Content deleted Content added
Link suggestions feature: 2 links added. |
|||
| (22 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
The '''OSTO System Model''' is based on the OSTO System Theory, which comprehends complex [[system]]s and [[organization]]s as living systems and maps these by means of the OSTO System Model. The [[model (abstract)|model]] is [[cybernetic]] in nature and is deduced from the theory of [[Ecological sanitation|closed loops]]. The basics of this [[theory]] have been formulated by David P. Hanna in the
▲The '''OSTO System Model''' is based on the OSTO System Theory, which comprehends complex [[system]]s and [[organization]]s as living systems and maps these by means of the OSTO System Model. The [[model (abstract)|model]] is [[cybernetic]] in nature and is deduced from the theory of [[Ecological sanitation|closed loops]]. The basics of this [[theory]] have been formulated by David P. Hanna in the 1980’s and have been published for the first time in 1988.<ref name="Hanna" /> The model assumes that several central transformation processes take place on the inside of a complex organization. These are deeply influenced by mutual reactions between the inner life of the organization and the outside (environment). In terms of closed loop theory, the OSTO System Model depicts the essential elements of such a living system in its [[wikt:interconnectedness|interconnectedness]], dependencies, and reciprocal reactions. Thinking in [[Biological network|network]] structures is, thus, a crucial part of OSTO System Theory.
The acronym “OSTO” stands for '''o'''pen, '''s'''ocio'''t'''echnical, '''e'''conomic ([[German language|German]]: “oekonomisch”) aspects of a system. With regard to organizations and economically working [[companies]], the model takes into consideration the openness of systems towards their environments as well as the fact that they are [[wikt:multidimensional|multidimensional]], socio-techno-economic structures. Taking into consideration these four aspects, the model displays the [[complexity]] of such a system in its numerous [[dimensions]].
==Fields of application==
The OSTO System Model is a concrete model of the OSTO thought framework. In practice this model is used as a managerial and reflection tool.
Looking through the so-called “OSTO glasses” is to facilitate managing the steadily increasing dynamism and [[complexity]] of systems such as to find new action strategies by creating distance.
Consequently, for organizational development the method is applied in the field of [[change management]]. Companies use the methods in the area of
Line 46 ⟶ 39:
==Formation and development==
[[Complexity]], with regard to entrepreneurial action was first described by organizational theorists in the years around 1975. Hence, different [[management
schools]] and consultants tried to develop new forms of organizational development since: They intended to understand the internal and external complexities
of companies by developing thought frameworks and creating models.
Line 58 ⟶ 51:
The OSTO System Model is based on the “Organization Performance Model” which has been developed, tested and published by David P. Hanna in 1988 in his
time as a consultant for [[Procter & Gamble]]. Further important participants in this development include
Later on, the model has been further developed and systemized for [[science]] by Heijo Rieckmann (Klagenfurt University) and [[Klaus Henning]] (RWTH Aachen University) as well as for systemic consulting of organizations by Renate Henning.
Line 65 ⟶ 58:
===Components outside the system environment===
====System
Every organization is separated from its environments (at least) theoretically by differing borders. Possible forms of such borders are: Physical
(e.g. buildings), temporal (e.g. work shifts), social (e.g. teams), or psychological ([[stereotypes]], prejudices) system borders. In order to describe and define a system as accurately as possible it is necessary to determine the borders of a system very carefully. It is a current perception that system borders are partly permeable.<ref name="Hanna97ff"/>
Line 84 ⟶ 77:
In applied practice, the Ultimate Anchor plays a minor role. It deeply analyses [basis and meta value, views on life and the world, images of people and gods which creates the framework of [[convictions]] and beliefs in which “questions for meaning” are shaped.] <ref name="Morgan"/>
Mission as well as Ultimate Anchor were added to the OSTO System Model by Rieckmann and Henning in the second half of the
===Components within the system===
Line 98 ⟶ 91:
*[[Implementation]] through core processes and transformational processes (process version)
*Realization through [[strategies]], design elements, and [[behavior]] (structural version)
[[File:
[[File:
The process version explains the processing of information from the environment, the reason for existing and the outputs/outcome by means of a transformational process. This process is made up of three central core processes. The term “core process” is to underline that only processes that go to the core of the subject matter, i.e. those which ensure the existence of the company, are relevant. There are three core process that are to be distinguished:
====Task
The task core process comprises all activities, [[communications]], actions, etc. which aim at creating the system results (output).
====Individual
An important basis for all processes of within a system is the [[energy]] (work power, [[performance]]) which each single person in a system provides and is capable of deploying towards the goals of a system. The systemic approach describes this by the term “Individual Core Process”.
====Social
Throughout the social core process, the humans in an organization work towards the goals of a system. In the SCP, the individual core process and the task core process are linked such that [[synergy]] effects are yielded from [[collaboration]].
===Structural version===
The Structural version explains the
====Goals and
In the OSTO map, the goals of a company belong to the internal design of an organization, i.e. the so-called transformational [[Business process|process]]. With respect to systemic theory, the goals are to be grasped as an internal specification and are derived from the reason for existing. They define the internal needs for actions. For reaching the goals it is necessary to formulate strategies that define how things are to be implemented such that the goals are achieved. The strategies are realized by appropriate adaptions to the design elements.
====(System-)
In every system/organization there is an abundance of very different behavioral [[patterns]] (e.g. [[leadership]] behavior, work behavior, etc.) which are produced by the design elements. This implies that the system behavior can only be influenced through the design elements. Since systems are dynamic processes, they are not oriented towards subjects but rather towards events. The overall system can have characteristics which are not inert to any of its component parts (loyal/[[cooperative]] characteristic) and does in general not behave like the sum of its parts. The OSTO System Model is currently the only model of this kind which closely analyses the behavior of an organization.
====Design
=====
The design element human comprises the members of a company/organization and their roles ([[Aptitude|talents]], qualifications etc.), expectations and needs of material character. Furthermore, the network of socio-emotional [[Social relationship|relationship]]s and interaction circumstances (“[[climate]]”) is included in these conditions of collaboration.
=====Technology and
Technology as a design element comprises the technical machines, the means of [[production (economics)|production]], [[property]] plant and equipment, etc. and the relationships among them, i.e. all material and spatial conditions of a system.
=====Organizational
The organizational structure describes the
=====Functions and
Functions and tasks as a design element is derived from the open property of companies/organizations. It comprises the description of the tasks which stem from customer needs as well as the division of tasks as specific work orders, expectations towards functions, jobs, etc. Consequently, it is possible to develop processes in order to install and foster changes in organizations.
=====Decision-
The decision
=====Information
The information system describes who receives or does not receive which information when, from whom and by which means. It also analyzes why this is so.
Amplifying and reduction systems of material and immaterial as well as formal and informal character are described through the reward and control system of an organization. As such it analyzes mechanisms and procedures which observe and guide human and technical behavior, results and processes. This includes amongst others remuneration structures and the unwritten rules of a company.
=====Development and renewal system (DRS)=====
By means of the development and renewal system the flexibility as well as the performance and adaption capacities of an organization are maintained and increased. This can also revolve around a group of employees within the company which have the mandate to develop the company internally and externally. Generally, this can be subsumed under the term [[innovation management]].
===
▲=====Development and Renewal System (DRS)=====
According to the model, [[feedback]] is of crucial importance for the survival of a system, i.e. of an organization that is confronted with [[turbulent]] environments. As systems are to be understood as open systems they rely on feedback loops in order to remain existent. The feedback consists of loops that have a guiding, stabilizing and renewing effect on the system. According to literature there are four types of feedback.
====Quality
[[Quality (business)|Quality]] feedbacks are reactions to the quality of the [[output (economics)|output]]. Usually, all types of [[quality management]] use quality feedback as a starting point of their methods.
====Renewal
Renewal feedbacks report reaction of the environment with regard to the reason for existing. This form of feedback is to analyze the demands of the environment (e.g. [[Business development|Development]] of new [[market (economics)|market]]s).
====Responsibility
Responsibility feedbacks question the mission of the system. They refer to the long-term chances of survival of the system and its environment (earth-humanity-future-problem). In that regard the focus of this form of feedback is sustainability.
====Awareness
[[Awareness]] feedbacks contain information about basic “truths” – about humans, the way humans live together and transcendent [[values]] – and about absolute (“true”) values. In this context, the consequences for the system and the members of the system (e.g. through religious orientations) are reflected.
==Delineation from
The OSTO System Model is, just like the St. Gallen Management Model and the [[Viable System Model]], to be categorized into economic and sociological system theory. The difference from these rather production oriented models is the fact that the OSTO System Model is process oriented and assumes an open system which is guided by permanent feedback. In contrast to other models it analyzes systems independently from [[hierarchies]] and is not based on management ratios. It is also the only model which takes (system-) behavior into consideration. Additionally, conscious and unconscious goals and strategies are rendered visible and intended as well as unintended outputs are unveiled and taken into consideration.
==Critical
The model assumes that the central transformational processes marked in the model take place on the inside of a complex organization. However, the concepts with regard to system and organization are not definitely pointed out in theory. On the part of system theory there is hardly any link to the modern theory of social systems with their core concepts of the observed observer and the [[autopoiesis]]. On the part of organizational theory, [[Karl E. Weick]] described the problem that the term organization leaves open in how far a special behavior of an involved person takes place at a certain place or refers to a certain place very early on. In the same manner it is not clear in how far behavior is controlled by an organization or contributes to the embodiment of an organization or if both or none of this is true.<ref name="Pugh01"/> [[Gareth Morgan (
==References==
Line 205 ⟶ 172:
<ref name="Krug">H. E. Krug (1992): ''Diagnose und Design komplexer Organisationen.'' In: K. Henning und B. Harendt (Hrsg.): ''Methodik und Praxis der Komplexitätsbewältigung.'' Berlin.</ref>
<ref name="Morgan">[[Gareth Morgan (
<ref name="Pugh01">[[Derek S. Pugh]] and [[David J. Hickson]] (1996) ''Writers on Organizations'', Fifths Edition 1996; Penguin Books, London; {{ISBN|0-14-025023-9}}, Seite 208–213</ref>
Line 218 ⟶ 185:
==Bibliography==
* Buro, Thomas (2000): Gestaltung globaler Luftfracht-Transportsysteme mit Hilfe des OSTO-TOC-Ansatzes. Düsseldorf: VDI. Reihe 12: Verkehrstechnik/Fahrzeugtechnik, Nr. 439.
* Clark, J. V./Krone, C. (1972): Towards an overall View of Organizational Development in the early Seventies. In. Thomas, J. M./Bennis, W. G.: The Management of change and conflict. Harmondsworth. S. 284f.
Line 232 ⟶ 198:
* Marks, Siegfried (1991): Gemeinsame Gestaltung von Technik und Organisation in soziotechnischen kybernetischen Systemen. Düsseldorf: VDI. VDI-Reihe: Technik und Wirtschaft, Nr. 60.
* Michulitz, Christiane (2005): Kommunikationsprozessanalyse – ein interdisziplinärer Beitrag zur Analyse der Kommunikation in Organisationen. Unternehmenskybernetik in der Praxis, Band 11: Shaker.
* [[Gareth Morgan (
* Petzold, Stephan (2001): Einführung der Balanced Scorecard als Performance-Meß-System für systemische Organisationsentwicklungsprozesse. Unternehmenskybernetik in der Praxis, Band 4: Shaker.
* Rieckmann, Heijo (2000): Managen und Führen am Rande des 3. Jahrtausends. Praktisches, Theoretisches, Bedenkliches. 2., durchgesehene Auflage. Frankfurt am Main, Berlin: Peter Lang. {{ISBN|3-631-35865-2}}
* Rieckmann, Heijo/Weissengruber, P. (1990): Managing the Unmanageable? Oder
* Taylor, J. R./Lerner, L.: Making Sense of Sensemaking, in: Studies in Cultures, Organizations and Societies, 1996, Vol. 2.2, pp. 259 ff.
* Ulrich, H./Probst, G.J.B. (1989): Anleitung zum ganzheitlichen Denken und Handeln – Ein Brevier für Führungskräfte. Bern, Stuttgart: Paul Haupt.
Line 242 ⟶ 208:
[[Category:Management]]
[[Category:Leadership]]
| |||