Systems Thinking, Technology, and Organizational Change
Models of Problem Solving
Different Approaches to Problem Solving
Identification of Complex Problem
Analyzing the Problem
Identification of a Range of Potential Solutions
Evaluation of Potential Solutions
Formative and Summative Evaluation
Values and Ethical Issues
Corporate Responsibility and Ethics
Thinking and Decision Making Strategies
Problem Solving Process
Complex Problem Solving
This section of the paper is focusing on the introduction of complex problem solving, which reflects the affiliation between the meanings of classical problem-solving and complex problem-solving. Complex problem solving tasks are situations involving dynamic environments because untimely actions decide the environment for subsequent decisions that are required to be made with the features of the task environment and it can be changed independently of the action of solvers (Funke, 2010; Chan, et al., 2012). On the other hand, time dependent is also a situation of complex problem solving because decisions are required to be made timely regarding the demands of the environment. The complex is the situation in the sense that most of the variables are irrelevant to each other in a one-t-one manner (Sager, et al., 2012). It can be said that the issues require not one decision in which early decisions are conditioned for later decisions. For a consistently changing task, the similar action can be definitive at one moment and useless at another moment. In contrast, experimental problem solving research has focused massively on tasks such as concept identification, which is not representative of the features (Wolf & Mieg, 2010; Zhang & Sternberg, 2009).
The complex issues in business systems are considered as the issues with formulation with the act of solving is complex. The existence of a large number of variables in the complex problem solving issues does not cause its complex nature. If there are quantified values for specific issues, then it cannot be featured as a complex issue. It is important to extract more mathematical estimations of issues but there is no dilemma in defining solution for issues (Sager, et al., 2012; Chan, et al., 2012). The solving process involves the way of approaching the issues along with the rationality in management actions that are important in functionality of a business system. The process of problem solving implies the phases including implementation of solution along with the monitoring of results (Chan, et al., 2012; Funke, 2010; Wolf & Mieg, 2010).
b. Systems Thinking, Technology, and Organizational Change
Systems thinking possess a long and complex intellectual genealogy, which has an enormous variety of disciplinary forms. It can be said that different attempts has been made to synthesize systems thinking within an overarching theoretical framework. It requires a universal theory of systems defined by the association between components with the concept of systems as processes that are open to change through internal dynamics of interactive feedback with the environment (Kitson, 2009; Boje, et al., 2012). It can be said that one of the major breakthroughs in understanding the complex world of organizations is the field of systems theory. The systems from the perspective of the entire system with its different sub-systems along with the recurring patterns in the relationships between the subsystems. One of the major tools of systems analysis is known to be a systems thinking, which is a way of helping a person to consider systems from broad perspective including observation of overall structures and patterns (Best & Holmes, 2010; Riley, et al., 2012). This aspect of the systems thinking can help in identifying the real causes of issues in organizations while knowing the place to address work. The systems thinking have provided a variety of principles along with the tools for analyzing and changing systems. While focusing on the entire system, consultants can identify solutions addressing different issues in the system and the positive effect of those solutions that improvement throughout the system (Best & Holmes, 2010; Kitson, 2009).
The systems theory has evolved to another level, which is known as chaos theory. The chaos refers to the dynamics of a system apparently has almost insufficient underlying order. It can be said that small changes in an organization can cause complex changes in the entire system and the chaos theory has introduced new aspects to study the complex systems (Riley, et al., 2012; Wolf & Mieg, 2010; Zhang & Sternberg, 2009). The approach of systems thinking is different from that of traditional form of analysis and the traditional analysis focuses on the separating the separate pieces of elements being studied. The systems thinking involve the studies of elements that are interacted with other elements of the system interacting with the behavior of the entire system. The features of systems thinking makes it extremely effective on different types of issues to solve. An example illustrates the difference between the perspectives of systems thinking and the traditional form of analysis as the action to reduce the damages by issues (Kitson, 2009; Best & Holmes, 2010; Chan, et al., 2012; Sager, et al., 2012).
c. Models of Problem Solving
For explaining the changes taking place in the First Glasgow, the paper is providing a fusion of Change Management and Resolution Theory. The model used in this section is the extension of Mchinney's (1997) theory of change pathways. This theory assists organizations to achieve two basic aims in achieving change and it involves the management of mindset, actions or processes from reactive state to a proactive state (Smith & Lewis, 2011; Gerth, et al., 2010). It further involves the creation of professional practice in which change is managed in a strategic manner and understood through a body of knowledge consisting of models, techniques, and strategies. The change management and resolution theory is conceptualizing change in terms of a process of problem solving and transition. In the aspects of theory, change management guides organizations into effective use of tools and principles of change to implement changes within the organization while promoting problem solving and conflict resolution techniques (Brucker, et al., 2013; Boje, et al., 2012; Riley, et al., 2012; Smith & Lewis, 2011). It can occur only when organizations understand different aspects and behaviors towards change. These aspects are socially constructed by experiences, religious, goals, cultural beliefs, employment, ethics, and generation (Chan, et al., 2012).
The aspects of the model are divided into four quadrants, which illustrate and help organizations to understand contested aspects of world and the ways in which they are constructed. These different quadrants are illustrating the realties named as unitary, sensory, social, and mythic (Best & Holmes, 2010; Brucker, et al., 2013; Funke, 2010; Riley, et al., 2012). In order to understand these aspects, organization can go through a change to accept and initiate change, selection of correct leader for change, deal with conflict that is a companion of change, and organize along with plan of solutions to issues (Riley, et al., 2012; Sager, et al., 2012; Zhang & Sternberg, 2009; Sager, et al., 2012).
The unitary reality is a combination of concepts, goals, and principles in an organization. These principles and goals considerably make the unitary reality in the form of mathematical, logical, and philosophical systems. Sustainable and cleaner production is unitary goals and principles within the process of change. It is imperative to evaluate that whether the First Glasgow has achieved its unitary goal of sustainability (Brucker, et al., 2013; Best & Holmes, 2010; Riley, et al., 2012; Sager, et al., 2012). On the other hand, the sensory reality reflects the hard sciences of the four realities, which assesses the organizations within the similar industry implementing the principles through the unitary goal of sustainability. The social reality focuses on feelings, ethics, and values of people, which assess the organizations specifically First Glasgow, possess a strong culture throughout the hierarchy of employment within the organization. The mythic reality leads an organization through the ways of change and the global aspect of a leader in turn accelerating or hindering change within the organization under consideration (Gerth, et al., 2010; Sager, et al., 2012; Smith & Lewis, 2011; Brucker, et al., 2013). There are three types of leadership namely charismatic, authoritarian, and pluralistic styles, which are navigating a specific leadership. Every leader has a philosophy on the way the change process can be implemented in the organization. It can be said that there are two fundamental pathways that an organization follows in the duration of change process, which are known as the revitalization and renaissance. The revitalization pathway is a top-down approach, which arises in sensory reality from the awareness of an issue (Brucker, et al., 2013; Sager, et al., 2012; Boje, et al., 2012; Best & Holmes, 2010). The process of resolution moves in a sequential way through unitary, mythic, and social realities. On the other hand, the renaissance procedure is a bottom-up process with the path of change leading in a sequential way from sensory reality through mythic, unitary, and social realities (Best…