Hard Systems Thinking in Management

A system with a limited number of subsystems and highly structured interactions. It remains relatively stable over time and is less influenced by external factors or the actions of its parts.

A system with numerous subsystems and complex, loosely structured interactions. It adapts and evolves over time, influenced by its own parts and external factors.

Participants share common values, beliefs, and goals. They work together towards a shared objective, and decision-making is collaborative.

Participants have compatible interests, but they don't necessarily share the same values and beliefs. Disagreements are allowed, and decisions come from compromise and negotiation.

Participants have few shared interests and conflicting values. Coercion is used to enforce decisions, as there is no consensus or agreement.

A simple system with participants who share common values and goals.

A complex system with participants who share common values and goals.

A simple system with participants who have compatible interests but diverse values and beliefs.

Systems approaches that primarily focus on achieving pre-defined goals and maximizing efficiency and effectiveness in doing so.

The ability of a system to survive and adapt to changing circumstances.

The extent to which a system uses minimal resources to achieve its goals.

The extent to which a system's actions lead to the desired outcomes.

The vertical axis of the grid of problem contexts represents the level of complexity and turbulence within a system.

Type A systems approaches focus on improving the system's ability to handle internal and external challenges, aiming to make the system more resilient and adaptable.

Type A systems approaches assume that goals are already clear or can be easily determined and don't focus on questioning or changing the goals themselves.

Using models to understand and improve complex real-world systems.

A simplified representation of a real-world system, used to explore different solutions.

Focus on the system as a whole, rather than individual components.

Exploring and testing solutions on the model before implementing them in the real world.

Involves drawing on expertise from multiple disciplines to understand a complex problem.

Systems engineering originated at Bell Telephone Laboratories in the USA to handle complex communication network challenges.

The structured process for applying a theory or approach in practice.

A common assumption in hard systems thinking - that clear objectives can be defined for systems improvement.

Systems Engineering applications expanded quickly beyond communications to industries like defense, space, and energy.

The first comprehensive methodology for Operations Research (OR), published in 1957.

Systems engineering focused on optimizing complex processes within manufacturing industries, considering factors like market conditions.

The International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) considers the approach applicable to diverse areas like transportation, housing, infrastructure, and environmental systems.

Hard systems thinking draws inspiration from the natural sciences, focusing on scientific methods applied to complex real-world problems.

The scientific method is adapted to the real-world situations encountered in hard systems thinking.

Operational Research (OR), Systems Analysis (SA), and Systems Engineering (SE) share a common focus on applying scientific methods to complex problems.

The British Operational Society defines Operational Research (OR) as the application of scientific methods to manage complex systems involving people, machines, materials, and resources.

A systems thinking approach that emphasizes the rights and empowerment of disadvantaged groups, aiming to address systemic inequalities.

A core principle of emancipatory systems thinking that ensures all individuals and groups have a platform to contribute to decision-making and action.

A core principle of emancipatory systems thinking that focuses on assisting disadvantaged groups to receive what they are rightfully due.

Systems methodology that prioritizes diversity and inclusivity in problem-solving, challenging dominant narratives and allowing marginalized voices to be heard.

A key criterion for evaluating interventions in postmodern systems thinking, focusing on highlighting marginalized viewpoints that have been previously excluded.

A key evaluation criterion in postmodern systems thinking, emphasizing the appropriateness and ethical resonance of proposed actions within local contexts.

A systems thinking approach that emphasizes the participation of those affected by system designs, ensuring their voices are heard in the decision-making process.

A framework for building a democratic and inclusive environment within organizations, where outcomes are determined through consensus and logical reasoning rather than power dynamics.

Hard systems thinking struggles to handle situations with many different perspectives on reality. It assumes a shared understanding of goals, which is often not the case in complex managerial scenarios.

Hard systems thinking relies on clearly defined goals to analyze a system. This is problematic because in managerial settings, determining the objectives can be a central part of the problem itself.

Hard systems thinking struggles to cope with the complexity and dynamism of many real-world situations. It relies on simplistic models that may not accurately represent the messy reality.

Hard systems thinking is criticized for its inability to address power dynamics in decision-making. It often favors the perspective of those in positions of power.

Hard systems thinking aims to create a mathematical model for the problem to find an optimal solution. However, real-world problems are often too complex to be accurately represented and solved in this way.

Hard systems thinking requires an objective and agreed-upon understanding of the system before analysis can begin. This can be challenging in situations where stakeholders have conflicting views and values.

Hard systems thinking has difficulty incorporating diverse values and beliefs in its analysis. It seeks a single, optimal solution based on a predetermined set of objectives.

Hard systems thinking is criticized for its difficulty in addressing political and power dynamics within organizations. It tends to neglect the influence of power relationships in decision-making.