For example, somebody with no knowledge of military jargon and technology may struggle with understanding how the military works. Systems theory allows that person to examine the linkages and structures within the military, and then to understand how those linkages and structures work towards the desired outcomes. This understanding comes on a broad level, and does not require the observer to understand the nuances of military jargon and technology. Systems thinking also allows the observer to understand similarities and differences between systems. Understanding the similarities between systems that on the surface level are entirely unrelated is difficult when the observer is focused on the superficialities, but an examination of the underlying systems allows for this understanding to take place. The university, for example, is more similar to a military unit than it is to a symphony. While within the university there is a clear structure of command, there is a fairly high degree of autonomy between different functional units -- the history department is analogous to a specific Army unit in that they both function with a high degree of autonomy in order to contribute a specific objective that in turn is a component of the broader, overarching strategic objective. With the symphony, that autonomy is more limited as an individual musician is subject to tighter organizational controls with respect to behaviors. Universities and military units both operate on outcomes-oriented control structures, with freedom to achieve that outcome in any number of different ways.

The analogy of an organization as an organism builds upon the understanding of the organization as a machine. The machine analogy focuses on specific tasks and the structure of those tasks as a means to an end, which at any given point in time is approximately how an organization functions. The...

Systems evolve in response to their stimuli, and this is true of organizations as well. The mechanical processes that underlying an organization's function form the basis for its actions and outcomes, but a machine is a closed system, unable to evolve on its own. The organism analogy, therefore, helps the observer to understand the changes within a system over time.
Each of the examples introduced here constitutes an open system, one that functions as an organism over time just as it functions as a machine in the moment. An individual process -- the performance of a symphony, for example -- may be a highly mechanical act based on repetition of specific processes. Over time, however, those processes must evolve, especially when desired outcomes or the external environment evolve. Organisms evolve at different rates, based on their stimuli and objectives. Sharks evolve at a much slower rate than humans have, for example. Symphonies may evolve slowly, whereas a military unit may be forced in combat to evolve at a near-constant rate based on a rapidly-changing situation. It is the nature of this process that the concepts underlying open systems theory help us to understand. Once the framework for open systems theory is understood, any system can be understood in terms of both its mechanics and its evolution, regardless of the observers' understanding of specific tasks, jargon and structures.

Works Cited:

Federov, G. (2001). The military unit as part of the Armed Forces' economic system. Military Thought. Retrieved October 31, 2010 from http://dlib.eastview.com/browse/doc/400163

Roelofs, L. (no date). Organizational change: Open systems concepts applied. Symphony Orchestra Institute. Retrieved October 31, 2010 from http://www.soi.org/reading/change/concepts.shtml