Test Your Feel For...

The Systemicist Approach

Works best when:

A fully developed systems approach has become more practicable in various areas with the use of computer technology that enables simulation models and resource allocation systems.

Drive for action:

Desire for a better future for the organization and its clientele.

The issue demands socio-technical development of the whole system. e.g. organizational change
&
The issue is unstructured and complex: and structure can be imposed on the issue in the light of a desired ('idealized') future scenario.

Involvement of others:

All those affected are participants in the development and need to be involved and input by experts is also required.

Unique strengths:

● Maximum impact combined with maximum participation.
● Balanced development.

Intrinsic dangers:

● Generation of unnecessary complexity, uncertainty, and awareness of ethical violations.
● Models are not understood by participants and those in positions of authority, or are too computer-dependent.

Less appropriate if:

Issue is simple, factual or polarized.

Typical Work Role

The strategist is an independent personality capable of reflective inquiry and an integrative vision. As a leader, they can bring about transformation of an organization.

The strategist can encompass complexity, appreciate which factors are key, handle the interdependence and interactions of roles and activities in organizations, and recognize psychosocial factors. The result is to maximize impact and change the organization in accordance with the evolution of the industry and society.

Sometimes systems scientists are employed to assist leaders by supporting computer modeling and simulation.

Those consultants who are systemicists involve people and integrate experts and their knowledge. They help develop future scenarios that balance a network of goals, modeling the present and future situation and developing efficient and effective interventions.

Criticisms

The difficulty with models in large organizations is that they are not understood by the people who are expected to use them.

More commonly, they omit crucial factors of personal meaning and experience, or do not give enough attention to the least powerful.

Other criticisms focus on the relative lack of concern for issues of ●certainty, ●information, ●expedience, and ●group power.

Return to the Summary Table.

Originally posted: 3-Apr-2011.