Systemic organization of life. General concepts of systems, characteristics, properties, classification

Unknown student at the end of the 20th century

Introduction

2. Organizational system: basic elements and types

3. Systems theory

Introduction

As the industrial revolution progresses, the growth
large organizational forms of business stimulated the emergence of new ideas
regarding how businesses operate and how they should be managed.
Today there is a developed theory that gives directions for achieving
effective management. The first theory to emerge is usually called classical
school of management, there is also a school of social relations, theory
systematic approach to organizations, probability theory, etc.

In my report I want to talk about the theory of the systems approach
to organizations as ideas for achieving effective management.

In our time, unprecedented progress in knowledge is taking place, which,
on the one hand, led to the discovery and accumulation of many new facts, information
from various areas of life, and thereby put humanity before
the need to systematize them, to find the general in the particular, the constant in
changing. There is no unambiguous concept of a system. In the most general form
a system is understood as a set of interconnected elements that form
a certain integrity, some unity.

The study of objects and phenomena as systems caused the formation
a new approach in science - a systems approach.

The systems approach as a general methodological principle is used in
various branches of science and human activity. Epistemological basis
(epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies forms and methods scientific knowledge)
is a general systems theory, which was started by the Australian biologist
L.Bertalanffy. In the early 20s, the young biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy began
study organisms as specific systems, summarizing your view in the book
"Modern Theory of Development" (1929). In this book he developed a system
approach to the study of biological organisms. In the book "Robots, People and Consciousness"
(1967) he transferred general systems theory to the analysis of processes and phenomena of social
life. 1969 - "General Systems Theory". Bertalanffy turns his systems theory into
general disciplinary science. He saw the purpose of this science in searching
structural similarity of laws established in various disciplines, based on
which, it is possible to derive system-wide patterns.

Let's define features systematic approach :

Taking into account the above, we determine concept of a systems approach :

A systematic approach is an approach to the study of an object
(problem, phenomenon, process) as a system in which elements are identified,
internal and external relations that most significantly influence
the studied results of its functioning, and the goals of each of the elements, based on
from the general purpose of the object.

It can also be said that the systems approach - this is what it is
direction of methodology of scientific knowledge and practical activity, based
which lies the study of any object as a complex integral
socio-economic system.

Let's turn to history.

Before its formation at the beginning of the 20th century. management science rulers,
ministers, generals, builders, when making decisions, were guided by intuition,
experience, traditions. Acting in specific situations, they sought to find the best
solutions. Depending on experience and talent, the manager could push
spatial and temporal framework of the situation and spontaneously comprehend your
the object is controlled more or less systematically. But, nevertheless, until the 20th century. V
management was dominated by a situational approach, or management by circumstances.
The defining principle of this approach is the adequacy of management
decisions regarding a specific situation. Adequate in this situation
the solution that is best from the point of view of changing the situation is relied upon directly
after providing appropriate managerial influence on it.

Thus, the situational approach is an orientation towards
the nearest positive result ("and then we'll see..."). It seems that
“next” will again be a search for the best solution in the situation that arises. But
decision in this moment the best may turn out to be completely different from what it once was
the situation will change or unaccounted for circumstances will be revealed.

The desire to react to every new turn or reversal
(change in vision) of the situation adequately leads to the manager
forced to make more and more new decisions that run counter to the previous ones. He
actually ceases to control events, but floats with their flow.

The above does not mean that management by circumstances
basically ineffective. A situational approach to decision making is necessary and
justified when the situation itself is extraordinary and the use of previous experience
obviously risky when the situation changes quickly and in an unpredictable way,
when there is no time to take into account all the circumstances. For example, rescuers of the Ministry of Emergency Situations
Often you have to look for the best solution within a specific situation.
But, nevertheless, in the general case, the situational approach is not effective enough and
must be overcome, replaced or supplemented by a systematic approach.

1. Integrity, allowing us to simultaneously consider the system as
   a single whole and at the same time as a subsystem for higher levels.
2. Hierarchical structure, those. the presence of a multitude (according to at least,
   two) elements located on the basis of subordination of elements of the lower level -
   higher level elements. The implementation of this principle is clearly visible in the example
   any specific organization. As you know, any organization represents
   is the interaction of two subsystems: the control and the controlled. One
   obeys the other.
3. Structuring, allowing you to analyze the elements of the system and their
   relationships within a specific organizational structure. Usually,
   the process of system functioning is determined not so much by the properties of its individual
   elements, as many properties of the structure itself.
4. Plurality, allowing the use of many
   cybernetic, economic and mathematical models to describe individual
   elements and the system as a whole.

2. Organizational system: main elements and types

Any organization is considered as
organizational-economic system that has inputs and outputs, and a certain
number of external connections. The concept of “organization” should be defined. IN
history there have been various attempts to identify this concept.

It was a retrospective. Today an organization can be
defined as a social community that unites a certain set
individuals to achieve a common goal, who (individuals) act on the basis
certain procedures and rules.

Based on the previously given definition of the system, we define
organizational system.

An organizational system is a specific set of
internally interconnected parts of the organization, forming a certain integrity.

The main elements of the organizational system (and therefore
objects organizational management) perform:

These elements are the main objects of organizational
management. But there is another side to the organizational system:

People. The manager's job is to facilitate coordination and
integration of human activity.

Goals And tasks. Organizational goal - there is an ideal project
future state of the organization. This goal helps to unite the efforts of people and
their resources. Goals are formed based on common interests, therefore the organization
a tool to achieve goals.

Organizational structure. Structure is a way of unification
elements of the system. Organizational structure is a way of connecting different
parts of the organization into a certain integrity (the main types of organizational
structures are hierarchical, matrix, entrepreneurial, mixed, etc.
d.). When we design and maintain these structures, we are in control.

Specialization And separation labor. This is also an object
management. Crushing complex production processes, operations and tasks on
components that involve specialization of human labor.

Organizational power- this is a right, ability (knowledge + skills)
and the willingness (will) of the leader to pursue his line in preparing, accepting and
implementation of management decisions. Each of these components is necessary for
realization of power. Power is interaction. Coordination function and
integration of people's activities powerless and ineffective manager organize
can not. Organizational power is not only a subject, but also an object of management.

Organizational culture- the system of traditions inherent in the organization,
beliefs, values, symbols, rituals, myths, norms of communication between people.
Organizational culture gives the organization its individuality, its own face.
What is important is that it unites people and creates organizational integrity.

Organizational borders- these are material and
intangible restrictions that fix the isolation of a given organization
from other objects located in the external environment of the organization. The manager must
have the ability to expand (to some extent) the boundaries of one’s own organization. In moderation
- means taking only what you can hold. Managing boundaries means
outline them in time.

Organizational systems can be divided into closed and
open:

A closed organizational system is one that
which has no connection with its external environment (i.e. does not exchange with the external
environment products, services, goods, etc.). An example is subsistence farming.

An open organizational system has connections with the external
environment, i.e. other organizations, institutions that have connections with the external
environment.

Thus, the organization as a system is
a set of interconnected elements that form an integrity (i.e. internal
unity, continuity, mutual connection). Any organization is open
system, because interacts with the external environment. She gets from the environment
environmental resources in the form of capital, raw materials, energy, information, people, equipment
etc., which become elements of its internal environment. Part of the resources with
using certain technologies is processed, converted into products and
services, which are then transmitted to the external environment.

3. Systems theory

Let me remind you that systems theory was developed by Ludwig von
Bertalanffy in the 20th century. Systems theory deals with the analysis, design and
functioning of systems - independent economic units that
are formed by interacting, interconnected and interdependent parts.
It is clear that any organizational form of business meets these criteria and can
studied using the concepts and tools of systems theory.

Any enterprise is a system that turns a set
resources invested in production - costs (raw materials, machines, people) - in goods and
services. It operates within a larger system - foreign policy,
economic, social and technical environment in which it constantly enters
into complex interactions. It includes a series of subsystems that also
interconnected and interacting. Malfunction in one part
system causes difficulties in other parts of it. For example, a large bank is
system that operates within a wider environment, interacts and
associated with it, and also experiences its influence. Bank departments and branches
are subsystems that must interact without conflict in order to
The bank as a whole worked efficiently. If something is violated in the subsystem, it
will ultimately (if left unchecked) affect performance
the bank as a whole.

Basic concepts and characteristics of general systems theory:

Characteristics of open organizational systems

d) for commercial organization main criterion
negative entropy is its sustainable profitability at a significant
time interval.

Feedback. Feedback means
information that is generated, collected, used by an open system
for monitoring, evaluation, control and correction of own activities.
Feedback allows the organization to obtain information about possible or
real deviations from the intended goal and make timely changes to the process
its development. Lack of feedback leads to pathology, crisis and collapse
organizations. People in an organization involved in collecting and analysis of information,
interpreting it, systematizing information flows, have
colossal power.

Open organizational systems are characterized by dynamic
homeostasis. All living organisms exhibit a tendency towards internal
equilibrium and balance. The process of maintaining a balanced
state and is called dynamic homeostasis.

Open organizational systems are characterized by
differentiation- a tendency towards growth, specialization and division of functions
between the various components that form a given system.
Differentiation is the system's response to changes in the external environment.

Equifinality. Open organizational systems
are capable, unlike closed systems, of achieving their goals
in different ways, moving towards these goals from different starting conditions. No and
there cannot be a single and best method of achieving a goal. The goal can always
be achieved different ways, and you can move towards it with different
speeds.

Let me give you an example: let’s consider a bank from the point of view of systems theory.

The study of a bank from the point of view of systems theory would begin with
clarifying goals to help understand the nature of the decisions that need to be made
take to achieve these goals. It would be necessary to explore the external environment,
to understand the ways in which the bank interacts with its wider environment.

The researcher would then turn to the internal environment. To
try to understand the main subsystems of the bank, interaction and connections with the system in
In general, the analyst would analyze the decision-making paths, the most important
information necessary for their adoption, as well as the communication channels through which this
information is transmitted.

Decision making, information system, communication channels especially
important to the systems analyst because if they perform poorly, the bank
will be in a difficult position. In each area, a systematic approach has led to the emergence
new useful concepts and techniques.

Making decisions

Information systems

Communication channels

Making decisions

In the area of ​​decision making, systems thinking has contributed to
classification of various types of solutions. The concepts of certainty were developed
risk and uncertainty. Logical approaches to accepting complex
solutions (many of which had a mathematical basis), which had a great impact
Helping managers improve the process and quality of decision making.

Information systems

The nature of the information at the disposal of the recipient
decision has an important impact on the quality of the decision itself, and it is not surprising that
This issue received a lot of attention. Those who develop systems
management information, try to provide relevant information
to the appropriate person at the appropriate time. To do this they need
know what decision will be made when the information is provided, and
also how quickly this information will arrive (if speed is an important element
decision making). Providing relevant information that improved
quality of decisions (and eliminate unnecessary information that simply increases
costs) is a very significant circumstance.

Communication channels

Communication channels in an organization are important elements
in the decision-making process because they convey the required information.
Systems analysts provided many useful examples of deep process understanding
relationships between organizations. Significant progress has been made in the study
and solving problems of “noise” and interference in communications, problems of transition from one
systems or subsystems from another.

4. The importance of a systems approach in management

The importance of the systems approach is that managers
can more easily coordinate their specific work with the work of the organization as a whole,
if they understand the system and their role in it. This is especially important for the general
director, because the systematic approach encourages him to maintain the necessary
balance between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire
organizations. It makes him think about the flow of information passing through all
system, and also emphasizes the importance of communications. Systems approach
helps to identify the reasons for making ineffective decisions, it also provides
tools and techniques to improve planning and control.

A modern leader must have systems thinking,
because:

Systems thinking not only contributed to the development of new
ideas about the organization (in particular, special attention was paid to
integrated nature of the enterprise, as well as the paramount importance and
importance of information systems), but also provided the development of useful mathematical
means and techniques that significantly facilitate management decision making,
use of more advanced planning and control systems. Thus,
a systematic approach allows us to comprehensively evaluate any
production and economic activities and management system activities at
level of specific characteristics. This will help analyze any situation in
within a single system, identify the nature of input, process and
exit. The use of a systematic approach allows the best way organize
decision-making process at all levels in the management system.

Despite all the positive results, systems thinking
still has not fulfilled its most important purpose. The statement that it
will allow the application of modern scientific methods to management, which is still not
implemented. This is partly because large-scale systems are very
complex. It is not easy to understand the many ways in which the external environment
affects internal organization. Interaction of many subsystems within
enterprise is not entirely understood. System boundaries are very difficult to establish,
a definition that is too broad will lead to the accumulation of costly and unusable
data, and too narrow - to a partial solution to problems. It won't be easy
formulate the questions that the enterprise will face, determine
accuracy of information needed in the future. Even if the best and most
a logical solution will be found, it may not be feasible. Nevertheless,
A systematic approach makes it possible to gain a deeper understanding of how an enterprise operates.

Systems theory was first applied in the exact sciences and technology. Application of systems theory in management in the late 50s. was the most important contribution of the school of management science. A systems approach is not a set of guidelines or principles for managers - it is a way of thinking in relation to organization and management1.

A system2 consisting of a certain set of interconnected elements (parts) differs from a set of the same, but separate elements in that:

The system is aimed at achieving certain goals; in a set of elements, each of them can have its own goal, the totality of which will not be identical to the goals of the system;

the system has a structure determined by a network of connections between elements; the set of elements of the connection network has no structure;

the system is capable of self-organization due to the synergy of properties inherent in its constituent elements; a set of elements does not have this ability;

“the system has properties that are not possessed by any of its elements taken separately (for example, a system consisting of two parts of the organization has the property of efficiency: a technological subsystem and a social subsystem. None of these subsystems separately has this property);

The system has interconnected properties of integrity and isolation; a set of elements has only the property of isolation.

Thus, all organizations are systems, since a system is a certain integrity consisting of interdependent parts, each of which contributes to the characteristics of the whole. Since people are components of organizations (social components), along with technology (technical components), which

Meskan M-X., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management / Transl. from English M.: Delo, 1992. P. 79.

2Credit No. AND. Strategic management company. M„Russian Business Literature, 1998. P. 436-440,

that are used to do work are called socio-technical systems. Just like in a biological organism, in an organization its parts are interdependent (Fig. 5 1)

Tsel napr av lei sostі. Structurality? Self-realization * Interchangeability of parts

The relationship between integrity and separateness

Rice. 5th. Systematic organization

Since a system is a whole created from parts and elements, for purposeful activity the signs of this system are: -

many elements and parts; -

unity of the main purpose for all elements and parts; -

the presence of connections between elements or parts; -

integrity and unity of elements or parts; -

structure and hierarchy; -

relative independence, ™ clear, pronounced controllability

The system can be large and it is advisable to divide it into a number of subsystems. A subsystem is a set of elements representing an autonomous area within the system (for example, economic, social, organizational, technical subsystems)1,

Chchshnt:> L Os-popy toprsht organizations M UNPTI, 2000. From 14

Large components of complex systems such as an organization, a person or a machine are often systems1. These parts are called subsystems. The concept of a subsystem is an important concept in organization management. By dividing an organization into departments, management deliberately creates subsystems within the organization. Systems such as management and various levels of management play an important role in the organization as a whole. Subsystems can, in turn, consist of smaller subsystems. Because they are all interdependent, the malfunction of even the smallest subsystem can affect the system as a whole. Understanding that organizations are complex open systems consisting of several interdependent subsystems helps explain why each of the schools of management has proven to be practical only within limited limits .

Each school sought to focus on one subsystem4

the behaviorist (behavioral) school was mainly concerned with social subsystem,

schools of scientific management and management science - mainly technical subsystems

Consequently, they often failed to correctly identify all the major components of an organization. Neither school gave any serious thought to the impact of environment on an organization. More recent research shows that this is a very important aspect of organizational performance. It is now widely believed that external forces may be major determinants2 of organizational success that determine which tools in the management arsenal are likely to be appropriate and most likely to be successful.

The properties of the systems are.

the system has a need for control;

a complex dependence is formed on the system on the properties of its constituent elements and subsystems (a system may have properties that are not inherent in its elements, and may not have the properties of its elements)

The systems have the following classification:

“a technical subsystem in which the range of solutions is limited and the consequences of decisions are usually predetermined;

1Meskon M X and others Fundamentals of Management C 80.

Determinant-lat determans (d?terminantis) - determining - Irgshech

3 Pol.robpss cm Smirnoe 3 A Fundamentals of organization theory C 1^-19

A biological subsystem, the set of solutions in which is also limited due to slow evolutionary development. However, the consequences of decisions in these subsystems are often unpredictable;

The social subsystem is characterized by the presence of a person in a set of interrelated elements. The set of solutions for this subsystem is characterized by great dynamism both in quantity and in means* and methods of implementation;

artificial systems are created by man to implement given programs or goals;

natural systems are created by nature, by man, to realize the goals of world existence;

open systems are characterized by the open nature of connections with the external environment and strong dependence on it;

closed systems are characterized primarily by internal connections and are created to meet the needs of their personnel;

deterministic (predictable) systems operate according to predetermined rules, with a predetermined result;

stochastic (probabilistic) systems are characterized by difficult to predict input influences of the external and (or) internal environment and output results;

soft systems are characterized by high sensitivity to external influences, and as a result - poor stability;

rigid systems are usually authoritarian, based on the high professionalism of a small group of leaders or an organization. Such systems are highly resistant to external influences and react poorly to small impacts;

In addition to the above systems, systems can be simple and complex, active and passive.

It should be noted that the technical, biological and social subsystems have different levels of uncertainty in the results of decision implementation. Each organization must have all the features of the system. The loss of at least one of them inevitably leads the organization to liquidation. Thus, the systemic nature of the organization is necessary condition her activities. A systematic approach requires taking into account all key elements (internal and external) that influence decision-making, as well as the largest expenditure of resources and time,

Systems theory was first applied in the exact sciences and technology. Application of systems theory in management in the late 50s. was the most important contribution of the school of management science. A systems approach is not a set of guidelines or principles for managers - it is a way of thinking in relation to organization and management. A system consisting of a certain set of interconnected elements (parts) differs from a set of the same, but separate elements in that:

· the system is focused on achieving certain goals; in a set of elements, each of them can have its own goal, the totality of which will not be identical to the goals of the system;

· the system has a structure determined by a network of connections between the Elements; the set of elements of the connection network has no structure;

· the system is capable of self-organization due to the synergy of properties inherent in its constituent elements; a set of elements does not have this ability;

· the system has properties that are not possessed by any of its elements taken separately (for example, a system consisting of two parts of the organization has the property of operability: a technological subsystem and a social subsystem. None of these subsystems individually has this property);

· the system has interconnected properties of integrity and isolation; a set of elements has only the property of isolation.

Thus, all organizations are systems, since a system is a certain integrity consisting of interdependent parts, each of which contributes to the characteristics of the whole. Since people, namely personnel, are components of organizations (social components), along with the technology (technical components) that they use to perform work, they together form sociotechnical systems. Just as in a biological organism, in an organization its parts are interdependent (Fig. 1.2).

Since a system is a whole created from parts and elements for purposeful activity, the signs of this system are:

§ many elements and parts;

§ unity of the main purpose for all elements and parts;

§ the presence of connections between elements or parts;

§ integrity and unity of elements or parts;

§ structure and hierarchy;

§ relative independence;

§ clearly expressed controllability.

Rice. 1.2. Systematic organization

The system can be large and it is advisable to divide it into a number of subsystems. Subsystem is a set of elements representing an autonomous area within the system (for example, economic, social, organizational, technical subsystems).

Large components of complex systems such as an organization, a person or a machine are often systems. These parts are called subsystems. The concept of a subsystem is an important concept in the management of an organization. By dividing an organization into departments, subsystems are intentionally created within the organization. Subsystems can, in turn, consist of smaller subsystems. Since they are all interdependent, the malfunction of even the smallest subsystem can affect the system as a whole. Understanding that organizations are complex open systems consisting of several interdependent subsystems helps explain why each of the schools of management has proven to be practical only to a limited extent. Each school sought to focus on one subsystem:

§ the behaviorist (behavioural) school was mainly concerned with the social subsystem;

§ schools of scientific management and management science - mainly with technical subsystems.

Consequently, they often failed to correctly identify all the major components of the organization.

The properties of the systems are:

· the system has a need for control;

· a complex dependence is formed in the system on the properties of its constituent elements and subsystems (a system may have properties that are not inherent in its elements, and may not have the properties of its elements).

The systems have the following classification:

· a technical subsystem in which the set of solutions is limited and the consequences of decisions are usually predetermined;

· biological subsystem, the set of solutions in which is also limited due to slow evolutionary development. However, the consequences of decisions in these subsystems are often unpredictable;

· the social subsystem is characterized by the presence of a person in a set of interconnected elements. The set of solutions in this subsystem is characterized by great dynamism both in quantity and in means and methods of implementation;

· artificial systems are created by man to implement given programs or goals;

· natural systems are created by nature and man to realize the goals of world existence;

· open systems are characterized by the open nature of connections with the external environment and strong dependence on it;

· closed systems are characterized primarily by internal connections and are created to meet the needs of their personnel;

Deterministic (predictable) systems operate according to predetermined rules, with a predetermined result:

· stochastic (probabilistic) systems are characterized by difficult to predict input influences of the external and (or) internal environment and output results;

· soft systems are characterized by high sensitivity to external influences, and as a result - poor stability;

· rigid systems are usually authoritarian, based on the high professionalism of a small group of managers or organizations. Such systems are highly resistant to external influences and react poorly to small impacts.

Determinant - (from Latin determinans or determinantis) - determining.

In addition to the above systems, systems can be simple and complex, active and passive

It should be noted that the technical, biological and social subsystems have different levels of uncertainty in the results of decision implementation. Each organization must have all the features of the system. The loss of at least one of them inevitably leads the organization to liquidation. Thus, the systemic nature of an organization is a necessary condition for its activities. A systematic approach requires taking into account all key elements (internal and external) that influence decision-making, as well as the largest expenditure of resources and time.

If the reward for work is not commensurate with the effort, the system begins to self-destruct, the incentives to complete work tasks are reduced, and the results of work (product volume, its quality) also decrease.

3.1. Formation of systemic ideas and a systematic approach to

organization research.

3.3. System structure.

3.4. Classification of systems.

Key terms and concepts: system, systems approach, system principles, system state, action, event, system properties, structure, subsystem, element, connection, relationships, communication attributes, types of systems.

Formation of systemic ideas and a systematic approach to organization research

Concept of mass system long story, since the first systemic ideas were formed within the science of philosophy back in the times of the ancient world. In ancient philosophy, the term system was associated with the orderliness and integrity of nature. Then the thesis was formulated that the whole more than the amount its parts. The ancient philosophers Plato and Aristotle, paying attention to the peculiarities of the system of knowledge and the system of elements of the universe, interpreted the system as a world order, arguing that systematicity is a property of nature.

Democritus laid the foundation for materialistic atomism (dividing the whole into parts-atoms), defining the fundamental categories of natural science - the whole, the elements and the connections between them. From that moment on, a systematic view of all objects, phenomena and processes surrounding a person began to form.

During the Renaissance, the concept of being as a cosmos changed into the concept of a world system - education with its own organization, hierarchy and patterns. At this time, scientific disciplines arose that appealed to the integrity of the universe. These include astronomy.

The hypothesis of the systemic organization of knowledge was developed in German classical philosophy. The principles of systematicity in the natural sciences were actively studied by Immanuel Kant, who tried to substantiate the systematic nature of the process of cognition itself. It is Kant who has the priority of clearly recognizing the systematic nature of scientific and theoretical knowledge and identifying specific procedures and methods for creating systemic knowledge.

In economics, the principle of systematicity was formulated by Adam Smith, who came to the conclusion that the effect of the actions of people organized in a group is greater than the sum of the individual results

The main stages in the development of the systems approach from the 15th to the 20th centuries are summarized in Table. 3.1.

Table 3.1.

Dynamics of formation of systems theory

These research results allow us to conclude that consistency is a property of nature and human activity or general property matter. Systematicity as a universal property of matter is manifested in practical systematicity, cognitive activity person and in the systemic nature of the external environment. Among the main properties of systemic practical and cognitive activity, we name the following: purposefulness; algorithmic; analysis; synthesis; systems approach. The properties of the systemic nature of the external environment turn out to be systemic: nature; human society; human interaction with nature. Thus, we can assume that systematicity is a general property of matter. The greatest attention from the point of view of scientific and educational activities deserves research into human cognitive activity, in particular the study of the essence, manifestations and application of a systems approach.

The systems approach was developed in the late 50s pp. XX century representatives of the classical school of management, applied systems theory in management. The need to apply a systematic approach has become acute due to the need to manage facilities that have a large scale of activity and operate in complex, dynamic environmental conditions.

J.K. Lafta notes that the systems approach is a way of thinking about organization and management; it cannot be interpreted as a set of specific recommendations or principles for managers.

According to S.V. Rogozhin, this is a methodology for cognition of component parts with the help of the whole and the whole with the help of its component parts. In other words, this is a universal research method based on the perception of the object under study as a certain integrity, consisting of interconnected parts and at the same time acting as an integral part of a higher order system. The systems approach allows you to build multifactor models characteristic of the socio-economic systems to which the organization belongs.

Systematicity lies in the study of an object with different sides and in connection with the external environment. The systematic approach is based on principles, among which the following are most often distinguished:

Consideration of the system as part of a subsystem of some more common system, located in the external environment;

Dividing the system into parts, subsystems;

The perception of the system as a unity has special properties that are not characteristic of its individual elements;

The manifestation of the value function of the system lies in the desire to maximize the efficiency of the system itself;

Consideration of the totality of system elements as a single whole.

The scheme for applying the systematic approach, according to Yu.M. Lapygin, can be represented as a sequence of certain procedures:

1) establishment of such characteristics of the system as integrity and multiplicity of divisions;

2) study of the properties, relationships and connections of the system;

3) determination of the structure of the system and its hierarchical structure;

4) fixation of the relationship between the system and the external environment;

5) description of the system behavior;

6) description of the goals of the system;

7) identification of information necessary to manage the system.

Some scientists note the limitations of the systems approach. In particular, Professor A.I. Prigogine, speaking about the limitations of the systems approach, notes the following:

systematicity means certainty, finality, but the world is characterized by uncertainty;

consistency means consistency, but disputes arise constantly, for example, between employees in an organization;

Systematicity means integrity, the ability to integrate, but individual components cannot always be integrated into a single system or subsystems.

The use of a systems approach as a method of researching an organization requires an integrated approach, which involves the involvement of specialists different profiles(Table 3.2.)

Table 3.2.

Comparative analysis of the characteristics of integrated and systemic approaches

In the most general case, we can say that a systematic approach is an integral part of an integrated approach, since an integrated approach includes strategy and tactics, and a systematic approach includes methodology and methods. How. says Yu. Lapygin, in the process of research there is a mutual enrichment of integrated and systematic approaches

1. Definition and properties of the system. Classification of systems.

2. Systemic properties of the organization. Organization as a management system.

3. System analysis of the functioning of the organization.

One of the most common views of organizations is the systems view.

A system is a certain integrity consisting of interdependent parts, each of which contributes to the characteristics of the whole. All organizations are systems. Cars, computers, televisions are all examples of systems. They are made up of many parts, each of which works in conjunction with the others to create a whole that has its own specific properties. These parts are interdependent. If one of them is missing or does not function correctly, then the entire system will not function correctly. For example, the TV will not work if the setting is not set correctly. All biological organisms are systems. Your life depends on the proper functioning of many interdependent organs that together make up the unique being that you are.

Because people are social components, along with the technology that are used together to do the work, they are called sociotechnical systems. Just like in a biological organism, in an organization its parts are interdependent.

 Origins of the systems approach

Alexander Aleksandrovich Bogdanov in 1913-17 wrote a book about tectology or universal organizational science, in which he tried to propose a general theory of the hierarchical structure of nature. His attempt came at the wrong time. In 1928, Bogdanov died, and his book remained unclaimed on library shelves.

Attempts to continue thinking in this direction were made in the West more than 35 years later. First, Ludwig von Bertalanffy, in his publications in 1951 and 1962, and then William Ashby in 1966, proposed the principles of general systems theory (Bertalanffy L., 1969). Max Weber, Talcott Parsons and Russell Ackoff, Milner Boris Z., Gvishiani D.M., S. Robbins also wrote about the organization as a system.

General systems theory is not so much scientific theory in the traditional sense of the word, it is a complex of methodological approaches to a wide class of objects, united under the name “complex systems” (Shrader Yu.A., Sharov A.A., 1982).

Complexity here does not mean a huge number of components that make up the system, but the complex organization of the object under study, the variety of interactions between its components.

The system is closely related to the concepts of systematicity, integrity, totality, organization, and regularity.

System(from Greek - a whole made up of parts; connection) - a set of elements that are in relationships and connections with each other, forming a certain integrity, unity.

According to L.A. Blumenfeld, a system can be called a set of elements in which:

1. the connections that exist between these elements are specified;

2. each element within the system is indivisible;

3. it interacts with the world outside the system as a whole;

4. during evolution over time, a set will be considered one system if a one-to-one correspondence can be made between its elements.

You can also add system properties such as:

5. consists of a hierarchy of subsystems of lower levels;

6. has vertical and horizontal connections between internal elements and the external environment;

7. is a subsystem of higher order systems;

8. saves general structure when external conditions and internal state change;

9. presence of input variables;

10. presence of output variables;

11. internal sequential or parallel processing of information.

All systems have an input, a transformation process and an output.

There are many different approaches to the classification of systems. For example, the classification may be based on the complexity of the system. Systems are distinguished between material and abstract, static and dynamic, organic and inorganic, open and closed, etc., depending on the basis of classification systems.

In the classification given below, a number of more complex systems are omitted, since they are not of interest to us.

1. Morphological systems. These are systems that are described using a network of structural relationships (for example, a typical organizational chart).

2. Cascade systems. They show the paths of matter and energy through a system (for example, a diagram of information flows in an organization).

3. Action-reaction systems combine the above and show the way in which the structure is tied to the life process (for example, the imposition of information flows on an organizational chart).

4. Control systems (transducers) - type 3 systems in which the main components are controlled by humans. We can consider an organization to be a control or cybernetic system if control through feedback leads to self-regulation.

Another way of classification is based on interaction with the external environment.

1. Isolated system. The borders of such a system are closed to the export and import of matter and energy (or information).

2. Closed system. Its borders prevent the export and import of matter, but are open to energy (or information). A clock is a familiar example of a closed system. The interdependent parts of the watch move continuously and very precisely once the watch is wound or the battery is inserted. And as long as the watch has a source of stored energy, its system is independent of environment.

3. Open system. Such a system exchanges both matter and energy (information) with the external environment. In addition, an open system has the ability to adapt to changes in the external environment and must do so in order to continue to function. All organizations are open systems. The survival of any organization depends on the outside world.

In addition, we view systems or their environments as static or dynamic depending on the rate at which their characteristics change over time. An adaptive system can respond to changes in the environment in a manner consistent with its normal actions. Of course, this applies to those changes that occur in the external environment and do not concern the internal problems of the company. Thus, we are talking about the relevant environment, that is, about events or objects that are not related to what is happening inside the system. The term “problem environment” is sometimes used. The term is narrower than the relevant environment because it covers only the activities of buyers, suppliers, competitors, and regulatory groups such as governments.

Economists talk about economic systems that are in a state of equilibrium, that is, in a state of rest, or lack of activity. Perhaps the term “stable” is more appropriate for “living” systems, where variables remain within predetermined limits rather than become constants. A system that operates under conditions of high stability is said to be in a steady state condition.

Another name for adaptive structures is organic. It is related to their ability to adapt to changes in the environment, just as living organisms do. Organic structure is built on goals and assumptions that are radically different from those that underlie bureaucracy.

English behavioral scientists T. Burns and G.M. Stalker compared organic and bureaucratic structures, which they called mechanical. They noted that in the mechanical structure, the problems and challenges faced by the organization as a whole are broken down into many small components for individual specialties. Each specialist solves his problem as isolated from the others. Technical methods and means of solving problems, the rights and responsibilities of each element of the system are precisely defined. Interaction in the control system occurs mainly vertically. Production activities and personnel behavior are regulated by instructions and management decisions. When managing such an organization, which has a complex hierarchical structure, a simple control system is used, where information flows from the bottom up.

However, when problems arise that cannot be broken down into individual elements and distributed among specialists in accordance with a certain hierarchical role, then only organic systems will allow adaptation to unstable conditions. Here employees will have to solve their problems in the light of the tasks of the organization as a whole, a significant part of the formal characteristics and job responsibilities disappears: they must be revised in the course of solving problems. Interaction occurs both vertically and horizontally, like consultations with colleagues.

Analyzing the dependence of the successful functioning of an organization on its structure, T. Burns and G.M. Stalker concluded that organic structures are most suitable for firms that operate in rapidly changing environments, while mechanistic structures, on the contrary, are more suitable for organizations operating in conditions that change rather slowly. Therefore, adaptive types of structures cannot be considered more effective than mechanistic ones in any situation. They represent only two extreme points in a continuum of such forms and the real structures lie between them. In addition, it happens that different departments within the same organization have different structures.

The two main types of organic structures used today are - This design and matrix organizations.

2. In the first works on general systems theory, the main attention was paid to the consideration of internal elements and connections between them, structures and processes that ensure the achievement of goals and obtaining results. From the perspective of a systems approach, an organization was considered as “any socio-economic entity that has a certain freedom to choose forms of activity and represents a single organizational structure, the elements of which are interconnected and function together to achieve common goals” (Tsygichko V.N. To the manager - on decision making. M., 1991, p. 9), and management was considered as “a property of a system striving to maintain its structure and strengthen its internal connections” (Beer St. p. 322).

As the connections of organizations with the external environment become more complex, the emphasis in works on the systemic representation of organizations shifts to identifying and describing its inextricable connection with the outside world. As a result, the features of the organization model as an open system were formed.

A systematic approach to organization involves consideration of both specific individual elements of the organization and those new properties and qualities that are inherent in the organized set of these elements as a whole. Moreover, each element must be considered in relation to all others; a change in one element affects all the others to a greater or lesser extent. Consequently, this approach to characterizing an organization also consists of identifying the relationships between elements of the system.

System properties of the organization:

integrity (the whole is primary, the parts are secondary;

impact on any part affects all others, etc.),

emergence (the presence of qualitatively new properties of the whole that are absent in its constituent parts),

homeostasis (restoration of disturbed balance).

Important Feature organization as a system - its relationship with the external environment (environment), which is understood as everything that is outside the given organization and has a significant impact on it.

In contrast to the internal environment, which expresses the relationships between the internal components of the system, to characterize the communication of an organization, it is necessary to accurately identify the inputs and outputs of the system, as well as a description of the components of the external environment that have a significant impact on the system. It should be borne in mind that the internal environment of the organization is under strong influence her surroundings. Within an organization, individual subsystems may have independent connections with certain components of the external environment. An organization as a system is characterized by the direction of its functioning and its development. It serves as a form of manifestation of the cause-and-effect relationships of the development and functioning of the system and is expressed in the desire: to achieve the most desirable regulator of activity. The complexity of organizations determines their multi-purpose nature. Reducing the entire variety of goals to a single metric is not always adequate for solving specific practical problems. Therefore, it is necessary to consider separately large classes of goals determined by political, economic, technical, social and other factors. Accordingly, the goals can be production-economic, scientific-technical, social, etc.

All these types of goals are inextricably linked, however, in the interests of a rational management organization, they can only be conditionally considered as more or less separate.

Organization division as complex system into relatively independent units requires setting many specific goals for each of these units. These goals, mutually complementing each other, may have different formulations, but in socio-economic essence they are not contradictory.

The organization as a system is also a mechanism for solving problems arising from the need to achieve certain goals. This means that its functions and internal structure must be directly and directly linked to the structure of goals. If this organization is an element of a higher order system, then it becomes, to one degree or another, a manageable and controllable subsystem. Thus, an enterprise can be a subsystem of a department that is included as a subsystem in the company. The enterprise itself can be a system of a higher order in relation to its constituent workshops and sections, which will become subsystems in relation to it, etc.

Hence, the goals of organizations must be linked to the goals of higher-level systems. In this sense, any goal of a lower level should be considered as intermediate, as a means of achieving the final goals of a higher system. Thus, the system of goals of the organization forms a hierarchical structure - a tree of goals, which serves as the most important basis for the formation of the management structure.

The management structure of an organization is characterized by the composition and interrelations of the divisions of the management apparatus, the relationship of powers, responsibility and subordination between employees.

Finally, organizations are self-organizing, self-regulating systems, tuned to achieve the goals that determine its existence. The existence of any system is justified as long as the goals for which it was created are relevant. In any self-regulating system, two, to a certain extent, independent parts can be distinguished - a control subsystem and a controlled subsystem. Communication and communications between them are carried out in the form of commands from the control subsystem to the controlled one, and from the controlled one to the control one - in the form of messages about the execution of commands.

The task of the control subsystem is to develop and implement solutions that would ensure the achievement of the goals set for the system. Since in a complex dynamic system the state of the interconnection of elements is constantly changing, the control subsystem must clearly respond to these changes. However, the controlled subsystem is not passive. Thanks to feedback, it encourages the manager to look for the optimal solution in relation to the actual situation.

Control is the process of influencing a system in order to maintain a given position or transfer it to a new state. Any control system must have four main elements:

· input of the main system (resources necessary to ensure functioning: raw materials, materials, equipment, information, finance, personnel, energy, etc.);

· output of the main system (results of activity: products, goods and services);

· feedback channel (a receiving device that measures and transmits information about the output state);

· a control unit that compares the actual and set output and, if necessary, generates a control action.

System structure is a set of system components that are in a certain order and combine local goals to best achieve the main (global) goal of the system. The number of system components and their connections should be minimal, but sufficient to fulfill the main purpose of the system.

The goal of the system is the final state of the system to which it strives in accordance with the structural organization.

A system process is a set of actions to transform incoming resources in order to ensure optimal output.

Feedback is information supplied to the input from the sphere of consumption regarding the quantity and quality of the output.

A management system can be defined as a subsystem of an organization, the components of which are groups of interacting people: its functions are to perceive certain problems of the organization (inputs) and subsequently perform a set of actions (processes), as a result of which solutions (outputs) are developed that increase the income from the activities of the entire organization (satisfaction) or optimizing some function of all inputs and outputs of the organization.

The concept of a subsystem is an important concept in management. By dividing an organization into departments, management intentionally creates subsystems within the organization. Systems such as departments, departments, and various levels of management each play an important role in the organization as a whole, just like the subsystems of your body such as circulation, digestion, nervous system, and skeleton. The social and technical components of an organization are considered subsystems.

Subsystems can, in turn, consist of smaller subsystems. Since they are all interdependent, the malfunction of even the smallest subsystem can affect the system as a whole. Understanding that organizations are complex open systems consisting of several interdependent subsystems helps explain why each of the schools of management has proven to be practical only to a limited extent. Each school sought to focus on one subsystem of the organization. The behaviorist school was mainly concerned with the social subsystem. Schools of scientific management and management science - mainly with technical subsystems. Consequently, they often failed to correctly identify all the major components of the organization. Neither school seriously considered the impact of the environment on the organization. More recent research shows that this is a very important aspect of organizational performance. There is now a widespread view that external forces can be the main determinants of an organization's success, determining which tools in the management arsenal are appropriate and most likely to be successful.

Currently, the organization as a management system includes the following subsystems:

1. management structure;

2. control technology;

3. control functions;

4. management methodology.

It should be noted that the management system can be considered both from a static position, i.e., as a certain mechanism (organization), and from a dynamic position, as a management activity.

Approaches (methodology) to management include goals, laws, principles, methods and functions, management technologies and management practices. The main task of the organization's management system is the formation of professional management activities.

Management process, as an element of management activity, includes: a communication system, development and implementation of management decisions, information support.

The control structure and technique are elements of the control mechanism and include, respectively:

· the management structure of the organization, which is largely determined in relation to other elements. The structure of management bodies and positions, the distribution of powers and responsibilities between them often predetermines management techniques, process, methods, functions and the scheme of organizational relations, taking into account the professionalism of personnel;

· computer and office equipment, furniture, information transmission channels (communication networks), document flow system. The structure and effectiveness of the management system largely depends on the document flow system of the enterprise. The number of accounting and planning errors and the speed of response to a certain impact directly depend on it. In practice, there is a growing understanding of the truth that the functionality of the organization of the workplace increases the productivity of the employee and manager not only technically, but also as a result of their receiving a positive emotional mood.

Management concept according to E.M. Korotkov is based on the following principles:

A) organic principle(integrity effect) is that the properties of any system depend on the properties of its elements, but are not completely determined by these properties. The properties of a system as a whole cannot be reduced to the properties of its elements or the sum of these properties. The system has its own properties that are not inherent in any of its elements. This property is very noticeable in such concepts as efficiency and quality of management;

b) principle of genetic certainty, which requires, when solving any problem in the management process, to approach it from the standpoint of its origin, nature, analyze its origins, and consequences. A manager should often ask himself the questions “why?” and "what's next?";

V) principle of spatiotemporal existence of a system. It does not come down to understanding the external environment, as is often believed. All connections, both internal and external, all elements exist in certain spatiotemporal relationships that affect their existence, manifestation and functioning. These are the extents of connections and the place of system elements in these extents. Analyze the structure of the management system of transnational corporations, study the dynamics of communications during the growth and development of a company - and you will receive practical confirmation of the importance of this principle;

G) the principle of historicity or phasing, one might say, the cyclical nature of the existence and development of the system. This principle requires taking into account the development trends of the system, anticipating ups and downs in this development, preparedness for crisis situations and risky decisions, determining the features of the current stage of the system’s existence, and not as an option separated from the general trend, but as a connecting link of the previous and subsequent stages;

e) principle conventions of system boundaries. Any system has a boundary with the external environment, but this boundary is conditional. At the same time, the integrity of the system does not disappear. It is simply included in another system, of a higher order or larger scale. This principle can be called the “matryoshka principle”. In management, it manifests itself in the need to manage not only internal processes functioning of the system, but, as far as possible, also by external processes. It is in this sense that they say that marketing is the management of the processes of promoting goods on the market. Of course, external and internal management differ in management methods, functions, and goals. Seeing their difference and connection is a very important problem in the methodology of practical management;

f) principle separation of system-forming and system-destroying, their fluctuations, i.e. mutual transitions, interactions. In the functioning and development of any system, both factors objectively exist. It is impossible to build effective management without an appropriate assessment and understanding of these factors;

g) principle correlation. Its content is that any system requires a certain ratio of its elements and parts. This ratio can change, within certain limits it is normatively specified. In management, assessments of social-structural relationships, relationships of technical means, types of information, time expenditure, etc. are of great importance;

i) principle communication skills lies in the fact that the object of management - the socio-economic system exists thanks to connections of a socio-informational nature. Communication between people in their processes joint activities determines the functioning and development of the system.

The principles of a systems approach should occupy central place in management methodology, serve as a link between management methodology and organization.

Systems approach– a comprehensive methodology of the process of cognition, analysis and synthesis, consisting in the fact that, firstly, the object under study is assessed as a whole, regardless of the aspect under consideration (technical, economic, administrative), and secondly, the solution to particular problems is subject to the solution of problems common to of the entire system, thirdly, knowledge of an object is not limited to the study of only the functioning mechanism, but expands to identify internal patterns of development of the object, determine reproductive proportions and the mechanism of its development, fourthly, in the process of abstraction, elements of the system that are of secondary importance in some conditions, may turn out to be significant in changed circumstances, fifthly, the process and the processor are considered as mutually dependent concepts that change over time.

System analysis - This is a set of studies aimed at identifying general trends and factors in the development of an organization and developing measures to improve the management system and all production and economic activities of the organization.

System analysis allows us to identify the feasibility of creating or improving an organization, determine which complexity class it belongs to, and identify the most effective methods scientific organization of labor, which were used previously.

A system analysis of the activities of an enterprise or organization is carried out in the early stages of work on creating a specific management system. This is due to the following reasons:

The duration and complexity of the work associated with the pre-project survey;

Selection of materials for research;

Choosing a research method;

Justification of economic, technical and organizational feasibility;

Development of computer programs.

The ultimate goal of systems analysis is to develop and implementation of the selected control system reference model.

In accordance with main goal must be completed following systemic research:

1) identify general trends in the development of a given enterprise and its place and role in a modern market economy;

2) establish the features of the functioning of the enterprise and its individual divisions;

3) identify the conditions that ensure the achievement of the goals;

4) identify conditions that impede the achievement of goals;

5) collect the necessary data for analysis and development of improvement measures current system management;

6) use the best practices of other enterprises;

7) study the necessary information for adapting the selected (synthesized) reference model to the conditions of the enterprise in question.

In the process of system analysis, the following characteristics are found:

1) the role and place of this enterprise in the industry;

2) the state of production and economic activity of the enterprise;

3) production structure of the enterprise;

4) control system and its organizational structure;

5) features of the enterprise’s interaction with suppliers, consumers and higher organizations;

6) innovative needs (possible connections of this enterprise with research and development organizations);

7) forms and methods of stimulating and remunerating employees

Thus, system analysis begins with clarifying or formulating the goals of a specific system management(enterprises or companies) and searching for efficiency criteria, which must be expressed as a specific indicator. As a rule, most organizations are multi-purpose. Many goals arise from the peculiarities of the development of the enterprise (company) and its actual state in the period of time under consideration, as well as the state of the environment (geopolitical, economic, social factors).

Clearly and competently formulated development goals of an enterprise (company) are the basis for system analysis and development of a research program.

The system analysis program, in turn, includes a list of issues to be studied and their priority. For example, a systems analysis program may include the following sections:

Analysis of the enterprise as a whole;

Analysis of the type of production and its technical and economic characteristics;

Analysis of enterprise divisions that produce products (services) - main divisions;

Analysis of auxiliary and service units;

Analysis of the enterprise management system;

Analysis of forms of connections between documents operating at the enterprise, routes of their movement and processing technology.

Each section of the program is an independent study and begins with setting goals and objectives of the analysis. This stage of work is the most important, since the entire course of research, the selection of priority tasks and, ultimately, the reform of a specific management system depends on it.

Table 1 shows how specific goals and objectives of the analysis can be linked.

As noted above, the primary task of system analysis is to determine the global goal of the organization’s development and operational goals. Having specific, clearly formulated goals, it is possible to identify and analyze factors that contribute to or hinder the speedy achievement of these goals. Let's look at this with specific examples.

Table 1. Main goals and objectives of the enterprise

Figure 1 shows an example of structuring the selected goals of the enterprise.

Fig.1. Fragment of the tree of organizational goals

As can be seen from Fig. 1, for implementation goals 1“Improving the efficiency of the enterprise” requires achieving at least three goals:

1.1.“Implementation new technology»;

1.2. “Improving the organization of production”;

1.3. “Improving the management system.” Having identified these subgoals, it is necessary to research and analyze the factors contributing to their achievement. Let's look at them in the table. 2 and 3.

It should be borne in mind that in order to analyze an organization based on a system of goals, it is necessary to identify and formulate a set of all operating goals at each level of the management system. In this case, the goal tree will be the most complete. The main task of such structuring is to bring the goal to each specific unit and performer. This is the key to the successful implementation of the organization's functional strategy.

Table 2.Factors contributing to achieving goals

Table 2.3. Study of factors hindering the improvement of production and management efficiency

As a result of the system analysis, it is necessary to make proposals to justify the feasibility of rationalizing the management system. Based on these proposals, the following work is carried out:

1. A decision is made to implement the selected management system model;

2. Regulatory documentation is being developed;

3. The final scheme of the management process is developed;

©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-08-20