New Paradigms of Systems Thinking

New Paradigm of Systems Thinking

Albert Einstein said: "Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results" (Einstein, 2011, p. 1). Hence, to effect change or transformation organizations must challenge previous actions and thinking. An organizations leaders may understand this concept but they may become stuck in a rut of complacency, "get trapped by the status quo... become myopic, accepting their current reality as the reality" (Morgan, 2007, p. 90). Although possessing "common, generic characteristics," organizations may vary in size, structure, and operating processes," requiring various systems thinking perspectives to operate efficiently (Scott & Davis, 2010, p. 1). Organizational leaders may know a change, or paradigm shift is necessary because of the changing environment but may not know where to look for alternatives to common systems thinking paradigms--open, natural, and rational. Often these common systems thinking paradigms may not support the type of transformation they want to create (Scott & Davis, 2010, p. 2). However, generating organizational transformation requires that leaders must be "prepared to challenge and change the basic rules of the game at both strategic and operational levels" and that employees believe the change will benefit them (Morgan, 2010, p. 9).

Current Systems Thinking Perspectives

According to Scott and Davis (2011) "rational, natural, and open system conceptions... are three influential perspectives [with] competing definitions... of organizations... which have shaped and continue to govern our understanding of organizations" (p. 2).

Organizations replicating the rational systems thinking paradigms are "highly formalized... oriented to the pursuit of specific goals... with maximum efficiency" (see Appendix 1); (Scott & Davis, 2010, p. 34, 35). Goulder (1959, as quoted in Scott & Davis, 2010) states "the rational model implies a "mechanical" model, in that it views the organization as a structure of manipulable parts, each of which is separately modifiable with a view to enhancing the efficiency of the whole... individual organizational elements are seen as subject to successful and planned modification enactable by deliberate decision" (Scott & Davis, 2010, p. 38).

Organizations mirroring the natural systems thinking paradigm are those organizations that although seek specific goals, are flexible enough so that if focus is necessary in another area, this organization will easily shift its focus. Therefore, the goals pursued "are never the only goals governing participants' behavior" (Scott & Davis, 2010, p. 60, 61). Goulder (1959, as quoted in Scott & Davis, 2010) states "the organization, according to this model, strives to survive and to maintain its equilibrium, and this striving may persist even after its explicitly held goals have been successfully attained... this strain toward survival may even on occasion lead to the neglect or distortion of the organization's goals" (Scott & Davis, 2010, p. 60).

Organizations imitating the open systems thinking paradigm are organizations that involve others in pursuit of its stated goals. Scott and Davis (2010) related that open systems organizations "are characterized by an assemblage or combination of parts whose relations make them interdependent" (Scott & Davis, 2010, p. 88).

A New Perspective

A new perspective-- that of a 'resolute' systems thinking paradigm-- may present an enlightening experience for organizational leaders to assist with stimulating a transformation. The resolute systems thinking paradigm has several distinct characteristics:

* Purpose-- thought, planning, and communicating a specific environmental change.

* Acceptance-- focus on employee concerns, suggestions, and initiatives to enhance employee relationships