It is conceptualized at organization as an open social system. Scott points out that the consideration of the organization as an open and complex system allows for an integrative conceptualization of this phenomenon and can include classical doctrines, interested in the autonomy of the organization or its normative structure, and neoclassical theories, interested in the operation and in the informal aspects that had been forgotten by them.
Introduction to the organization as a system
The general theory of systems seeks to create a science of organizational universals, a universal science that uses the common organizational elements found in all systems as a starting point. Approach that conceptualizes the organization as a system of variables and mutually interdependent parts. The study of the strategic or central parts of the system, the nature of their mutual interdependence, the main processes that interrelate them and allow their adaptation to each other, and the central purposes of these systems.
In the developments experienced Due to the theory of organizations after World War II, the concept of systems was incorporated into its study. Organizations are defined as systems sociotechnical, as systems in which human resources intervene and as coordinated systems for rational decision-making with multiple decision-making levels. These contributions must be systematized and an integrative vision of the concept of organization that describes its complex and multidimensional character must be presented.
Some forgotten theoretical problems
The conceptualization of organizations As an open system, it focuses attention on “mature”, adult organizations. It was about understanding its operation and improving its maintenance. However, the problem of origin, genesis and development has been little investigated. 2 alternative positions have been developed:
- Kimberly (1976) points out that when a person leaves an organization to found another, they carry with them a series of organizational rules that will find expression in the new organization. This would explain the generative process of organizations from others through the transmission of a “genetic code” consisting of those rules and experiences;
- Pettigrew (1976), based on the analysis of the behavior of several entrepreneurs who founded new companies, insists on the creative dimension when establishing them, rather than on the reproduction of old experiences.
The contribution of general systems theory to the study of organizations
Miller (1978) in his work “Living Systems” defines a system as a set of units that interact while maintaining relationships with each other. The word set implies that the units have common properties. Properties that are essential if the units are to interact or relate. The state of each unit is limited by, conditioned by, or dependent on the state of other units. The units are linked. There is at least one measure of the sum of its units that is greater than the sum of each measure of its units. The structure of the system is defined as the arrangement of its subsystems and components in three-dimensional space at a given moment in time, and its process as any change of matter, energy and information.
The systems theory It is interested in problems of relationship, structure, and interdependence rather than in the constant attributes of objects.
Boulding (1956) in his “General Systems Theory” states that the skeleton of science distinguishes 9 different levels of systems that would ascend from static structures, the simplest, to social and human systems, the most complex, passing through structures cybernetics like the thermostat. The levels are ordered so that the higher the level, the more complexity. Its conceptualization is more difficult and the system is more likely to be influenced by external events and phenomena. The hierarchy is:
- Static structure, such as the arrangement of the planets in the social system.
- Simple dynamical systems, like most machines and models of Newtonian physics.
- Open systems, those that have self-perpetuating structures.
- Societal-genetic system, with a certain subdivision of functions, includes differentiated subsystems
- Animal system, includes self-sensitivity and mobility and specialized subsystems to receive and process information that comes from the world or the external environment.
- Human system, includes the ability to be self-aware, self-sensitive, and to use symbolization to communicate ideas.
- Social organizations consider human beings as subsystems within a large organization or system.
- Transcendental systems, which collect alternatives and realities that may be known but have yet to be discovered.
For Boulding This hierarchy is useful to reveal the gaps in our knowledge, which is inadequate to develop mathematical or other models that go beyond the 2nd level, that is, the level of simple dynamic structures. Boulding’s views are especially suggestive for a theory of science, but he is interested in the place in which human social organizations would be located depending on their typology, complexity and openness.
Organizations as open systems
Organizations are characterized as open social systems. Compared to the closed systems of the physical sciences, which allow self-contained structures to be considered as if they were independent of external forces, open systems, such as biological and social living organisms, are maintained thanks to the ebb and flow of energy that passes through their limitations. permeable. katz and kahn point out that the essential difference between an open system and a closed system can be established in terms of the concept of entropy and the 2nd law of thermodynamics. A system moves towards its equilibrium, the entropy becomes maximum and the physical system reaches its equilibrium when it achieves the most probable distribution state of its elements. In social systems, the structure tends more toward greater elaboration than toward less differentiation, which is so because the operation of entropy is counteracted by the import of energy; living systems are characterized by negative rather than positive entropy.
Limitations and problems of the closed system:
- the disregard of the environment as a source of inputs for the system.
- excessive concern for the principles of internal operation.
From these insufficiencies arise erroneous approaches when it comes to explaining living and social systems:
- the closed system denies the possibility of the principle of equifinality. In closed systems there is only one way to reach a given result. The same initial conditions must lead to the same final result, if nothing has changed, nothing will change. A fact that may be true in fully known and determined conditions, but that is not true in living systems or in the most complex ones such as organizations;
- The closed system treats disruptive events in the environment as variance error. However, open systems theory maintains that environmental influences are not a source of error but are integrated into the functioning of the system and this cannot be adequately understood without a constant study of the forces that affect it.
Human organisms and social formations that form (groups, organizations, institutions, etc.) are open systems and all have defining characteristics.
This article is merely informative, at Psychology-Online we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.