Mockler Teoria de Sistemas

7/30/2019 Mockler Teoria de Sistemas

1/7

ROBERT J. MOCKLER

The Systems Approachto Business Organizationand Decision Making

SYSTEMS THEORY has had a revolutionary effect

he computer is not, however, the villain. What

of systems. A system may be defined

Dr. M ockler has worked in managementplanning and control for InternationalPaper Co., Time Inc., Dow Jones, and

The arrange men t of components must be orderlyand hierarchical, no matter how complex it is. Since the comp onents of tlie system are inte rde -pendent, there must be communication among them. Since a system is oriented towa rd an objective, anyinteraction among the components must be designed toachieve that objective.A number of authorities working in diverse fields

of specialization have contributed to the develop-ment of systems theory. Four of the better knownare Ludwig von Bertalanffy, Kenneth Boulding,Norbert W iener , and He rbert Simon.

A biologist, von Bertalanffy, is considered theoriginator of the general systems theory.- Disturbedby the increasing fragmentation and specializationof knowledge in this century, he attempted to find aunifying framework for the separate scientific disci-plines. His work led to the development of a gen-eral theory of systems, which he felt provided suchan integrating approach to the study and develop-ment of a wide range of scientific disciplines: "Tlienotion of a 'system' being defined as 'any arrange-ment or combination, as of parts or elements, in awhole' applies to a cell, a human being, a society, aswell as to an atom, a planet or a galaxy."'

Kenneth Boulding carried the general systemstheory a step further by defining nine levels of sys-tems, starting with the most simple and static (theanatomy and geography of the universe) and end-ing with the most dynamic ( transcendentalsystems).* He thus conceived of a hierarchical ar-rangement of separate systems, which are in turn


2/7

Both Boulding and von Bertalanffy recognizedthe dangers that resulted from the increasing frag-mentation of science into more and more subgroupsand the growing difficulty of communicating amongthe scientific disciplines. One of the main objectivesof the general systems theory was to develop "aframework of general theory to enable one special-ist to catch relevant communications from others."^

Since systems theory focuses on tlie dynamic in-terrelationship and interaction of entities, informa-tion and communication theory are important to thedevelopment of systems theory. In his study of in-formation theory and communication, Norbert Wie-ner drew many parallels between the communica-tion processes in living beings and in the newercommunication machines, such as computers. Bothhave special apparatuses for collecting informationfrom the outside world, storing it, and using it as abasis for action. Through this mechanism bothhuman beings and information-processing machineshave the capacity to compare actual performance toexpected performance and to correct any deviationsby "the sending of messages which effectivelychange the behavior of the recipient."^ Thus, Wie-ner saw communication and information theory as abasis for understanding and e.xplaining the plan-ning, control, and decision-making processes.'^

Herbert Simon, in his study of business manage-ment, considered "decision making" and "managing"as synonymous. He saw the business organizationwithin which the manager works as a decision-mak-ing information system. Simon thus extended thescope of Wiener's information and communicationtheory and von Bertalanffy's general systems theoryby applying them to business operations, wherethey can be viewed as vehicles for effectivelyachieving corporate objectives.

Systems theory and tlie various applications of itexplored by these four men are important to businessmanagers primarily for these reasons:

Since the systems concept is objective-oriented,systems organization automatically centers attentionupon the objectives for which the finn has been es-tablished and helps to generate concerted and coordi-nated activity toward attainment of these objectives. Systems theory sti esses the inte rdependence of ele-ments, so that a manager is continually forced to viewthe business firm as a component of the over-all operat-ing economy.

business organization can be viewed on one la complete, integrated decision-making systsigned to achieve some specific objective, sproducing automobiles or paper products. other level this internal business system viewed as a component or subsystem of a largtemthe economic, social, and competitive ement within which the business operates.

The environmental system. Looking upon cial, economic, and competitive environmentintegrated system, of which a particular busia subsystem, aids management planning ansion making.

1 / In plann ing and ope rating a particular cits managers are led to give greater considerationpolitical and social values of the environment atential impact that these values, and tbe legislatiproduce, have on the business.

2 / Managers become m ore aw are of th e ecforces influencing the business. Tbe company'and short-range planning is thus influenced to a degree by such economic factors as supply and dpopulation growth and labor force trends; gross nproduct and income estimates; technological dment; trends in governmental receipts and etures; fluctuations in indush'ial production, pricebusiness, and tbe economy in general; and sfactors.1"3 / A company's managers are m ade more athe specific influences of the competitive system operations. As a result, a company's sales forecaimproved, for greater consideration is given tmarket and industry factors as anticipated standing and share, competitive stiategy and and new product and market development. Prprofit levels, rates or return on investment, and sproduction, marketing, and financial plans are aveloped with more precise estimates of competitiditions in mind.The effects of these external factors can tweighed with other information on interna

pany resourcesthe strengths and weaknessespartic ular business un de r studyto develocorporate plans and to make operating decisi

A business manager acquires such an apprplanning and decision making by followiprinciples of scientific business planning."ever, the systems approach supplements andforces the disciplines laid down in scientificning, by impressing upon the manager the reship between his internal business operation


3/7

The systems approach forces the manager to look

These information-communication systems neces-

In organizing the components of a business to

In Management Systems, McDonough and

1 / Be sure th at a dequ ate provision is mad e for all2 / G roup (depa rtme ntalize) activities on some logi-3 / Limit th e num ber of subord inates reporting to

4 / Define the responsibilities of each department, di-

6 / Make authority and responsibility equal.7 / Provide for controls over those to whom authorityis delegated.8 / Avoid dual subordination.9 / Distinguish clearly between line authority, functional authority, and staff relationships.10 / Develop methods of coordination.These principles clearly focus on the person-to

person relationships within an organization, and onthe physical and functional departmentalization ofthe business unit. The commonplace block-diagramorganization chart reflects this concept. Such relationships are, of course, important in thinking abouorganizations, but overemphasis of these relationships can obscure the information and communication links so vital to effective decision makingwitliin tlie corporation.When changes are introduced within the traditional organization structure, new departments ounits are normally added or new responsibilitiesgiven to existing departments. Sometimes these additions or changes are made to meet new businessneeds, sometimes to take maximum advantage of anindividual executive's particular combination of talents, and sometimes merely to adjust to the personalities of individual executives. Such a fragmenteddevelopment process almost invariably leads tosome decrease in the effectiveness of the decisionmaking processes within an organization.

The systems concept of organization attempts toavoid tliis problem by focusing on the dynamic interaction and intercommunication among components of the system. Systems theory subordinatethe separate units or departments of a business todecision-making information and communicationnetworks. Understanding this difference is fundamental to understanding how systems theory has affected business organization and decision making

The initial chart picturing a business organizationrestructured around the information flows, insteadof around the authority and responsibihty unitsdoes not look substantially different, for during thfirst phases of the changeover only a few departments have been added and some job responsibilities shifted. The change in basic organization philosophy has a profound effect, however, for it creates major changes in the way an organization functionschanges that affect the lives of all the individuals operating within the business system an


4/7

adjustments in the structure of the business organi-zation. Both in theory and in practice, therefore, thetheory of systems is revolutionary for an establishedbusiness.The revolution has in fact occurred in most largercompanies, for the introduction of electronic dataprocessing, with its enormous capacity for storingand processing information and its enormous ex-pense, is forcing business to use a systems approachto organization development. The computer has in asense been the catalyst for re-evaluation andchange. For some companies the transition has beensmooth; for others it has been chaotic.When introducing a computer, many companiestend to approach the changeover in the traditionalwaypiecemeal, department by department. Suchan approach only reinforces the fragmentation anddisruption of information and decision-making sys-tems.

The Catalyst for ChangeInstead, as most companies sooner or later dis-cover, before major decisions concerning com puteri-zation are made, management must step back andre-evaluate the entire ffow of business, not merelythe individual operations being computerized, inorder to isolate the major decision-making areas,their interrelations, and the information needed tomake these decisions most effectively. In otherwords, the systems approach has proved in practiceto be the best one.For example, in a large mail-order business whichhas recently been changing to computerized orderprocessing and information handling, the first incli-

nation was to write programs in steps, first forketing, then for order processing, billing, invecontrol, and so on, for each of the componendepartments currently operating in the companIt soon became apparent that this was nobest approach. At this time management dirthe systems group to study the nature of the ness in which the company was tlien engagedbusiness in which the company hoped to bgaged within the next five years, and the envment in which the company would operate ifuture.The group next constructed a chart of the flothe business operation, starting with the coupovertisement offering the product and asking foorder, and following the customer's order thrprocessing and billing until the product is shithe merchandise restocked, and the bill paideach phase in the flow chart a supplemental lismade of the significant planning, control, and ational decisions necessary to perform that pwell. The information needed to make these sions and the form in which this informationneeded was then determined.Only after the above studies were completeda decision made as to which aspects of the busprocess could most economically be computerwhich would best be done clerically, and wwere of suflSciently minor importance to the ovfunctioning of the business that they would be in a less than ideal way or not be done at all.As a final step, the actual organization of theration was restructured around the picture obusiness which had been developed in the sysstudies.


5/7

"systems" organization struc ture.

how it fiows, and how its parts interrelate is

piecemeal. Letting presently established organiza-tional structures control the systems study and de-velopment creates problems, among them: it leavesthe antiquated organization structure intact andhinders the development of an effective mechanismfor improved decision making; and it leads to ineffi-cient use of the new, automated, computerized pro-cessing equipment.The systems approach is revolutionizing businessdecision making, for it can provide more compre-hensive information, faster, at the point and in theform it is needed to make better business decisions.Adapting the organization to the information sys-tems needed for effective planning, control, and op-erational decision making enables a company totake advantage of new facilities for storing and pro-cessing information, which can in turn lead to com-petitive advantages and greater profits.Control and Expansion

Conclusion. Drastic organizational changes donot necessarily have to occur at the time a study ofthe business system is made, for a company mayhave grown and developed in tune with its growingbusiness. But this is the exception. Some changeswill always occur, and over the long run they areusually major.The executive familiar with the fundamentalchanges in business philosophy forced upon busi-ness by the introduction of electronic data process-ing and the development of systems theory will bebetter prepared to meet the challenges they present.He will not be confused by the continuing changebrought about by the systems approach to organiza-tion and decision making, nor will he consider elec-tronic data processing a threat to his position. In-stead, he will be able to control and guide thatchange in the most profitable directions and at thesame time expand his capacity for more effectivemanagement performance.

REFERENCES1. Many variations of this definition exist, e.g.. W arrenBrown, "Systems, Boundaries, and Information Flow,"Academy of Management Jaurnal, IX:4 (Dec. 1966),318, defines a system as "a group or complex of parts

(such as people, machines, etc.) interrelated in their ac-tions towards some goal," and Richard A. Johnson, Fre-


6/7

and Management of Systems (New York: McGraw-HillBook Company, Inc., 1963), p. vii, state that "a systemmay be defined as an array of components designed toachieve an objective according to plan."2. Johnson, Kast, and Rosenzweig, p. 6, n. 1, assertthat von Bertalanffy was the first to use this term. Forfurther information on von Bertalanffy's systems theory,see his Problems of Life: An Evaluation of Modern Bio-logical and Scieiitific Though t (London: C. A. Wattsand Co., Ltd., 1952) and a series of papers by von Ber-talanffy, Carl G. Hempel, Robert E. Bass, and HansJonas, published as "General Systems Theory: A NewApproach to Unity of Science," in Human Biology,XXlllA (Dec. 1951), 302-361.3. von Bertalanffy, "General Systems Theory," 303.4. Kenneth E. Boulding, "General Systems TheoryThe Skeleton of Science," Management Science, 11:3(April 1956), 197-208.5. Ibid., 199.6. Norbert Wiener, The Human Use of HumanBeings: Cybernetics and Society (Boston: HoughtonMifilin Company, 1950), p. 8.7. Ibid., p. 15.8. Herbert A. Simon, The New Science of Manage-ment Decision (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers,1960), p. 1.9. A number of recent authors have studied the ap-plication of systems theory to business operations: Rob-

er t N. Antbony, Jobn Dearden, and Richard F. Vancil,Management Control Systems: Cases and Readings(Hom ewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1965); JohnDearden and F. Warren McFarlan {Management Infor-mation Systems: Text and Cases (Homewood, 111.:Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1966); Daniel O. Dommaschand Gharles W. Laudeman, Principles Underlying Sys-tetns Engineering (New York: Pitman Publishing Corp.,1962); Donald G. Malcolm and Alan J. Rowe, Manage-ment Control Sy.stems (New York: John Wiley & Sons,Inc., 1960); Adrian M. McDonough and Leonard J.Garrett, Management Systems: Working Concepts andPractices (Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.,1965); Heniy M. Paynter, Analysis and Design of Engi-neering Systems (Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press,1961); and Thomas R. Prince, Information Systems forManagement Planning and Control (Homewood, 111.:Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1966).

10. A review of the kinds of environmental ition needed for business planning, control, andtional decision making can be found in the foV. Lewis Bassie, Economic Forecasting (NewMcGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1958); ElmeBratt, Business and Cycles and Forecasting (5Homewood, 111.: Ricbard D. Irwin, Inc., 1961); Due and Robert W. Glower, Intermediate EcAnalysis: Resource A llocation, Factor Pricing, afare (5th ed; Hom ewood, 111.: Richard D. Irw1966); and Milton H. Spencer, Colin G. GlaPeter W. Hoguet, Business and Economic For(Homewood, III.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1961)

11. The following is a simplified statementplanning process: (1) Define specifically what tpany's planning effort is expected to achievewhat use the plans will be put; develop an a(including organization and management plannicies) to carry out the planning function withinporation. (2) Determine the key factors (ppremises) which will have a major influence oning, through a study of both the environmeeconomy, society, public policy, industry, andand the company's strengths and weaknesses.tbe light of the planning premises, develop andalternative directions the company might follothe long range and select tlie corporate objectikind of company) which will enable the commost profitably exploit the market opportunitiesfied during tbe premising stage of planning. (4developing and evaluating alternative policies agrams which wiU achieve the objective, detennpolicies, programs, and procedures that best fucorporate objective and still meet market, induscompany criteria (premises), and establish aorganization structure and adequate budgetaryerational controls. (5) Review and refine theperiodically.For further infoimation on the approach toplanning, see: Melville G. Branch, The Corporning Process (New York: American Managemenciation, 1962); Preston P. LeBreton and Dalening. Planning Theory (Englewood Gliffs, N.tice-Hall, Inc., 1961); Bruce Payne, Planning fpany Growth (New York: McGraw-Hill Boopany, 1963); and Brian W. Scott, Long-Rangein American Industry (New York: American Mment Association, 1965).

12 . McDonough and Garrett, p. 9.


7/7

Mockler Teoria de Sistemas

Documents

Transcript of Mockler Teoria de Sistemas