UPI Study › Courses › Principles of Management › Free lessons › Lesson 5.4 Free with a free account
Organizations as Systems: How the Parts Create the Whole
Principles of Management · Chapter 5: Modern Management PerspectivesSection 5.4 · lesson 22 of 11713 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Principles of Management.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Principles of Management
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: The Contingency View: No Single Best Way to Manage →← Running the Operation: Balancing Efficiency and Customer ValueNext lesson: The Contingency View: No Single Best Way to Manage →
In this lesson
How the parts create the whole.
- Describe the systems perspective and its 5 elements
- Explain why organizations are open systems
- Define synergy, entropy and equifinality
- Apply systems thinking to a recurring problem
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,820 words). Read along, or search it.
Modern Management Perspectives
Organizations as Systems
A department can hit every one of its targets, and still make the organization worse. That sounds like a paradox. This section explains why it isn't one. The tool is the systems perspective, which treats an organization as a set of connected parts. First, we cover the five elements every system shares, and why organizations are open systems. Then the handoff between subsystems, where failures tend to gather. Next comes a cluster of ideas. Local optimization, synergy, entropy, and equifinality. Then feedback loops, and the way delay produces overcorrection. And finally, the biggest practical shift of all. Look for the structure behind a problem, not the person.
The Systems Perspective
The Connections Matter, Not Just the Parts
The systems perspective treats an organization as a set of interdependent parts, arranged to achieve a shared purpose. Its central claim is simple to say, and hard to practice. An organization's behavior cannot be understood by examining the parts separately. Think about a single department. You could analyze it in complete isolation, and do it very carefully. You would still miss something important. That department hands work to some departments, and it receives work from others. Its decisions ripple outward, into every part it is connected to. Studying the department alone will never show you those ripples. So understanding the organization means attending to the connections between the parts, not only the parts themselves. This is the lens that Table five point one point one introduced earlier in the chapter. It answers one question. How do the parts combine to produce an outcome that no single part explains alone?
5 Elements
What Every System Is Made Of
In this framework, a system consists of five elements. Inputs are the resources entering the system. The transformation process converts those inputs into something else. Outputs are what that process produces. Feedback is information about the outputs, or about the system's own performance. The important word is returned. Feedback comes back into the system, and it informs what the system does next. And the environment is everything outside the system's own boundary that the system interacts with. If this list feels familiar, it should. These are the same transformation-model elements from Subchapter five point three. There, they described a single operation. Here, they describe the whole organization. Only the scale has changed. The logic is the same.
Open Systems
Why Organizations Are Open
Systems come in two kinds. A closed system is self-contained. It exchanges nothing with its surrounding environment. An open system depends on ongoing exchange with its environment, just to keep functioning. Organizations are open systems, and the reason is direct. They depend on the environment twice over. First, for the inputs they need. Capital, labor, materials, and information. Second, for the environment's acceptance of what they produce. That means customers willing to buy, regulators willing to permit operation, and a labor market willing to supply workers. An organization that lost either exchange entirely would not persist for long. That is why environmental scanning matters so much. It means systematically monitoring conditions outside the organization's boundary. Scanning is a genuine survival function, not an optional add-on. An open system that stops attending to its environment risks losing the very exchanges it depends on.
Subsystems
The Handoff Is Where Failures Gather
Large systems are themselves built from smaller ones, called subsystems. Each subsystem is nested inside the larger system, with its own inputs, its own process, and its own outputs. And each one connects to its neighbors at defined boundaries. Now focus on one specific moment. One subsystem hands its output to another, where it becomes the next input. That moment is the handoff. It is the characteristic point where system failures concentrate. Here is the counterintuitive part. Each subsystem may be working well, judged on its own terms. Yet information, quality, or timing can still degrade, right at the boundary between them. So who is to blame? Often, no single subsystem is straightforwardly at fault. The failure lives in the connection, not inside either part. That pattern has a clear family resemblance to an earlier idea. It echoes the diffused responsibility of bureaucratic dysfunction, from Subchapter three point two.
Figure 5.4.1
An Organization as an Open System
Here is a fictional organization, drawn as an open system. The whole thing sits inside its environment. Resources come in on the left, as inputs. They pass through two subsystems, A and then B, and leave on the right as outputs. Those outputs go back into the environment, where they are accepted, or rejected. Two feedback loops are traced, one across the top and one across the bottom. Across the top is a reinforcing loop. Rising sales fund more inventory, so growing outputs feed back into greater investment in inputs. Across the bottom is a balancing loop. Complaints trigger extra quality checks, a corrective response sent back into the process. Both loops operate at the same time, and independently of a third feature. Between Subsystem A and Subsystem B sits the handoff, flagged as a failure point. That is where this system's most fragile point actually sits. The loops are easy to notice. The handoff is where the risk quietly lives.
Local Optimization
When Winning Locally Loses Overall
This brings us to the systems perspective's central practical insight. Local optimization can make whole-system performance worse. Picture a department making a decision that is entirely sensible from its own vantage point. The decision is aimed squarely at its own measured target. And yet it can still damage the organization as a whole. That happens when the decision shifts a cost, a delay, or a quality problem onto a connected part of the system. Specifically, a part the department does not measure, and whose consequences it never feels. Take a purchasing department with a cost-reduction target. It hits that target by switching to a cheaper, less reliable supplier. By its own measure, purchasing has succeeded. Meanwhile, the production department depends on that supplier's parts. It now has a reliability problem. Purchasing's performance measure never captures that problem at all. Why not? Because the measure only looks at cost.
Core Concepts
Synergy, Entropy and Equifinality
Three more concepts complete the systems vocabulary. Synergy means the whole shows behavior or capability that the individual parts do not possess on their own. The related idea of emergent properties describes characteristics that arise from how the parts are connected. Picture a coordinated team that accomplishes what the same people, working independently, could not. No individual became more capable. The connections between them produced something none of them had alone. That is precisely why the parts of an organization cannot be understood in isolation. Entropy is the tendency of a system to drift toward disorder and decline, without ongoing intervention. Negative entropy is the counterweight. An open system imports resources from its environment, to resist that decline. An organization that stops importing capital, talent, and information does not stay stable. It drifts. So resource import is a standing requirement, not a one-time setup cost. Finally, equifinality. The same end state can be reached by different paths. That quietly undermines the classical search for one best way, from Chapter three. If genuinely different methods can each reach comparable results, the search for one correct approach was misconceived from the start. Subchapter five point five develops that insight into the contingency perspective.
Feedback Loops
Loops That Accelerate, Loops That Correct
Feedback comes in two loop types, and they behave very differently. A reinforcing loop amplifies a trend already underway. An initial change produces an effect, which feeds back to produce more of the same change. The system accelerates in one direction. A balancing loop does the opposite. It corrects the system back toward a target, or an equilibrium. A deviation triggers a response that pushes the system back the other way. In any real organization, both kinds run constantly, and at the same time. One complication deserves its own name. Delay. Delay is the gap in time between an action, and the feedback that reports its effect. Here is how it causes trouble. A manager makes a change, but the feedback hasn't caught up yet. She reasonably concludes the change was not enough, and makes another one. Later she discovers the first change was already working. Now the second has pushed the system too far, in the same direction. The longer the delay, the more likely this overcorrection becomes. There is simply more time to act before the truth shows up.
Table 5.4.1
6 Systems Concepts at Work
This table pulls the six concepts together, each with a workplace example and a management implication. Interdependence. Purchasing helps its own numbers, but hurts production's reliability. So manage the connections, not only the parts. Synergy and emergence. A coordinated team outperforms the same people working alone. So invest in how parts connect. Entropy. A department that stops recruiting or training gradually loses capability. The implication is to treat resource import as an ongoing requirement, not a one-time investment. Equifinality. Two regional offices reach similar results through different methods. So don't assume a single method must be copied everywhere to succeed. A reinforcing loop. Early sales success funds the marketing that drives further sales. Recognize when a loop is accelerating a trend, for better or for worse. And a balancing loop. Rising complaints trigger added quality checks, which then reduce complaints. Recognize when a loop is correcting the system back toward a target.
Systems Diagnosis
Look for the Structure, Not the Person
All of this changes how a manager diagnoses a problem. The single most consequential change is this. Look for the structure producing the behavior. Do not start by looking for the person responsible for it. Consider a problem that keeps coming back, even though good people are working on it conscientiously. That pattern is a signal in itself. It frequently means the structure is generating the problem on its own. By structure we mean the connections, the incentives, and the handoffs. And it does so regardless of who happens to occupy which role. Now think about the usual response, which is to replace the person in the role. Without a change to the structure, the same problem typically returns under new management. The structure, not the individual, was the actual cause all along.
Case Vignette
Priya Hits Her Target, the Next Team Falls Apart
Here is a composite case, constructed for instruction. Priya led a quality-inspection department. It was measured on inspection throughput, the number of units reviewed per day. Under pressure to raise that number, she streamlined the review process, cutting the time spent on each inspection. Throughput rose sharply, exactly as her department's target rewarded. Within weeks, the assembly department immediately downstream began reporting a problem. Assembly relied on Priya's team to catch defects before final assembly. Now more defective units were turning up much later, at a considerably higher cost to fix. Throughout this period, Priya's own numbers looked better than ever. Her measure said nothing about units after they left her department. She had not been careless. No single decision was obviously wrong, by the measure she was given. The problem was interdependence her target did not capture. Her local optimization moved the cost of catching defects downstream, rather than eliminating it. Try one yourself. A support team closes far more tickets after adopting a faster process. Soon, sales reports more cancellations citing unresolved issues. Which interdependence did support overlook?
About Principles of Management at UPI Study
Principles of Management (Business 101) is a self-paced online course of 117 video lessons in 17 chapters, from the classical schools and the four management functions to leadership, motivation, change, human resources, strategy and ethics. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Principles of Management with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Principles of Management carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Organizations as Systems: How the Parts Create the Whole
Why are organizations considered open systems?
What are synergy, entropy, and equifinality in systems theory?
What is local optimization, and why can it hurt an organization?
What is the difference between a reinforcing loop and a balancing loop?
About the Principles of Management course
How many college credits is Principles of Management?
How much does Principles of Management cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Principles of Management take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Principles of Management.
117 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →