuses on the dynamics of group interactions while seeing problems as originating from the existing circular patterns of interaction within the system; according to systemic therapy, every system (organization in this case) operates on the basis of a given set of predictable patterns of behaviour. Granted that these patterns of behaviour are passed and replicated from generation to generation, the issues affecting an individual member of the organization eventually affects the rest of the members as well (Walsh 2011, p.154). The domain of the circularity concept, therefore, is the patterns of behaviour that arise within systems, which are not only repetitive, but also circular in nature and are always evolving; similarly, behaviours and beliefs that are deemed to be difficulties are also more likely to develop and evolve in a circular manner. Some of the reported long-term impacts of systemic therapy to systems such as the organization include strengthened organizational functioning and relationships of people, healthy organizational structure and communication patterns, as well as supportive organizational networks, systems and resources. A common language, collaborative atmosphere, characterizes the internal environment of the organization and offices that are located very near to each other, all of which facilitate closer interactions between the members of its highly interconnected system. A long table provided in the main office also encourages the assembly of people; occasionally, members of the organization gather to engage in conversations that eventually contribute to bonding amongst them. This influences not only the manner in which the organization functions as an entity, but also how individual members feel about themselves and about their inter-relational relationships within the organization (Rober 2005, p.385). Concept of organizational structure, which highlights the hierarchical order of management levels, is akin to the concept of family structure, which defines the power relationships between individual family members. In the organization, different levels of power exist and every level has a distinguishable set of activities and jurisdictions besides being answerable and accountable to the succeeding level of authority. For instance, while the manager oversees the activities of the organization from the legal perspective, the therapists undertake the counselling sessions, thereby enabling the organization to fulfil its goals and objectives effectively. The student therapists work under the direct supervision of the eight therapists and they have no power to make autonomous decisions regarding patient treatment or any other thing for that matter; the secretary’s role is restricted to paperwork. This order of organizational structure and division of labour is clearly outlined, to avoid any confusion, thereby promoting harmony and consistency in the organization. The concept of life cycles, which highlights the stress that occurs at crucial transition points in the family life cycles, can also be applied to this organization. The life cycles model considers the growth and development of systems over time, through a series of stages addressing nodal events relating to the “comings” and “goings” of members of the system (Hoyle 2013, p.6). In the organizational system, where organizational life is basically centred on the effective utilization off resources in the creation of value, all the members of the organization collaborate in providing therapy to its clients, both from the public and private hospitals. In that respect, the comings and goings of members of the organization as well as patients after completion of sessions constitutes the organization’s life cycle. The events at every crucial transition point have a significant impact on the organization as a unit, thus, organizations must make critical adaptive decisions as well as specific relationship shifts, to cope effectively with the new situations. For instance, the organization was compelled to make quick adjustments in its operational structure after its secretary left; every member of the organization was greatly affected by the absence of the secretary since there was no one to handle the organization’s massive paperwork. The influence of external factors such as the economy on the organizational system can also be applied in the evaluation of organizations; the state of the economy has a great influence on the finances of the organization; thus, its structure and value creation process. While a rapidly growing economy will lead to the success of the organization, a dwindling economy will most likely constrain the output as well as profits of the organizations, consequently constraining its operations and survival as well. For instance, in the wake of a recent financial meltdown, the organization is forced to make rapid structural adjustments to ensure proper functioning and survival of its operations. Precisely, the organization had to lay off its secretary in response to tough economic times, due to insufficient funds to support the secretary’s pay and allowance packages; this change greatly affected the rest of the organization and its members who were now forced to process their own paperwork. Overall, this paper has discussed the systemic theory by applying its various concepts in the case of a state-funded charity organization within which the writer has been actively engaged in before. This discussion has traced evolution of systemic theory and systemic therapy in the foundations of the general systems theory while applying the systemic therapy concepts to the case of the state-funded charity organization. Evidently, existing literature and personal reflections highlighted herein this paper demonstrate that there are many benefits that accrue to the organizations that apply systemic theories. References Brown, J., 2010. Psychotherapy Integration: Systems Theory and Self-Psychology. Journal of marital and family therapy, 36(4), pp. 472-85. Hoyle, C., 2013. A critique of the life cycle model used within family therapy: A social work perspective. Cumbria Partnership Journal of Research Practice and Learning, 3(1), 5-9. Mele, C., Pels, J., & Polese, J., 2010. A Brief Review of Systems Theories and Their Managerial Applications. Service Science 2(1-2):126-135. Montgomery, E. G., & Oladapo, V., 2014. Talent Management Vulnerability in Global Healthcare Value Chains: A General Systems Theory Perspective. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 173-189. Rober, P., 2005. Family Therapy as a Dialogue of Living Persons: A perspective inspired by Bakhtin, Voloshinov, and Shotter. Journal of marital and family therapy, 31(4), pp. 385-97. Sexton, T.L., 1994. Systemic thinking in a linear world: Issues in the application of interactional counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development : JCD, 72(3), pp. 249. Skyttner, L., 1996. General systems theory: Origin and hallmarks. Kybernetes, 25(6), pp. 16-22. Stewart, J., & Ayres, R., 2001. Systems theory and policy practice: An exploration. Policy Sciences, 34(1), pp. 79. Von Sydow, K., Beher, S., Schweitzer, J., & Retzlaff, R., 2010. The Efficacy of Systemic Therapy With Adult Patients: A Meta-Content Analysis of 38 Randomized Controlled Trials. Family process, 49(4), pp. 457-85. Walsh, F., 2011. Family Therapy: Systemic Approaches to Practice. In J. Brandell (ed). Theory and Practice in Clinical Social Work, NY: Sage. Read More