Introduction to the systems approach. Introduction to the systems approach The role of the systems approach in managing an organization

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………… 2

1. The concept of a systematic approach, its main features and principles ……………… .2

2. Organizational system : main elements and types ………………………… 3

3. Systems theory …………………………………………………………………… 5

Basic concepts and characteristics of general systems theory

Example: a bank from a systems theory perspective

4. The value of a systems approach in management …………………………………………...7
Introduction

As the industrial revolution progressed, the growth of large organizational forms of business stimulated new ideas about how businesses function and how to run them. Today there is a developed theory that provides directions for achieving effective management. The first theory that emerged is usually called the classical school of management, there is also a school social relations, theory of systems approach to organizations, theory of probability, etc.

In my report, I want to talk about the theory of a systems approach to organizations, as ideas for achieving effective management.

1. The concept of a systems approach, its main features and principles

In our time, an unprecedented progress of knowledge is taking place, which, on the one hand, has led to the discovery and accumulation of many new facts, information from various areas of life, and thereby confronted humanity with the need to systematize them, to find the common in the particular, constant in the changing. There is no unambiguous concept of a system. In the most general form, a system is understood as a set of interrelated elements that form a certain integrity, a certain unity.

The study of objects and phenomena as systems has led to the formation of a new approach in science - a systems approach.

The systems approach as a general methodological principle is used in various branches of science and human activity. The epistemological basis (epistemology - a branch of philosophy, study. Forms and methods of scientific knowledge) is the general theory of systems, the beginning of the cat. put the Australian biologist L. Bertalanffy. In the early 1920s, the young biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy began to study organisms as specific systems, summarizing his view in the book Modern Theory of Development (1929). In this book, he developed a systematic approach to the study of biological organisms. In the book "Robots, People and Consciousness" (1967), he transferred the general theory of systems to the analysis of processes and phenomena of social life. 1969 - "General Systems Theory". Bertalanffy turns his systems theory into a general disciplinary science. The purpose of this science, he saw in the search for the structural similarity of the laws established in various disciplines, based on the cat. it is possible to derive system-wide patterns.

We define traits systems approach :

1. Syst. approach - a form of methodological knowledge, communication. with the study and creation of objects as systems, and applies only to systems.

2. The hierarchy of cognition, requiring a multilevel study of the subject: the study of the subject itself - "own" ur-n; the study of the same subject as an element of a wider system - "higher" ur-n; the study of this subject in relation to the constituent elements of this subject - "lower" ur-n.

3. The systematic approach requires to consider the problem not in isolation, but in the unity of connections with the environment, to comprehend the essence of each connection and individual element, to make associations between general and private goals.

With this in mind, we define systems approach concept :

Syst. an approach is an approach to the study of an object (problem, phenomenon, process) as a system in a cat. the elements, internal and external connections, most significantly influencing the investigated results of its functioning, and the goals of each of the elements, based on the general purpose of the object, are identified.

We can also say that the systematic approach - this is a direction of the methodology of scientific knowledge and practical activity, which is based on the study of any object as a complex integral socio-economic system.

Let's turn to history.

Before becoming at the beginning of the XX century. management sciences rulers, ministers, commanders, builders, making decisions were guided by intuition, experience, traditions. Acting in specific situations, they sought to find the best solutions. Depending on experience and talent, the manager could expand the spatial and temporal framework of the situation and spontaneously comprehend his control object more or less systemically. But nevertheless, until the XX century. management was dominated by a situational approach, or management according to circumstances. The defining principle of this approach is the adequacy of management decisions in relation to a specific situation. Adequate in this situation is the decision that is the best from the point of view of changing the situation, immediately after the provision of appropriate managerial influence on it.

Thus, a situational approach is an orientation towards the nearest positive result ("and then it will be seen ..."). It is thought that "further" will again be the search for the best solution in the situation that will arise. But the decision at the moment is the best, it may turn out to be completely different as soon as the situation changes or unaccounted circumstances are revealed in it.

The desire to react to each new turn or reversal (change of vision) of the situation in an adequate way leads to the fact that the manager is forced to make more and more decisions that run counter to the previous ones. He actually ceases to control events, and floats with their flow.

This does not mean that case management is ineffective in principle. A situational approach to decision-making is necessary and justified when the situation itself is extraordinary and the use of previous experience is obviously risky, when the situation changes quickly and in an unpredictable way, when there is no time to take into account all the circumstances. For example, rescuers of the Ministry of Emergency Situations often have to look for the best solution within a specific situation. Nevertheless, in the general case, the situational approach is not effective enough and must be overcome, replaced, or supplemented by a systemic approach.

1. Integrity, allowing to consider simultaneously the system as a whole and at the same time as a subsystem for higher levels.

2. Hierarchy of structure, those. the presence of a set (at least two) of elements located on the basis of the subordination of the elements of the lower level to the elements of the highest level. The implementation of this principle is clearly visible on the example of any specific organization... As you know, any organization is the interaction of two subsystems: managing and controlled. One obeys the other.

3. Structuring, allowing you to analyze the elements of the system and their relationship within a specific organizational structure. As a rule, the process of functioning of a system is determined not so much by the properties of its individual elements as by the properties of the structure itself.

4. Plurality, allowing the use of many cybernetic, economic and mathematical models to describe individual elements and the system as a whole.

2. Organizational system: basic elements and types

Any organization is considered as an organizational and economic system with inputs and outputs and a certain number of external relations. The concept of "organization" should be defined. There have been various attempts in history to identify this concept.

1. The first attempt was based on the idea of \u200b\u200bexpediency. Organization is a purposeful arrangement of parts of a whole that has a specific purpose.

2. Organization - a social mechanism for achieving goals (organizational, group, individual).

3. Organization - harmony, or correspondence, between parts and the whole. Any system develops on the basis of the struggle of opposites.

4. Organization is a whole that is not reduced to a simple arithmetic sum of its constituent elements. This is a whole, which is always more or less than the sum of its parts (it all depends on the effectiveness of the connections).

5. Chester Bernard (in the West is considered one of the founders of modern management theory): when people come together and formally decide to unite their efforts to achieve common goals, they create an organization.

It was a retrospective. Today, an organization can be defined as a social community that brings together a set of individuals to achieve a common goal, which (individuals) act on the basis of certain procedures and rules.

Based on the previously given definition of the system, we define the organizational system.

Organizational system - this is a certain set of internally interconnected parts of the organization that forms a kind of integrity.

The main elements of the organizational system (and hence the objects of organizational management) are:

·production

Marketing and sales

·finance

·information

· Personnel, human resources - have a system-forming quality, the efficiency of the use of all other resources depends on them.

These elements are the main objects of organizational management. But the organizational system has another side:

People ... The manager's job is to facilitate the coordination and integration of human activities.

Objectives and tasks ... An organizational goal is an ideal blueprint for the future state of an organization. This goal helps to unite the efforts of people and their resources. The goals are formed on the basis of common interests, therefore the organization is a tool for achieving goals.

Organizational structure ... Structure is a way of bringing together the elements of a system. Organizational structure is a way of connecting various parts of an organization into a certain integrity (the main types of organizational structure are hierarchical, matrix, entrepreneurial, mixed, etc.). When we design and maintain these structures, we are in control.

Specialization and separation labor ... This is also an object of management. The fragmentation of complex production processes, operations and tasks into components that imply the specialization of human labor.

Organizational power - this is the right, ability (knowledge + skills) and readiness (will) of the leader to pursue his own line in the preparation, adoption and implementation of management decisions. Each of these components is required for the exercise of power. Power is interaction. A powerless and ineffective manager cannot organize the function of coordination and integration of people's activities. Organizational power is not only a subject, but also an object of management.

Organizational culture - the system of traditions, beliefs, values, symbols, rituals, myths, norms of communication between people inherent in the organization. Organizational culture gives the organization its individuality, its own face. Importantly, it brings people together, creates organizational integrity.

Organizational boundaries are tangible and intangible constraints that fix the isolation of a given organization from other objects in the external environment of the organization. The manager must have the ability to expand (moderately) the boundaries of his own organization. In moderation means taking only what you can keep. Managing boundaries means defining them in time.

Organizational systems can be divided into closed and open:

Closed an organizational system is one that has no connection with its external environment (that is, it does not exchange products, services, goods, etc. with the external environment). An example is subsistence farming.

Open the organizational system has connections with the external environment, that is, other organizations, institutions that have connections with the external environment.

Thus, an organization as a system is a set of interrelated elements that form integrity (i.e., internal unity, continuity, mutual connection). Any organization is an open system, because interacts with the external environment. It receives resources from the environment in the form of capital, raw materials, energy, information, people, equipment, etc., which become its elements. internal environment... Some of the resources with the help of certain technologies are processed, converted into products and services, which are then transferred to the external environment.

3. Systems theory

Let me remind you that systems theory was developed by Ludwig von Bertalanffy in the 20th century. Systems theory deals with the analysis, design and operation of systems - independent business units that are formed by interacting, interrelated and interdependent parts. It is clear that any organizational form of business meets these criteria and can be studied using the concepts and tools of systems theory.

Any enterprise is a system that transforms a set of resources invested in production - costs (raw materials, machines, people) - into goods and services. It functions within a larger system - a foreign policy, economic, social and technical environment, in which it constantly enters into complex interactions. It includes a series of subsystems that are also interconnected and interact. A malfunction in one part of the system causes difficulties in other parts of it. For example, a large bank is a system that operates within a wider environment, interacts with and is associated with it, and also experiences its impact. Departments and branches of a bank are subsystems that must interact without conflict for the bank as a whole to work effectively. If something breaks down in the subsystem, it will ultimately (if not restrained) affect the efficiency of the bank as a whole.

Basic concepts and characteristics of general systems theory:

1. System components (elements, subsystems). Any system, regardless of its openness, is determined through its composition. These components and the connections between them create the properties of the system, its essential characteristics.

2. System boundaries - these are all kinds of material and non-material restraints that distance the system from the external environment. From the point of view of general systems theory, each system is a part of a larger system (which is called a super-system, supersystem, supersystem). In turn, each system consists of two or more subsystems.

3. Synergy (from Greek - acting together). This concept is used to describe phenomena in which the whole is always greater or less than the sum of the parts that make up this whole. The system functions as long as the relationship between the components of the system does not become antagonistic.

4. Input - Transform - Output ... The organizational system in dynamics is presented as three processes. Their interaction gives a cycle of events. Any open system has an event loop. With a systematic approach, it is important to study the characteristics of an organization as a system, i.e. characteristics of "input", "process" ("transformation") and characteristics of "output". With a systematic approach based on marketing research first investigated exit parameters , those. goods or services, namely what to produce, with what quality indicators, with what costs, for whom, in what time frame to sell and at what price. The answers to these questions must be clear and timely. As a result, the “output” should be competitive products or services. Then determine "input" parameters , those. the need for resources (material financial, labor and information) is investigated, which is determined after a detailed study of the organizational and technical level of the system under consideration (level of technology, technology, features of the organization of production, labor and management) and parameters of the external environment (economic, geopolitical, social, environmental) and etc.). Finally, research is equally important. parameters of the "process" converting resources into finished products... At this stage, depending on the object of research, a production technology or control technology, as well as factors and ways of its improvement, are considered.

5. Cycle of life ... Any open system has a life cycle:

occurrence Þ becoming Þ functioning Þ crisis Þ crash

6. Backbone element - an element of the system, on which the functioning of all other elements and the viability of the system as a whole depend to a decisive extent.

Characteristics of open organizational systems

1. Having an event loop .

2. Negative entropy (neo-entropy, anti-entropy)

a) entropy in general systems theory refers to the general tendency of an organization to die;

b) an open organizational system, thanks to the ability to borrow necessary resources from the external environment can counteract this tendency. This ability is called negative entropy;

c) an open organizational system exhibits the ability to negative entropy, and, thanks to this, some of them live for centuries;

d) for a commercial organization, the main criterion for negative entropy is its sustainable profitability over a significant time interval.

3. Feedback ... Feedback is understood as information that is generated, collected, used by an open system to monitor, evaluate, control and correct its own activities. Feedback allows the organization to receive information about possible or real deviations from the intended goal and to make changes in the process of its development in time. Lack of feedback leads to pathology, crisis and collapse of the organization. People in organizations that collect and analyze information, interpret it, organize information flows, have tremendous power.

4. Open organizational systems are inherent dynamic homeostasis ... All living organisms show a tendency towards inner balance and balance. The process of maintaining a balanced state by the organization itself is called dynamic homeostasis.

5. Open organizational systems are characterized by differentiation - a tendency towards growth, specialization and division of functions among the various components that form a given system. Differentiation is the system's response to a change in the external environment.

6. Equifinality ... Open organizational systems are capable, in contrast to closed systems, to achieve the set goals in different ways, moving towards these goals from different starting conditions. There is not and cannot be a single and best method of achieving a goal. The goal can always be achieved in different ways, and you can move towards it at different speeds.

Let me give you an example: consider a bank from a systems theory point of view.

Researching a bank from a systems theory perspective would begin by clarifying goals to help understand the nature of the decisions that need to be made to achieve those goals. It would be necessary to explore the external environment in order to understand how the bank interacts with its wider environment.

The researcher would then turn to the internal environment. To try to understand the main subsystems of the bank, the interaction and connections with the system as a whole, the analyst would analyze the ways of making decisions, the most important information required for making them, as well as the communication channels through which this information is transmitted.

Decision making, information system, communication channels are especially important for a systems analyst, because if they function poorly, the bank will be in a difficult position. In each area, a systematic approach has led to the emergence of new useful concepts and techniques.

Making decisions

Information systems

Communication channels

Fig. 1 Systems theory - basic elements

Making decisions

In the field of decision making, systems thinking has contributed to the classification different types solutions. The concepts of certainty, risk and uncertainty have been developed. Logical approaches to making complex decisions (many of which had a mathematical basis) were introduced, which greatly helped managers to improve the process and quality of decision-making.

Information systems

The nature of the information at the disposal of the decision maker has an important influence on the quality of the decision itself, and it is not surprising that much attention has been paid to this issue. Those who design management information systems try to give the relevant information to the right person at the right time. To do this, they need to know what decision will be made, when information will be provided, and how soon that information will arrive (if speed is an important element of decision making). Providing relevant information that improves the quality of decisions (and eliminates unnecessary information that simply increases costs) is essential.

Communication channels

Communication channels in an organization are important elements in the decision-making process as they convey the required information. Systems analysts have provided many useful examples of deep understanding of the interconnection process between organizations. Significant progress has been made in the study and solution of the problems of "noise" and interference in communications, the problems of transition from one system or subsystem to another.

4. The value of a systems approach in management

The value of a systems approach is that managers can more easily reconcile their specific work with the work of the organization as a whole, if they understand the system and their role in it. This is especially important for general directorbecause a systems approach encourages him to maintain the necessary balance between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire organization. He makes him think about the flows of information passing through the entire system, and also emphasizes the importance of communication. A systems approach helps to identify the reasons for poor decisions, and it provides tools and techniques to improve planning and control.

A modern leader must have a systematic thinking, because:

· The manager must perceive, process and systematize a huge amount of information and knowledge that are necessary for making management decisions;

· The leader needs a systematic methodology, with the help of which he could correlate one area of \u200b\u200bactivity of his organization with another, prevent quasi-optimization of management decisions;

· The manager must see the forest behind the trees, the private - the general, rise above everyday life and realize what place his organization occupies in the external environment, how it interacts with another, larger system, of which it is a part;

· A systematic approach to management allows the manager to more productively implement his main functions: forecasting, planning, organization, management, control.

Systems thinking not only contributed to the development of new ideas about the organization (in particular, special attention was paid to the integrated nature of the enterprise, as well as the paramount importance and importance of information systems), but also provided the development of useful mathematical tools and techniques that greatly facilitate the adoption of management decisions, the use of more advanced planning and control systems. Thus, the systematic approach allows us to comprehensively assess any production and economic activity and the activity of the management system at the level of specific characteristics. This will help analyze any situation within a single system, to identify the nature of the problems of entry, process and exit. The use of a systematic approach allows you to best organize the decision-making process at all levels in the management system.

Despite all the positive results, systems thinking still has not fulfilled its most important purpose. The claim that it will allow the application of modern scientific methods to management has not yet been realized. This is partly because large-scale systems are very complex. It is not easy to grasp the many ways in which the external environment influences internal organization. The interplay of many subsystems within an enterprise is not well understood. System boundaries are very difficult to establish, too broad a definition will lead to the accumulation of costly and unusable data, and too narrow will lead to partial problem solving. It will not be easy to formulate the questions that will arise before the enterprise, to determine with precision the information required in the future. Even if the best and most logical solution is found, it may not be feasible. Nevertheless, a systems approach provides an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of how an enterprise works.

Page
3

4. Entrance - Transformation - Exit. The organizational system in dynamics is presented as three processes. Their interaction gives a cycle of events. Any open system has an event loop. With a systematic approach, it becomes important to study the characteristics of an organization as a system, i.e. characteristics of "input", "process" ("transformation") and characteristics of "output". With a systematic approach based on marketing research, the “exit” parameters are firstly investigated, ie. goods or services, namely what to produce, with what quality indicators, with what costs, for whom, in what time frame to sell and at what price. The answers to these questions must be clear and timely. As a result, the “output” should be competitive products or services. Then the "input" parameters are determined, i.e. the need for resources (material financial, labor and information) is investigated, which is determined after a detailed study of the organizational and technical level of the system under consideration (level of technology, technology, features of the organization of production, labor and management) and parameters of the external environment (economic, geopolitical, social, environmental) and etc.). Finally, it is equally important to study the parameters of the "process" that transforms resources into finished products. At this stage, depending on the object of research, a production technology or control technology is considered, as well as factors and ways of its improvement.

5. The cycle of life. Any open system has a life cycle:

emergence Þ becoming Þ functioning Þ crisis Þ collapse

6. System-forming element - an element of the system, on which the functioning of all other elements and the viability of the system as a whole depend to a decisive extent.

Characteristics of open organizational systems

1. The presence of a cycle of events.

2. Negative entropy (negoentropy, anti-entropy)

a) entropy in general systems theory refers to the general tendency of an organization to die;

b) an open organizational system, due to the ability to borrow the necessary resources from the external environment, can counteract this trend. This ability is called negative entropy;

c) an open organizational system exhibits the ability to negative entropy, and, thanks to this, some of them live for centuries;

d) for a commercial organization, the main criterion for negative entropy is its sustainable profitability over a significant time interval.

3. Feedback. Feedback is understood as information that is generated, collected, used by an open system to monitor, evaluate, control and correct its own activities. Feedback allows an organization to receive information about possible or real deviations from the intended goal and to make changes in the process of its development in time. Lack of feedback leads to pathology, crisis and organizational collapse. People in organizations that collect and analyze information, interpret it, organize information flows, have tremendous power.

4. Dynamic homeostasis is inherent in open organizational systems. All living organisms show a tendency towards inner balance and balance. The process of maintaining a balanced state by the organization itself is called dynamic homeostasis.

6. Equifinality. Open organizational systems are capable, in contrast to closed systems, to achieve their goals in different ways, moving towards these goals from different starting conditions. There is not and cannot be a single and best method of achieving a goal. The goal can always be achieved in different ways, and you can move towards it at different speeds.

Let me give you an example: consider a bank from a systems theory point of view.

Making decisions

Information systems

Communication channels

Fig. 1 Systems theory - basic elements

Making decisions

In the field of decision making, systems thinking has contributed to the classification of different types of decisions. The concepts of certainty, risk and uncertainty have been developed. Logical approaches to making complex decisions were introduced (many of which had a mathematical basis), which was of great help to managers in improving the process and quality of decision-making.

Information systems

Communication channels

The value of a systems approach in management

The value of a systems approach is that managers can more easily align their specific work with the work of the organization as a whole if they understand the system and their role in it. This is especially important for the CEO because a systems approach encourages him to maintain the necessary balance between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire organization. He makes him think about the flows of information passing through the entire system, and also emphasizes the importance of communication. A systems approach helps to identify the reasons for poor decisions, and it provides tools and techniques to improve planning and control.

The value of a systems approach is that managers can more easily align their specific work with the work of the organization as a whole if they understand the system and their role in it. This is especially important for the CEO because a systems approach encourages him to maintain the necessary balance between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire organization. He makes him think about the flows of information passing through the entire system, and also emphasizes the importance of communication. A systems approach helps identify the reasons for poor decision making, and provides tools and techniques to improve planning and control.

Undoubtedly modern leader must have systemic thinking. Systems thinking not only contributed to the development of new ideas about the organization (in particular, special attention was paid to the integrated nature of the enterprise, as well as the paramount importance and importance of information systems), but also provided the development of useful mathematical tools and techniques that greatly facilitate the adoption of managerial decisions, the use of more advanced planning and control systems. Thus, the systematic approach allows us to comprehensively assess any production and economic activity and the activity of the management system at the level of specific characteristics. This will help to analyze any situation within a single system, to identify the nature of the problems of entry, process and exit. The use of a systematic approach allows you to best organize the decision-making process at all levels in the management system.

Despite all the positive results, systems thinking still has not fulfilled its most important purpose. The claim that it will allow the application of modern scientific method to management has not yet been realized. This is partly because large-scale systems are very complex. It is not easy to grasp the many ways in which the external environment influences internal organization. The interplay of many subsystems within an organization is not well understood. System boundaries are very difficult to establish, too broad a definition will lead to the accumulation of costly and unusable data, and too narrow will lead to partial problem solving. It will not be easy to formulate the questions that will arise before the enterprise, to determine with precision the information required in the future. Even if the best and most logical solution is found, it may not be feasible. However, a systems approach provides an opportunity for a deeper understanding of how an organization works.

Rules for applying a systematic approach

So, from the above material it becomes clear that the systems approach is based on in-depth studies of causal relationships and patterns of development of socio-economic processes. And since there are connections and patterns, it means that there are certain rules. Let's consider the basic rules for applying a systematic approach.

Rule 1. It is not the components by themselves that constitute the essence of the whole (system), but, on the contrary, the whole as a primary generates, during its division or formation, the components of the system.

Example. The firm as a complex open socio-economic system is a collection of interconnected departments and production units. First, one should consider the firm as a whole, its properties and connections with the external environment, and only then - the components of the firm. A firm as a whole does not exist because, say, a pattern-maker works in it, but, on the contrary, a pattern-maker works because the firm functions. In small systems, there may be exceptions: the system functions thanks to an exceptional component.

Rule 2. The sum of properties (parameters) or a separate property of the system is not equal to the sum of the properties of its components, and the properties of its components cannot be derived from the properties of the system (the property of non-additivity of the system).

Example. All parts as components technical system technological, and the product is not technological, since its layout is unsuccessful, the combination of parts is complex. When designing the product, the principle "simplicity of design is the measure of the designer's mind" was not followed. To ensure the manufacturability of a technical system, it is necessary to simplify its kinematic diagram and layout, reduce the number of components, and ensure approximately the same accuracy of connections.

Rule 3. The number of system components that determine its size should be minimal, but sufficient to achieve the goals of the system. The structure of, for example, a production system is a combination of organizational and production structures.

Rule 4. To simplify the structure of the system, it is necessary to reduce the number of management levels, the number of connections between the components of the system and the parameters of the management model, automate the processes of production and management.

Example. It is required to analyze the complexity of the structure small system - a five-person firm providing intermediary services in the field of small cargo transportation. The structure of the company: administration, accounting, marketing, technical, production, financial departments, garage, control room, personnel department, i.e. the company has nine divisions. She must develop regulations on her divisions, plan, record and control the work performed and their payment. Obviously, nine divisions for five people is a contrived structure of the company, "meeting" the requirements of fashion, but not the rationality of the structure and cost savings. In practice, at an early stage of the formation of market relations, the structures of firms often meet to a greater extent not the requirements of the economy, but rather the ambitions of investors. Rational structure of the company: manager, accountant-dispatcher, three drivers. Functions of administration, marketing, technical and production departments performed by the head of the company. The functions of the accounting, financial department, dispatching office are carried out by the accountant-dispatcher. Drivers carry out production assignments and maintain their vehicles.

Rule 5. The structure of the system should be flexible, with the least number of rigid connections, capable of quickly readjusting to perform new tasks, provide new services, etc. System mobility is one of the conditions for its rapid adaptation to market requirements.

Example. It is required to compare the level of rigidity of two production systems that produce similar products. The first system has a flow-mechanized conveyor organization of production, the second - the organization of production on the basis of integrated production automated modules, characterized by fast readjustment from one operation (part) to another. The organization of labor in the first system is conveyor, with the assignment of each worker to a specific operation (workplace), in the second - brigade. The mobility of the second system is higher than that of the first, both in the flexibility of the means of labor and in the organization of labor itself. Therefore, under conditions of reduction life cycle of production and the duration of its release, the second system is more progressive and efficient in comparison with the first.

Rule 6. The structure of the system should be such that changes in the vertical connections of the components of the system have a minimum impact on the functioning of the system. To do this, it is necessary to justify the level of delegation of powers by the subjects of management, to ensure the optimal independence and independence of management objects in socio-economic and production systems.

Rule 7. Horizontal isolation of the system, ie, the number of horizontal connections between the components of one level of the system should be minimal, but sufficient for the normal functioning of the system. A decrease in the number of connections leads to an increase in the stability and efficiency of the functioning of the system. On the other hand, the establishment of horizontal connections allows for the implementation of informal relationships, facilitates the transfer of knowledge and skills, and ensures the coordination of the actions of the components of the same level to achieve the goals of the system.

Rule 8. The study of the hierarchy of the system and the process of its structuring should begin with the definition of higher-level systems (to whom or where this system is subordinate) and establishing its links with these systems.

When structuring the system, one should use methods of analysis and synthesis. First, one person (group) builds the structure of the system (analyzes, determines the intra-system hierarchy), removes the connections between the components and transfers the set with the names of the components to another person (group) to assemble the system (synthesis). If the results of analysis and synthesis coincide, that is, after assembling the system, there will be no extra components left, and the system is functioning, then we can assume that the analysis and synthesis have been performed correctly, the system has been structured

Rule 9. Due to the complexity and multiplicity of the description, the system should not try to learn all its properties and parameters. Everything should have a reasonable limit, an optimal limit.

Rule 10. When establishing interconnections and interaction of the system with the external environment, it is necessary to build a "black box" and formulate first the "output" parameters, then determine the impact of macro- and microenvironment factors, requirements for, "input", feedback channels and, last of all, design process parameters in the system.

Rule 11. The number of connections of the system with the external environment should be minimal, but sufficient for the normal functioning of the system. Excessive growth in the number of links complicates the controllability of the system, and their insufficiency reduces the quality of control. At the same time, the necessary independence of the system components must be ensured. To ensure the mobility and adaptability of the system, it must be able to quickly change its structure.

Rule 12. In the context of the development of global competition and international integration, one should strive to increase the degree of openness of the system, provided that its economic, technical, informational and legal security is ensured.

Rule 13. For the construction, operation and development of the system in the context of expanding international integration and cooperation, its compatibility with other systems should be achieved in terms of legal, information, scientific, methodological and resource support based on country and international standardization. international standards on systems of measures and measurements, quality systems, certification, audit, financial reporting and statistics, etc.

Rule 14. To determine the strategy for the functioning and development of the system, a tree of goals should be built.

Rule 15. To increase the rationale for investment in innovation and other projects, it is necessary to study the dominant (prevailing, strongest) and recessive features of the system and invest in the development of the first, most effective ones.

Rule 16. Of all the goals of the first level listed in rule 14, priority should be given to the quality of any management objects as the basis for meeting market requirements, saving resources on a global scale, ensuring safety, improving the quality of life of the population.

Rule 17. In shaping the mission and goals of the system, priority should be given to the interests of the higher-level system as a guarantee of solving global problems

Rule 18. Of all the quality indicators of systems, priority should be given to their reliability as a set of manifested properties of reliability, durability, maintainability and preservation.

Rule 19. The efficiency and prospects of the system is achieved by optimizing its goals, structure, management system and other parameters. Therefore, the strategy for the functioning and development of the system should be formed on the basis of optimization models.

Rule 20. In formulating the objectives of the system, the uncertainty of information support should be taken into account. The probabilistic nature of situations and information at the stage of forecasting goals reduces the real effectiveness of innovation.

Rule 21. When constructing a tree of goals and formulating a system's strategy, it should be remembered that the goals of the system and its components in semantic and quantitative meanings, as a rule, do not coincide. However, all components must perform a specific task to achieve the goal of the system. If the goal of the system can be achieved without any component, then this component is superfluous, contrived, or it is the result of poor-quality system structuring. This is a manifestation of the system's emergence property.

Rule 22. When constructing a tree of goals of the system and optimizing its functioning, one should study the manifestation of the property of its multiplicativity. For example, the reliability of a system is determined not by adding, but by multiplying the reliability factors of its components.

Rule 23. When building the structure of the system and organizing its functioning, it should be borne in mind that all processes are continuous and interdependent. The system functions and develops on the basis of contradictions, competition, a variety of forms of functioning and development, the ability of the system to learn. The system exists as long as it functions. Rule 24. When forming the strategy of the system, it is necessary to provide an alternative way of its functioning and development on the basis of forecasting various situations. The most unpredictable pieces of the strategy should be planned in several ways, taking into account different situations.

Rule 25. When organizing the functioning of a system, it should be borne in mind that its efficiency is not equal to the sum of the efficiency of functioning of subsystems (components). When the components interact, a positive (additional) or negative synergy effect occurs. To obtain a positive synergy effect, you must have high level organization of the system.

Rule 26. To reduce the inertia of the system, that is, to increase the rate of change in output parameters when changing the input parameters or parameters of the system functioning, production should be oriented towards integrated automated modules and systems that ensure production mobility and quick response to changes. Rule 27. In a rapidly changing environment, the system must be able to quickly adapt to these changes. The most important tools for increasing the adaptability of the system's functioning are strategic market segmentation and the design of goods and technologies based on the principles of standardization and aggregation.

Rule 28. To improve the efficiency of the system functioning, it is necessary to analyze and predict the parameters of its organization: indicators of proportionality, parallelism, continuity, direct flow, rhythm, etc., to ensure their optimal level.

Rule 29. The structure and content of the system are formed on the ideas and principles of standardization, without which it cannot function. Global competition is increasing the share of standardized systems and their components, especially on an international scale.

Rule 30. The only way to develop organizational, economic and production systems is innovative. The introduction of innovations (in the form of patents, know-how, R&D results, etc.) in the field of new goods, technologies, methods of organizing production, management, etc. serves as a factor in the development of society.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists using the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

FEDERAL STATE BUDGETED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

"TYUMEN STATE UNIVERSITY"

Course work

in the discipline "Management Theory"

Topic: The role of a systems approach in the functioning and development of organizations

1st year student

Specialties Management

Distance learning

Popova T.Yu.

Checked

Uzhakhova L.M.

INTRODUCTION

In the context of the transition of the economy of our country to the phase of sustainable economic growth, the role of the scientific approach in increasing the efficiency of organization management and the development of management decisions is increasing. The main factor in the scientific approach to improving management is the study of management systems. The use of a systematic approach to management allows you to develop a strategy for the development of an organization, justify plans and management decisions, monitor their implementation, identify a reserve for increasing the efficiency of an organization, evaluate the results of the functioning of organizations, their divisions and employees.

The systematic approach has its roots in antiquity. From the very beginning, it, perhaps unconsciously and in implicit forms, was used in decisions and in research of various nature. Even today, the systems approach is used everywhere.

The use of a systems approach in management allows you to see the organization in the unity of its constituent parts, which are inextricably linked with the external environment. Managers can more easily align their specific work with the work of the organization as a whole if they understand the organization's system and their role in it. This understanding is especially important for senior managers because further development of the organization depends on their decisions.

A systems approach encourages the necessary balance to be maintained between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire organization. The use of a systematic approach makes us think about the importance of communications, information flows passing through the entire system.

A systems approach helps to identify the reasons for poor decisions, and it provides tools and techniques to improve planning and control.

The relevance of the study is as follows: the systemic management of an organization is especially important, since for the development of the correct successful strategy development, for the successful functioning of a company, it is necessary to analyze many factors, both internal and external, that affect it.

The object of the research is the oil transportation enterprise OAO Sibnefteprovod, a branch of the Ishim UMN.

The subject of the course work is the place and role of a systems approach in management.

The purpose of the course work is to consider a systematic approach to management at OJSC "Sibnefteprovod" branch of the Ishim UMN.

The main objectives of the course work are:

studying the essence and significance of a systematic approach to management;

consideration of the main elements and types of the organizational system;

to acquire the skills of distinguishing systemic technologies for managing organizations for a conscious choice of technologies for solving practical problems in companies;

to form an idea of \u200b\u200bthe patterns of development of control systems in the form of a variety of classes of systems with different levels of development;

consider the essence, structure, principles of functioning of a systematic approach to management;

The structure of the work consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion and a list of used literature.

In the introduction, the relevance of the topic is studied, the main goal is set, on the basis of which the corresponding tasks are highlighted, and the methodological base is considered.

The first chapter is devoted to the study of theoretical material, where questions such as: the essence, characteristics and principles of the systems approach are considered. Along with these questions, the purpose of the first part of the work is to understand the systems approach as such.

The practical significance of the course work is determined by the study of the features of the systematic approach to personnel development at OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishim UMN, as well as the main conclusions and proposals can be used in the activities of organizations in order to develop their systematic approach to management.

The theoretical basis of the research is normative and legislative acts, educational literature on the study of management systems, management, management theory, devoted, including to the issues of conflict management, by such authors as: O.N. Zharikov, M.M. Zakharov, K.N. Lebedev and V.I. Mukhin, E.M. Korotkov, N.V. Mineeva, V.N. Popov, S.V. Rogozhin, A.M. Starastenko, V.F. Ukolov, A.V. Shegda, S. Ya Yanova and others, as well as special literature, legal sources and documentation on the organization under study.

DCHAPTER 1. ESSENCE, CHARACTERISTIC AND PRINCIPLES OF THE SYSTEM APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATION

systematic approach organizational management

1.1 The essence and significance of a systematic approach to management

A systematic approach to management is based on the fact that every organization is a system consisting of parts, each of which has its own goals. The leader should proceed from the fact that in order to achieve the overall goals of the organization, it is necessary to consider it as unified system... At the same time, strive to identify and evaluate the interaction of all its parts and combine them on a basis that will allow the organization as a whole to effectively achieve its goals. (The achievement of the goals of all subsystems of the organization is a desirable phenomenon, but almost always not real).

A system is a set of interacting elements. There are open and closed systems.

A closed system has rigid fixed boundaries, its actions are relatively independent of the environment surrounding the system.

An open system is characterized by interaction with the external environment. Such a system is not self-sustaining, it depends on energy, information, materials that come from outside. An open system must be able to adapt to changes in the external environment in order to continue to function.

The systems approach is a comprehensive study of a phenomenon or process as a whole from the standpoint of systems analysis, i.e. clarification of a complex problem and its structuring into a series of problems solved using economic and mathematical methods, finding criteria for their solution, specifying goals, designing an effective organization to achieve goals.

Systems engineering is an applied science that studies the tasks of real creation of complex control systems.

The systems approach eliminates the main disadvantage of the approaches of various schools of management, which is that they focus on one important element. A systematic approach means analysis not separately, but in a system, i.e. a certain connection between the elements of this system.

System analysis includes:

analysis and description of the principles of construction and operation of the system as a whole;

analysis of the features of all components of the system, their interdependencies and internal structure;

establishing the similarities and differences between the system under study and other systems;

transfer, according to certain rules, of the properties of the model to the properties of the system under study.

We can also say that the systemic approach is a direction of the methodology of scientific knowledge and practical activity, which is based on the study of any object as a complex integral social economic system.

The study of the essence of control should begin with the definition of its components and the relationship between them and the external environment, establishing the differences between the control of the functioning of the system under given conditions and the control of the development of the system.

The purpose of control in the first case is to eliminate internal and external disturbances without changing the output parameters of the system, and in the second, to change the input and output parameters in accordance with changes in the external environment.

The regulation of the system ensures that its activity is such that the state of the output of the system is equalized at a given rate. Consequently, the main task comes down to establishing a given state of the system's functioning, provided for by planning as proactive control. The complexity of management depends primarily on the number of changes in the system and its environment. All changes have certain patterns or are random. The essence of management can be viewed as a set of the following concepts: management organization, management process and information.

It is possible to speak about the organization of management only when the purpose and object of management are highlighted. Therefore, the effectiveness of the organization of management largely depends on the clarity of the formulation of management objectives.

The main provision of the systems approach is that if an element belongs to the system or is contained in it, then it is always smaller than the system.

As an integrated methodology of the process of cognition and analysis of systems, the systems approach is characterized by the following main features:

the object under study is assessed as a whole, regardless of the point of view under consideration;

the solution of particular problems is subject to the solution of problems common to the entire system;

cognition of the object is not limited only to the mechanism of functioning, but expands to reveal the internal laws of the development of the object;

elements of the system that are of secondary importance in some conditions may become significant when circumstances change.

Consider the basic principles of the systematic approach (Fig.1.1.)

1. Unity - the system is viewed as a single whole and as a set of parts.

2. Integrity, allowing to consider simultaneously the system as a whole and at the same time as a subsystem for higher levels.

3. Dynamism - the ability of a system to change its state under the influence of directed or random factors.

The principles of the systems approach		Unity

		Integrity

		Dynamism

		Interdependence of the system and the environment

		Hierarchy

		Organization

		Plurality,

		Decomposition

Figure: 1.1 Principles of the systems approach

4. The interdependence of the system and the environment, i.e. the system shows its properties in the process of interaction with the environment.

5. Hierarchy ie ranking of parts, each element of the system is considered as a subsystem, and the system itself - as an element of a more complex system.

6. Organization - putting in order the constituent parts and the connections that unite them.

7. Plurality, which allows using a variety of cybernetic, economic and mathematical models to describe individual elements and the system as a whole.

8. Decomposition - the ability to dismember an object into its component parts, each of which has goals arising from the overall goal of the system.

A modern leader must have a systematic thinking, because:

A manager must perceive, process and systematize a huge amount of information and knowledge that is necessary for making management decisions;

The leader needs a systematic methodology, with the help of which he could correlate one area of \u200b\u200bactivity of his organization with another, prevent quasi-optimization of managerial decisions;

The manager must see the forest behind the trees, the private - the general, rise above everyday life and realize what place his organization occupies in the external environment, how it interacts with another, larger system of which it is a part;

A systematic approach to management allows the manager to more productively implement his main functions: forecasting, planning, organization, leadership, control.

The systematic approach makes it possible to comprehensively evaluate any production and economic activity and the activity of the management system at the level of specific characteristics. This will help to analyze any situation within a single system, to identify the nature of the problems of entry, process and exit. The use of a systematic approach allows you to best organize the decision-making process at all levels in the management system.

Thus, the systems approach is a comprehensive study of a phenomenon or process as a whole from the standpoint of systems analysis, i.e. clarification of a complex problem and its structuring into a series of problems solved using economic and mathematical methods, finding criteria for their solution, specifying goals, designing an effective organization to achieve goals. The principles of the system approach are: unity, integrity, dynamism, interdependence of the system and environment, hierarchy, organization, multiplicity and decomposition.

1.2 The main elements and types of organizational management system

Any organization is considered as an organizational and economic system that has inputs and outputs and a certain number of external relations.

The concept of "organization" should be defined. There have been various attempts in history to identify this concept.

1. The first attempt was based on the idea of \u200b\u200bexpediency. Organization is a purposeful arrangement of parts of a whole that has a specific purpose.

2. Organization - a social mechanism for achieving goals (organizational, group, individual).

3. Organization - harmony, or correspondence, between parts and the whole.

Any system develops on the basis of the struggle of opposites.

An organization is a deliberately coordinated social entity with defined boundaries, with a certain set of interrelated goals.

Organization as a system is a set of interrelated elements that form integrity. Any organization is an open system as it interacts with the external environment. In any organization, three key processes are implemented:

obtaining resources from the external environment;

product manufacturing;

transferring it to the external environment.

The main flows in the organization (at the input of the system - the flow of materials, labor, capital; at the output - the finished product (goods, services).

Organization as a system for coordinating people's behavior provides a process for achieving goals. The activities of the organization's members are implemented within the framework and depends on the effectiveness of the established links between them. In order for an organization to effectively fulfill its functions to achieve goals, they use motivation, incentives, power, leadership, conflict management, organizational culture, etc. All organizations, regardless of goals, type and end result, have characteristics common to all complex organizations.

Today, an organization can be defined as a social community that brings together a set of individuals to achieve a common goal, which (individuals) act on the basis of certain procedures and rules.

Based on the previously given definition of the system, we define the organizational system.

An organizational system is a specific set of internally interconnected parts of an organization that forms a kind of integrity.

The main elements of the organizational system (and hence the objects of organizational management) are:

Production;

Marketing and Sales;

Finance;

Information;

Personnel, human resources - have a system-forming quality, the efficiency of using all other resources depends on them.

These elements are the main objects of organizational management.

But the organizational system has another side:

People. The manager's job is to facilitate the coordination and integration of human activities.

Targets and goals. An organizational goal is an ideal blueprint for the future state of an organization. This goal helps to unite the efforts of people and their resources. The goals are formed on the basis of common interests, therefore the organization is a tool for achieving goals.

Organizational structure. Structure is a way of bringing together the elements of a system. Organizational structure is a way of connecting various parts of an organization into a certain integrity (the main types of organizational structure are hierarchical, matrix, entrepreneurial, mixed, etc.). When we design and maintain these structures, we are in control.

Specialization and division of labor. This is also an object of management. The fragmentation of complex production processes, operations and tasks into components that imply the specialization of human labor.

Organizational power is the right, ability (knowledge + skills) and readiness (will) of a leader to pursue his own line in the preparation, adoption and implementation of managerial decisions. Each of these components is required for the exercise of power. Power is interaction. A powerless and ineffective manager cannot organize the function of coordination and integration of people's activities. Organizational power is not only a subject, but also an object of management.

Organizational culture is a system of traditions, beliefs, values, symbols, rituals, myths, norms of communication between people inherent in an organization.

Organizational culture gives the organization its individuality, its own face. Importantly, it unites people, creates organizational integrity.

Organizational boundaries are tangible and intangible constraints that fix the isolation of a given organization from other objects in the external environment of the organization. The manager must have the ability to expand (moderately) the boundaries of his own organization. In moderation - it means taking only what you can keep. Managing boundaries means defining them in time.

Organizational systems can be divided into closed and open:

A closed organizational system is one that has no connection with its external environment (i.e. does not exchange products, services, goods, etc. with the external environment). An example is subsistence farming.

An open organizational system has links with the external environment, i.e. other organizations, institutions that have links with the external environment.

Thus, an organization as a system is a set of interrelated elements that form integrity (i.e., internal unity, continuity, mutual connection). Any organization is an open system, because interacts with the external environment. It receives resources from the environment in the form of capital, raw materials, energy, information, people, equipment, etc., which become elements of its internal environment. Part of the resources with the help of certain technologies is processed, converted into products and services, which are then transferred to the external environment.

CHAPTER 2. THE ROLE OF SYSTEM ANALYSIS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF OJSC SIBNEFTEPROVOD ISHIMSKOE UMN

2.1 The value of a systems approach in the management of an organization

The value of a systems approach is that managers can more easily align their specific work with the work of the organization as a whole if they understand the system and their role in it. This is especially important for the CEO because a systems approach encourages him to maintain the necessary balance between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire organization. He makes him think about the flows of information passing through the entire system, and also emphasizes the importance of communication. A systems approach helps identify the reasons for poor decision making, and provides tools and techniques to improve planning and control.

Undoubtedly, a modern leader must have a systemic mindset. Systems thinking not only contributed to the development of new ideas about the organization (in particular, special attention was paid to the integrated nature of the enterprise, as well as the paramount importance and importance of information systems), but also provided the development of useful mathematical tools and techniques that greatly facilitate the adoption of managerial decisions, the use of more advanced planning and control systems. Thus, the systematic approach allows us to comprehensively assess any production and economic activity and the activity of the management system at the level of specific characteristics. This will help to analyze any situation within a single system, to identify the nature of the problems of entry, process and exit. The use of a systematic approach allows you to best organize the decision-making process at all levels in the management system.

Taking into account a systematic approach to management is very important for any organization. Each organization has its own system. Each system has its own inherent features, its own reaction to management, its forms of possible deviation from the program, its own ability to respond to various kinds of influences.

The systems approach assumes the presence of a special unity of the system with the environment, which is defined as a set of external elements that affect the interaction of the system's elements.

A comprehensive study of the connections of elements (subsystems) is necessary to build a model of a management object - a firm or an enterprise. Experiments with the model make it possible to improve management decisions, that is, to find ways to most effectively achieve common goals.

The entire life of the organization depends on a competent systematic approach to management. It has been and will be used for centuries to optimally calculate the building and development of an organization.

2. 2 Analysis of the systematic approach to personnel development at OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoe UMN

To retain personnel at enterprises, special attention is paid to the issues of stimulating labor, finding ways to motivate it, allocating significant funds for social payments.

Serious work in OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoe UMN, along with the leadership of the organization, are also carried out by trade unions. Together they manage 567 employees. The average age of the staff is 45.1 years. Expenses for retraining and professional development of personnel in 2012 amounted to 9 184 thousand rubles, which is 1.64 times more than the previous period. In other words, 16,089.8 rubles are spent per employee in the organization.

In 2012, the number of employees who improved their qualifications and underwent retraining amounted to 252 people, which amounted to 44.4% of the average number of employees against 40.3% in 2011. This once again shows that the process of working with personnel is not allowed to take its course , and it is planned in advance, funds are allocated and a lot of organizational work is carried out to ensure the training of personnel, their training and retraining. The professionalism of personnel is the most important task in working with personnel.

The management of OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishim UMN uses a systematic approach to personnel development. The personnel policy of the enterprise is considered as a guarantee of high production and economic achievements, and in the organization they are really high. For this, a complex of social programs has been developed aimed at the development and motivation of personnel, ensuring the activation of the role of employees in the processes of managing production and economic activities. Complexity and features production process determine the increased requirements for professional training and personal qualities of employees. Therefore, the company does everything to create a close-knit team of qualified specialists and workers. Suffice it to emphasize that the staff turnover at the enterprise in recent years has reached 4-5%, and in 2011. it was only 2.6%

The most important task of the personnel policy of OAO Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN is to focus on its own personnel, whose qualifications are high demands. A corporate culture and mutual support in work are cultivated.

The process of personnel training and development is based on the system of continuous professional education, and recently more and more emphasis is being placed on training for a specific task. The Company is successfully implementing a program to improve the educational level of managers and specialists. There is no data on the quality of work of employees who have completed training, which makes it impossible to calculate economic effect from training and advanced training. The disadvantage in the work is that when the grade increases, some workers do not receive a transfer in accordance with the grade during the year, which leads to a decrease and obsolescence of the qualifications of trained workers.

In 2012, actually trained:

In third-party training centers with a plan of 252 people, 252 people were trained. Expenses for training at third-party educational institutions amounted to 2,389 thousand rubles;

In the NOU NPO "TNPL" 275 people were trained, incl. 248 workers and 27 specialists. The actual costs of training at the NPO NPO "TNPL" amounted to 6 182 thousand rubles.

Two people from among the trainees quit on their own, which led to a loss of 44,960 rubles, this reduces the return on trained employees. To do this, it is necessary to include in the collective agreement or contract with employees a clause on the mandatory period of work after training or the return of funds spent on training.

The company is actively working on personnel development. The percentage of managers and specialists with higher professional education is growing. In 2012, the organization had about 98.0% of managers and a specialist with higher education... The number of employees who have been trained in various advanced training programs is constantly increasing. The top management of the Company demonstrates a high and purposeful orientation towards development, motivating employees by personal example.

In addition, great attention is constantly paid to improving the general educational and cultural level of personnel. All this creates conditions for constant professional development, and most employees understand the value of training and professional experience.

To develop the potential of specialists, work is constantly underway to train a reserve of personnel for managerial positions. This once again emphasizes that a systematic approach to work with personnel is provided in society. The experience used in society is interesting in planning and monitoring the individual training of reservists, their training in all areas of management, economics, finance, production and personnel management, systems of motivation and remuneration, and the development of corporate competencies. Conditions are created at the enterprise for personnel rotation, employees are given the opportunity to get new positions and really implement their professional growth.

The experience of the Company in the implementation of a new form of certification of managers and specialists is also noteworthy. An annual interview is held, which has found understanding and active support from the leaders. The results of certification are used in the formation official salaries managers and specialists with the introduction of a new wage system, as well as individual development plans for these categories of workers. If in 2011 the percentage of employees who passed certification in the form of an annual interview was 69.0%, in 2012 it has already become 98.2%.

Particular attention is paid to youth. The company has established and operates a Committee for Work with Youth, which contributes to the increase in business activity and creative community not only of young specialists, but also of all employees of the Company under the age of 30.

The work carried out in the field of strengthening the role of enterprise managers and their trade union organizations in the implementation of social programs is bringing ever more significant results and more and more effectively affects production results.

2.2 Proposals for the development of a systematic approach to the management of OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye MN

The use of a systems approach in management allows you to see the organization in the unity of its constituent parts, which are inextricably linked with the external environment. It should be borne in mind that a systems approach is a way of thinking in relation to the organization and management, helping the leader to better understand the organization and more effectively achieve its goals.

The following prerequisites for the formation of a systematic approach in assessing management efficiency can be distinguished:

growing influence of the human factor in management. The more complex the structure of the managed object or, conversely, the more centralized the management in the firm, the more significant the influence of the subjective approach of management on decision-making becomes;

rapid change in environmental factors: laws and regulations. The coefficients used in the estimates in some cases turned out to be outdated and did not reflect the actual state of the company;

acceleration of scientific and technological progress: techniques and technologies. The product life cycle was shortened so much that the use of the same management assessment methods was a distorting factor.

The systematic approach is an assessment of a large amount of information of various nature using universal indicators. The systems approach includes the following sections:

Identification of all aspects of the assessed criterion;

Investigation of each aspect of the assessed criterion by appropriate methods of analysis;

Universalization of the obtained assessment results;

Processing of results;

The system approach is based on the idea of \u200b\u200bdecomposition and integration of the system, its subsystems and elements when analyzing the relationship between the organization and the external environment and making management decisions that provide an integrated approach to its functioning and obtaining the desired result, taking into account the combined impact of external and internal factors.

In a simplified form, Sibnefteprovod OJSC can be represented as an open system (Fig. 2.2.), Which through inputs receives information, capital, human resources, materials and equipment (technology) from the external environment, and returns oil transportation services to the external environment.

In the process of functioning of this system, OJSC Sibnefteprovod transforms inputs (resources entering the inputs) into outputs. With the effective transformation of resources at OJSC Sibnefteprovod, an additional cost of outputs is formed in relation to inputs, as a result of which additional outputs are formed: sales increase, profit is generated, market share is increased, the organization's social responsibility is realized, the needs of employees are met, the organization is grown, etc. etc.

External environment

	Organization (transforming inputs and inputs)
Inputs Outputs

Figure: 2.2 Organization as an open system

The management process of OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN, carried out using management mechanisms, is a purposeful and rational process. As a result of this process, the initial situation at the input of the system (1) is transformed into the desired situation at its output (0), which is determined by strategic management aimed at achieving certain goals of the organization. For the optimality and purposefulness of the process, the implementation of the necessary control function must be ensured.

Decomposition of the system, implemented within the framework of a systematic approach, is the main method that allows you to penetrate into the essence of a particular object, a problem, without violating an integrated approach in the formation of management decisions. The systems approach allows you to take into account the relationship between the elements of the system (that is, the organization) and specific environmental factors in their relationship. Decomposition and structuring of the system, its subsystems and elements, combined with the integration of assessing the consequences of decisions made, are the main tools of a systematic approach in complex work on managing an organization.

Since decisions depend on information, and that, in turn, on communications, the organization is built on the basis of an analysis of information needs and communication networks. The focus is on the decision-making process, rather than on the activities or structure of departments, because it is in the decision-making process that goals and strategy are set and actions are directed that lead the company to success or failure.

Since in order to understand the behavior of a system, we must investigate both its components and their interaction with each other, then to understand the organization it is necessary:

1) know the subsystems or main areas of solutions;

2) understand how decisions are actually made;

3) understand the way in which solution areas are connected by communication channels carrying information flows.

However, if we are interested not only in this organization, but also in its development, we should also determine what the main decisions should be; how these decisions should be made; what information is needed for this and what communication channels are needed to transfer it.

The systematic approach to OJSC Sibnefteprovod in the sense outlined above can be divided into the following stages:

1. Setting goals.

2. Definition of subsystems, or main areas of solutions.

3. Analysis of solution areas and identification of information needs.

4. Designing communication channels for information flows.

5. Grouping solution areas to reduce communication congestion.

A systematic approach to management involves the consideration of management as a procedure or process of making managerial decisions.

The management process at OAO Sibnefteprovod Ishim UMN, in addition to management, includes such important functions as planning, organization, management (in the narrow sense) and communications.

1. Planning. The planning function at OAO Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN includes the choice of the organization's goals, as well as the definition of policies, programs, actions and methods of achieving them. Planning essentially provides the basis for integrated decision making.

2. Organization. Organizational function at OAO Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN is aimed at uniting people and material, financial and other resources into a system in such a way that the joint activities of production personnel ensure the solution of problems facing the organization. This function of leadership includes the definition of those types of administrative activities that are necessary to achieve the goals of the enterprise, the allocation of these activities by divisions, granting rights and establishing responsibility for their use. Thus, the organization function provides the relationship, or interdependence, between various subsystems and the entire system as a whole.

3. Management (in the narrow sense). The control function at OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoe UMN, in essence, ensures the operation of various subsystems in accordance with the general goal. Management consists in monitoring the activities of subsystems with subsequent adjustments to ensure the implementation of the plan by the entire organization.

4. Communication. The communication function at OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN consists mainly in transferring information between the centers of various subsystems and organizations that ensure decision-making. In addition, the communication function includes the mutual exchange of information with the outside world.

Planning plays a special role in the management of OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN - the process by which the system uses its capabilities to change external and internal conditions. This is the most dynamic function and is used to build a solid foundation for other management activities. The purpose of the planning function is to create a coherent decision-making system that improves the performance of an organization.

The management of Sibnefteprovod OJSC is actively using the Ishim UMN, continuing to develop, a systematic approach to management. The main goals and directions were determined further development organizations: increasing the competitiveness and quality of products, income, entering new markets and increasing its presence in the already developed ones, increasing the volume of oil transportation, overall stable growth, transition to a more advanced technological level of production and a qualitatively new level of management, continuous improvement of all subsystems of the organization, reduction of costs and losses, etc.

To achieve these goals, a systematic approach to problem solving is required. Separate solutions to seemingly local problems should not contradict each other, hinder the implementation of the organization's general strategic goals. In order to prevent haphazard management, the specialists of OAO Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN are developing a concept for the further development of the organization, making changes to it necessary for timely adjustment to the constantly changing situation in the outside world. The development concept of OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoye UMN includes the following strategic directions:

improvement of production technology in order to increase the volume of transported oil;

improving the quality of oil to the level of the requirements of European standards;

reducing the cost of oil transportation.

development and growth of the export potential of all products of the society to the countries of far and near abroad, etc.

The data obtained as a result of the analysis of the external and internal environment is used to make decisions that meet the goals set for management. Decisions taken, ultimately, form the organization as such, its policy, and determine the ability to survive in a tough competition, to achieve goals. To achieve the goals, it is necessary that the products are competitive.

To increase the competitiveness of products, increase transportation volumes, maintain the image of OJSC Sibnefteprovod, Ishim UMN, it is necessary to pay more attention to quality in the development and manufacture of products. There is a need for priority unconditional execution of orders for oil transportation, strict control of the agreed terms.

CONCLUSION

The value of a systematic approach to the management of any organization can be understood by considering two aspects of a leader's work. First, it seeks to achieve the overall performance of the entire organization and to prevent the private interests of any one element of the organization from damaging the overall success. Second, he must achieve this in an organizational environment that always creates conflicting goals.

A systematic approach to the organization of management requires a transition from disparate, private models of the economy, an isolated consideration of economic categories and individual private issues to a general concept that allows you to see the entire system of connections and relations in the economy, the whole complex of parameters that determine the best ways of its development and contribute to the implementation of the outlined plans ... The same approach should be used when making decisions at the level of individual organizations and enterprises. Those "who take on particular questions without first solving general questions will inevitably" bump into "these general questions at every step unconsciously for themselves" 6. The systems approach is directly opposite to the practice of local, temporary problem solving without considering the consequences of these decisions in the future.

Nowadays, in almost any scientific work on economic, management problems, references are made to the use of a systematic approach. We can say that the expansion of the application of the systematic approach in making managerial decisions will help to increase the efficiency of the functioning of the country's economic system as a whole and its individual objects.

So, a systematic approach to management is based on the fact that every organization is a system consisting of parts, each of which has its own goals. The leader must proceed from the fact that in order to achieve the overall goals of the organization, it is necessary to consider it as a single system. At the same time, strive to identify and evaluate the interaction of all its parts and combine them on a basis that will allow the organization as a whole to effectively achieve its goals.

LIST USED \u200b\u200bLITERATURE

1. Vershigora, E.E. Management: Textbook. - 2nd ed. - M .: INFRA M, 2010 .-- 283 p.

2. Gaponenko, A.L. Control theory: Textbook. Moscow: RAGS Publishing House, 2011 .-- 558 p.

3. Zharikov, ON A systematic approach to management, Moscow: Unity, 2010.64 p.

4. Zakharov, M.M. Control theory. M .: UNITI-DANA, 2010 .-- 652 p.

6. Lebedev, KN, System approach and management methodology: Monograph. - M .: Krasnaya Zvezda, 2010 .-- 840 p.

7. Mukhin, V.I. Research of control systems. Moscow: Ed. Nat. Institute of Business, 2009. - 412 p.

8. Korenchenko, R.A. General theory of organization. M .: UNITY DANA, 2009.286 p.

9. Korotkov, E.M. Research of control systems: Textbook. - M .: publishing and consulting company "DeKa", 2011. - 285 p.

10. Ignatieva, AV, Maksimtsov MM Research of organization management systems: Textbook for universities M .: UNITI-DANA, 2010. - 157 p.

11. Mineeva, N.V. Research of control systems and systems analysis. SPb .: Publishing house of SPb. University of Economics and Finance, 2010. - 285 p.

12. Nikanorov, S.P. Systems analysis and systems approach. In Sat: System Research. Moscow: Nauka, 2012 .-- 211 p.

13. Pechatnikova, S.M. System management "in the image and likeness" as a factor of the enterprise's survival in the market // Management in Russia and abroad - 2010. - №3. - from. 11 - 17.

14. Popov, V.N., Kas'yanov V.S., Savchenko I.P. Systems analysis in management: Textbook. - M .: KNORUS, 2012 .-- 304 p.

15. Prigogine, A.I. Organization development methods. Moscow: MCFER, 2009 -420 p.

16. Rogozhin, S.V. Organization theory: textbook. M .: "Examination", 2009.315 s,

17. Rozmanov, V.S. Control theory. M .: Unity, 2009 .-- 475 p.

18. Solyannik, G.P., Feklistov I.F. "Fundamentals of management in an organization", S-PB, Publishing house "Polytechnic", 2009 - 267 p.

19. Starastenko, A.M., Yakushina N.V. Research of control systems. Study guide. Oryol: Publishing house ORAGS, 2010 .-- 206 p.

20. Ukolov, V.F, Control theory. - M .: ZAO Publishing House "Economics", 2009. - 656 p,

21. Shegda, A.V. Fundamentals of Management: Textbook. K .: Association of Knowledge, KOO, 2009 .-- 347 p.

22. Yanovaya, S.Ya. Control theory. SPb: Peter, 2010 .-- 479 p.

Posted on Allbest.ur

...

Similar documents

A systematic approach to management and its leading figures. The modern understanding of the systems approach. The concept of a systematic approach, its main features and principles. Differences between traditional and systemic approaches to management. The value of a systematic approach to management.

course work , added on 10/21/2008

The essence of the systematic approach as the basis for complex analysis. The basic principles of the systems approach. A systematic approach to the management of an organization. The importance of a systems approach in management organization... Systematic approach to operations management.

term paper, added 11/06/2008

term paper added 09/10/2014

The essence of a systematic approach to managing an organization. Features of making management decisions. Analysis of the supply of the enterprise with material resources, demand, consumer audience, competition. Competitiveness of products of LLC "Minskmebel".

term paper, added 03/12/2011

The origin of systems theory. Formation of systems thinking and development of the systems paradigm in the XX century. Theoretical foundations of a systematic approach to managing an organization and their application in practice. Stages of development of systemic ideas in management.

term paper, added 06/16/2009

The concept of a systems approach, the evolution of views on it. Organization as a system, its main elements and parameters, their internal interaction. Applicability and effectiveness, especially the use of a systematic approach in managing an organization.

term paper, added 09/27/2010

Acquaintance with the theory of a systematic approach to managing an organization. Analysis of the management system in the state civil service... Formulation of proposals for improving the management system of the committee for social protection of the population.

term paper, added 09/08/2014

The essence and basic principles of a systematic approach in the study of organization management systems. Application of a systematic approach to analyze the product quality management system on the example of an industrial enterprise LLP "Bumkar Trading".

term paper, added 10/11/2010

Basic properties of control systems. The essence, principles and requirements of a systematic approach to the development and implementation of management decisions. The mechanism and procedures for the system analysis of the decision-making process by the administration for the improvement of the city of Yakutsk.

term paper added 04/17/2014

General characteristics of the systems approach. Making management decisions. System analysis. The role and characteristics of the systematic approach in the management of the pension fund in Beloretsk. General characteristics and development of recommendations for improvement.

Federal Agency for Education

State educational institution

higher professional education

"CHELYABINSK STATE UNIVERSITY"

Management department

Course work

In the discipline "Management Theory"

On the topic: "A systematic approach to management"

Completed:

Checked:

Chelyabinsk 2006

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………. ... 3

PartI... Systems approach …………………………………………………… .6

§1. A systematic approach to management and its luminaries …………………………. 6

§2. The modern understanding of the systems approach ………………………. 13

2.1. The concept of a systems approach, its main features and principles ... .13

2.2. Differences between traditional and systematic approaches to management ... 15

§3. The value of a systematic approach to management .. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… .. ……………………………….

PartII... System analysis..………………………………………………….19

§1. From the history of the emergence of system analysis …………………………… 19

§2. Definition of the concept of "system analysis" ………………………… ... …… 21

§3. Concept of the system ………………………………………………………… ... 27

§4. Rules for applying a systematic approach ………………………………… 37

Conclusion ...... ………………………………………………………………… 45

List of used literature …………………………………………… .47

Introduction

In the early 20s of the 20th century, a young biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy began to study organisms as specific systems, summarizing his view in the book Modern Theory of Development (1929). In this book, he developed a systematic approach to the study of biological organisms. In the book "Robots, People and Consciousness" (1967), he transferred the general theory of systems to the analysis of processes and phenomena of social life. 1969 - "General Systems Theory". Bertalanffy turns his systems theory into a general disciplinary science.

Subsequently, thanks to the works of such scientists as N. Wiener, W. Ashby, W. McCulloch, G. Bateson, St. Beer, G. Haken, R. Ackoff, J. Forrester, M. Mesarovich, S. Nikanorov, I. Prigogine, V. Turchin, a number of directions related to the general theory of systems arose - cybernetics, synergetics, the theory of self-organization, the theory of chaos, systems engineering, etc.

The concept of business originated together with the concept of commodity-money relations, i.e. at the community stage of human development. When the main form of "trade" between communities was natural exchange, nomadic money changers appeared who roamed from one community to another and exchanged various goods for their own benefit. This can be considered one of the first manifestations of the entrepreneurial spirit.

Gradually, with the development of commodity-money relations, business also developed. Trade flourished during slavery; later, in the days of feudalism and the prosperity of subsistence farming, the importance of trade in the countryside diminished slightly, but with the development of cities and crafts, it regained its original importance. During the rise of capitalism and the initial accumulation of capital, financial entrepreneurship flourished, and later industrial. In the middle of the 19th century, business took on new forms. If before that the owner was the sole manager, then during the times of rapid industrial growth, the structure has changed significantly.

It was at this stage that management began to develop in the form in which we are accustomed to perceive this word. It cannot be said that it appeared suddenly with the development of capitalism; it existed before. In the days of slavery, there were plantation managers who made sure that the work was done correctly, but it would be more correct to call this supervision than management. In the days of feudalism and the prosperity of natural economy, there were also managers, assistants to the owner, this, probably, can be considered one of the first manifestations of management, and not just supervision over workers, since the manager had the opportunity to maneuver: he could replace the type of work in the form of incentives or punishing the peasants, could lower the tax (albeit only by raising the tax for others). It was a miserable, but still a manifestation of control. But management really began to develop only with the development of capitalism, it was then that there was a need for talented managers who could develop their own strategy for managing the company and developing the business and lead the company to success, or, in extreme cases, save it from bankruptcy.

It was at this time that scientific theories of management began to be applied with direct reliance on various scientific schools, one of which was the school of management. The School of Management includes a systematic, process and situational approach to management. Complementing each other, these approaches form modern science and management practice. However, it should be borne in mind that there are no universally applied techniques or principles that would guarantee effective management in all cases. However, already developed approaches and methods can help managers increase the likelihood of effectively achieving the organization's goals. In my work, I will dwell on the systems approach in more detail.

Currently, the management process is increasingly systemic in nature, the management of any organization is carried out as an impact on a single whole. Managers must clearly understand the interconnectedness of all systems in their company. Thus, the Modern leader must have a systematic thinking, since:

· The manager must perceive, process and systematize a huge amount of information and knowledge that are necessary for making management decisions;

· The manager must see the forest for the trees, for the private - the general, rise above everyday life and realize what place his organization occupies in the external environment, how it interacts with another, larger system, of which it is a part;

· A systematic approach to management allows the manager to more productively implement his main functions: forecasting, planning, organization, leadership, control.

In conclusion, I would like to note that the systematic approach includes a large volume of questions, each of which is multifaceted, interesting and worthy of separate study. But within the framework of my work, I will try to highlight the main principles and provisions of this scientific direction as fully as possible.

PartI... Systems approach

§ 1.A systematic approach to management and its luminaries

The strengthening of the interconnectedness of all aspects of the organization's activities (production, financial, marketing, social, environmental, etc.), as well as the expansion, complication and intensification of both internal and external relations led to the formation of the so-called systemic approach to management in the middle of the 20th century.

He considers the organization as an integral set of various types of activities and elements that are in a contradictory unity and interconnection with the external environment, assumes taking into account the influence of all factors affecting it, and focuses on the relationships between its elements.

In accordance with it, managerial actions not only functionally flow from each other (this was emphasized by the process approach), but all, without exception, exert both direct and indirect effects on each other. Because of this, changes in one link of the organization inevitably cause changes in the rest, and ultimately in it as a whole.

Therefore, each leader, making his own decisions, must take into account their impact on the overall results, and the main goal of management is to integrate the elements of the organization, to find mechanisms to preserve its integrity.

One of the representatives of the systems approach, who first considered the enterprise as a social system, was the American researcher Charles Barnard (1887-1961), who for two decades served as President of the New York Bell Telephone Company. He outlined his ideas in the books Administrator Functions (1938), Organization and Management (1948), and others.

According to Barnard, the physical and biological limitations inherent in humans force them to unite to achieve goals in coordinated groups (social systems). Any such system, as he believed, can be divided into two parts: an organization (a system of consciously coordinated activities of two or more persons), containing only the interaction of people, and other elements.

Any organization, according to Barnard, is hierarchical (this is its main feature), unites individuals who have a conscious common goal, who are ready to cooperate with each other, contribute to a common cause, and submit to a single authority. All organizations (with the exception of the state and the Church) Barnard regarded as private.

Organizations can be formal or informal. Each formal organization includes: a) a system of functioning; b) a system of incentives that encourage people to contribute to group actions; c) a system of power (authority) that persuades group members to agree with the decisions of the administration; d) a logical decision-making system.

The head of a formal organization must ensure the activities of its most important links, take full responsibility for the actions of subordinates, maintain internal communications, formulate goals, find a balance between opposing forces and events, the contribution of people and the satisfaction of their needs.

People will collaborate effectively with the organization if they benefit from it. Therefore, the first responsibility of the leader is to manage the incentives for activity, because orders are perceived only within certain limits.

Barnard believed that the emergence of informal organizations that make the formal more viable is inevitable.

The goal of an informal organization, according to Barnard, is to spread informal information; maintaining the sustainability of the formal organization; ensuring the personal safety of employees, self-respect, independence from the formal organization.

He spoke of the need for careful consideration in management of moral factors, because many failures of administrators are associated with the inability to do this.

Based on a systems approach, Barnard put forward the concept of corporate social responsibility, according to which management should take into account the consequences of decisions made and be responsible for them before society and the individual.

Another representative of the systematic approach can be considered P. Drucker (he is often referred to as the followers of classical school), who made a significant contribution to the creation of a holistic management concept and defining the role of a professional manager in the organization.

In the book "The Practice of Management" Drucker noted the exceptional role of management and the managerial elite, considering them the basis of entrepreneurship and human society.

He defined management as the art of business management and focused on the creative and constructive side of the leader's activity, who, firstly, creates from the available resources a genuine whole, a production unity, and in this respect he is an “orchestra conductor”.

Just as the conductor must always hear the entire orchestra, the manager must keep an eye on the overall activities of the enterprise and the market conditions. He needs to constantly review the enterprise as a whole, but not to lose sight of individual trees behind the forest, because in certain conditions, particular issues become decisive. But the conductor has before him the score written by the composer; the manager is both a composer and a conductor at the same time.

The task of the manager, according to Drucker, is to always remember the prospects of the enterprise, to do everything possible to achieve them. But he cannot be a "universal genius", but must encourage, direct, organize people to do the job.

Drucker referred to the general functions of managers at the enterprise, which are largely determined by its characteristics:

1) organization, classification, distribution of work; creation of the necessary organizational structure, selection of personnel;

2) defining goals, deciding what needs to be done to achieve them, ensuring their implementation by setting specific tasks for people;

3) providing incentives, creating a team of persons responsible for various work, achieving the necessary consistency of their work;

4) analysis of the organization's activities, rationing, assessment of all employees;

5) ensuring the hiring of people.

Society in the early 1950s. This idea seemed alien, so it was rejected, which was the biggest defeat for Drucker in his life. However, today many of its provisions find application in the practice of "social partnership".

Perhaps the most important of Drucker's many ideas was the concept, set out in 1954 in the book "The Practice of Management," according to which it is based on the goals of the organization. Only after their setting, in his opinion, it is possible to determine its functions, system and methods of interaction of elements of the control process. This fundamentally contradicted the logic adopted since the time of A. Fayol, which proceeded from the determining role of functions and process.

American researcher D. Forrester developed a formal model of the organizational system of an industrial enterprise. There were six interconnected flows in it: raw materials, orders, cash, equipment, work force, information.

The difficulty of managing this system, according to Forrester, is that, under the influence of various factors, the future result may not correspond to the expected. This pushes for a policy based on momentary interests, especially given the fact that the term of office of governors and leaders is short. While short-term goals are easier to set, managing complex systems from only these inevitably leads to worse performance.

Thus, psychological factors contribute to the implementation of policies that will provide good results in the near future to the detriment of the future.

In 1956, T. Parsons defined the organization as a complex social system (aggregate actions and interrelated behavior of subjects), which is focused on achieving goals and contributes, in turn, to the implementation of the goals of larger organizations.

Subsystems of the organization are: formal and informal structures, statuses, roles, physical environment. The core is the formal structure. These elements link communication, balance and decision making.

1. Communication is understood as the method by which actions are triggered in various parts of the system, control and coordination are provided. The communication system forms the configuration, structure of the organization.

2. Equilibrium is considered as a mechanism for stabilizing the organizational whole, its adaptation to changing conditions in order to harmonize the needs and attitudes of individuals and the requirements of the organization.

3. The decision-making process is an important means of regulation and governance.

Together, this is defined as an organizational system, the main integrating factor of which is the goal, and the stabilizing factor is the institutional standards that determine the roles of the participants.

According to Parsons, social systems are distributed at four levels of society: primary, psychological, where the elements interact directly; managerial, regulating the process of interaction of the first level; institutional (board of directors), where issues are resolved general order; social, in political spheres.

Parsons put forward the idea of \u200b\u200bfour functional imperatives, the implementation of which ensures the normal state and development of the system: the function of achieving goals; adaptation of the system in relation to the external environment; system integration; regulation of latent voltages.

Within the framework of the systems approach, numerous quantitative control theories have emerged. The impetus for this was the emergence and widespread dissemination of cybernetics, general systems theory, operations research, and other mathematical methods. Proponents of these theories, relying on formalized descriptions of various situations, tried to find optimal solutions to the problems facing the organization using mathematical modeling.

Consider as an example the operations research method that began in the 1940s. in England due to the need to solve some military and strategic problems.

By rational enumeration of options, he solves the following problems:

Inventory management (determination based on costs of the optimal size of reserves);

Distribution of resources between consumers, taking into account the degree of efficiency of their use;

Mass service (determination of rules and sequence of actions that form a particular process);

Route selection and specification of works in time;

Determination of a schedule for the replacement of obsolete equipment.

As a result, long-term forecasting, planning, programming, decision-making in conditions of an excess of information is facilitated, when its accounting, evaluation and systematization by conventional methods is impossible.

Another direction, called econometric, is based on the creation of economic and mathematical models.

Typically, a model of a management process can be represented as a system of equations and inequalities, including a set of variables (known and unknown) and parameters reflecting the relationships between them. By specifying the value of the known variables ("inputs" of the model), it is possible, on the basis of mathematical calculations, to determine the values \u200b\u200bof the unknowns ("outputs"), in other words, to show how the controlled object will (or should) behave when exposed to it in one way or another and to what results will it lead.

But the hopes pinned on the use of quantitative methods did not materialize due to the complexity social systems and the fact that their behavior is poorly quantifiable. Nevertheless, the generalization of the experience gained gave an additional impetus to the development of a systems approach.

In the 1980s. one of the most popular theories within its framework was the concept of "7-S", developed by E. Athos, R. Pascal, T. Peters and R. Waterman, "7-S" are seven interrelated variables whose names in English begin with the letter S: "strategy", "structure", "management system", "personnel", "qualifications of employees", "organizational values", "style".

Changes in one variable through the system of relationships affect the state of the others, therefore maintaining balance and harmony between them is the main task of management.

2. Modern understanding of the systems approach

2.1. The concept of a systems approach, its main features and principles

The systems approach as a general methodological principle is used in various branches of science and human activity. The epistemological basis (epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies the forms and methods of scientific cognition) is the general theory of systems, which was initiated by the Australian biologist L. Bertalanffy (mentioned above). Let's define the features of the systematic approach:

The systems approach is a form of methodological knowledge associated with the study and creation of objects as systems, and applies only to systems.

The hierarchy of cognition, requiring a multilevel study of the subject: the study of the subject itself -<собственный> level; studying the same subject as an element of a wider system -<вышестоящий> level; the study of this subject in relation to the elements constituting this subject -<нижестоящий> level.

The systems approach requires to consider the problem not in isolation, but in the unity of connections with the environment, to comprehend the essence of each connection and individual element, to draw associations between general and particular goals.

With this in mind, we define the concept of a systematic approach:

Systems approach - this is an approach to the study of an object (problem, phenomenon, process) as a system in which the elements, internal and external connections, which most significantly affect the investigated results of its functioning, and the goals of each of the elements, based on the general purpose of the object, are identified.

1. Integrity, allowing to consider simultaneously the system as a whole and at the same time as a subsystem for higher levels.

2. Hierarchy of structure, i.e. the presence of a set (at least two) of elements located on the basis of the subordination of the elements of the lower level to the elements of the higher level. The implementation of this principle is clearly visible on the example of any particular organization. As you know, any organization is the interaction of two subsystems: managing and controlled. One obeys the other.

3. Structuring, which allows you to analyze the elements of the system and their relationship within a specific organizational structure. As a rule, the process of functioning of a system is determined not so much by the properties of its individual elements as by the properties of the structure itself.

4. Pluralitythat allows using a variety of cybernetic, economic and mathematical models to describe individual elements and the system as a whole.

Thus, on the basis of the above, certain conclusions can be drawn, or rather, the difference between the systemic and traditional (analytical) approaches.

2.2. Differences between traditional and systematic approaches to management

The traditional and systemic approaches use both analysis (dividing the whole into parts) and synthesis (combining parts into a whole) when making management decisions. The difference lies in the combination, sequence of these methods. Traditional thinking contains the following sequence of stages: 1) dismemberment (analysis) of what is to be explained; 2) an explanation of the behavior or properties of parts taken separately; 3) unification (synthesis) of these explanations into an explanation of the whole. In the systemic approach, three stages can also be distinguished: 1) the definition of the whole (system), of which the object of interest to us is a part; 2) an explanation of the behavior or properties of this whole (system); 3) an explanation of the behavior or properties of the object of interest to us from the point of view of its functions in this whole, of which it is a part. Those. with a systematic approach, synthesis precedes analysis, and with a traditional approach, vice versa.

In an analytical approach, the subject being explained is considered as a whole that is to be decomposed into parts. In a systematic approach, the subject being explained is considered as part of a whole.

for instance

This difference can be shown using the example of an institution. With an analytical approach to explaining what a university is, it begins to be divided into components: faculties, specialties, departments, groups, subgroups, students. Then the definition of the faculty, department, etc. is given. After that, these definitions are combined, which ends with a definition of what a university is. With a systematic approach to the same problem, it is necessary to start with the selection of the system containing the university - the education system. Then determine the goals and functions of this education system, which is part of the national economy. And only after that it is possible to give a definition of the university from the standpoint of the education system and the national economy.

There are major differences between what is called analytical and systems management. One of them is based on the following principle of consistency: if every part of the system is made to function with maximum efficiency, the system as a whole will not yet function with maximum efficiency as a result. (The whole is not equal to the sum of its components.)

for instance

If we select the best parts from all the best car models and assemble a car from them, then we will not get the best car in the world. If the new head of the shop dramatically increases his efficiency, then this can lead to failures at the plant as a whole.

Thus, the traditional approach to management is based on the premise that the best functioning of the enterprise can be achieved by simply summing its parts in the modes of their best functioning. The principle of consistency states that this condition is not met for complex systems.

So, in this section, we covered the basics of a systems approach. This means that we can draw a small conclusion on the first part of the work, more accurately answer the question of what value a systematic approach to management has.

3. The value of a systems approach in management

The value of a systems approach is that managers can more easily align their specific work with the work of the organization as a whole if they understand the system and their role in it. This is especially important for the CEO because a systems approach encourages him to maintain the necessary balance between the needs of individual departments and the goals of the entire organization. He makes him think about the flows of information passing through the entire system, and also emphasizes the importance of communication. A systems approach helps identify the reasons for poor decision making, and provides tools and techniques to improve planning and control.

PartII... System analysis

§ 1. From the history of the emergence of system analysis

Systems analysis originated in the United States and primarily in the depths of the military-industrial complex. In addition, in the United States, systems analysis has been studied in many government organizations. It was considered the most valuable spin-off achievement in defense and space exploration. In both chambers of the US Congress in the 60s. last century, bills were introduced "on the mobilization and use of the country's scientific and technical forces for the application of systems analysis and systems engineering in order to make the fullest possible use of human resources to solve national problems."

Systems analysis has also been used by managers and engineers in large industrial enterprises. The purpose of applying the methods of systems analysis in industry and in the commercial field is to find ways to obtain high profits.

As of 1969, only in the civilian departments of the United States, systems analysis was used to justify at least 50 types of large projects and programs, covering over 60% of all civil government activities. These include: the program for the exploitation of water resources, forestry management of the country, the design and manufacture of space rockets of the Saturn-5 type, the development of oil and shale deposits, health programs (disease control, reduction of child mortality, etc.).

According to executives at Lockheed and several other firms, a systems approach is the best way to identify possible sources of growth for an industrial firm. In the 70s and 80s. of the last century, people with qualifications in the field of systems disciplines were promoted to the role of top managers of the largest American corporations, since it is precisely such training that largely determines the face of American management.

An example of the use of methods of systems analysis in the United States is the system of program planning, known as "planning-programming-budgeting" (PBB), or abbreviated "program financing".

The elements of the PPB system are: "planning" - the formulation of goals and the establishment of ways to achieve them in possible theaters of military operations; "Programming" - defining the types of military equipment necessary for the implementation of military doctrine, and comparing costs with goals and objectives, taking into account the time factor, developing a detailed list of measures to achieve the set goals; “Budgeting” —the allocation of available or expected resources needed to implement weapons programs. (The programmed weapons development program has also been actively implemented in the USSR since the second half of the 60s of the last century.)

In addition to the use of the PPB system in the United States, a number of forecasting and planning systems are used, which are based on the methods of systems analysis. In particular, the PATTERN information system was used for forecasting and planning R&D, the FAME automated information system was used to manage the Apollo space project at all stages of its development, the QUEST system was used to achieve a quantitative relationship between military tasks and goals, and The SCOR system was the scientific and technical means necessary for their implementation for the same purposes in industry.

The main methodological feature of these systems was the principle of sequential division of each problem into several tasks of a lower level in order to build a "tree of goals".

For example, the PATTERN system made it possible to analyze the needs and interests of the military ministries at various levels of government. Cutting off parts of the "goal tree" at the appropriate level meant the allocation of areas of responsibility for the research activities of a particular ministry, department, industry, research institute and even laboratory.

The systems under consideration made it possible to determine the timing of the solution of scientific and technical problems and the mutual usefulness of the work, helped to improve the quality of decisions made by overcoming the narrow departmental approach to their adoption, rejection of intuitive and volitional decisions, as well as from work that cannot be completed in a timely manner.

§ 2. Definition of the concept of "system analysis"

First of all, let us briefly compare the concepts of "systems analysis" and "systems approach". They are fairly close concepts, although there are certain differences between them. Dialectical logic is at the heart of both systems analysis, which implements in practice the ideas of the systems approach, and the systems approach. The systems approach does not provide a ready-made set of recipes for solving problems; rather, it crystallizes the ability to correctly apply special methods of analysis.

There are different points of view on the content of the concept of "system analysis" and the scope of its application. The study of various definitions of systems analysis allows us to distinguish four of its interpretations.

The first interpretation considers system analysis as one of the specific methods for choosing the best solution to the problem that has arisen, identifying it, for example, with cost-effectiveness analysis.

This interpretation of systems analysis characterizes attempts to generalize the most reasonable methods of any analysis (for example, military or economic), to determine the general laws of its implementation.

In the first interpretation, system analysis is more likely a "systems analysis", since the emphasis is on the object of study (system), and not on the systematic consideration (taking into account all the most important factors and relationships that affect the solution of the problem, the use of a certain logic of finding the best solution etc.)

In a number of works covering certain problems of systems analysis, the word "analysis" is used with such adjectives as quantitative, economic, resource, and the term "system analysis" is used much less frequently.

According to the second interpretation, systems analysis is a specific method of cognition (the opposite of synthesis).

The third interpretation considers systems analysis as any analysis of any systems (sometimes it is added that the analysis is based on a systemic methodology) without any additional restrictions on its scope and methods used.

According to the fourth interpretation, system analysis is a very specific theoretical and applied direction of research, based on a systemic methodology and characterized by certain principles, methods and field of application. It includes both methods of analysis and methods of synthesis that we briefly described earlier.

It seems to us that the fourth interpretation is correct, which most adequately reflects the direction of system analysis and the set of methods it uses.

So, system analysis is a set of certain scientific methods and practical techniques for solving various problems that arise in all spheres of purposeful activity of society, based on a systematic approach and representing the object of research as a system. It is characteristic of systems analysis that the search for the best solution to the problem begins with the definition and ordering of the goals of the system, during the functioning of which the problem arose. At the same time, a correspondence is established between these goals, possible ways to solve the problem that has arisen and the resources required for this.

Systems analysis is characterized mainly by an ordered, logical approach to the study of problems and the use of existing methods for solving them, which can be developed within the framework of other sciences.

The purpose of the system analysis is a complete and comprehensive verification of various options for action in terms of quantitative and qualitative comparison of the resources expended with the resulting effect.

Systems analysis is essentially a means of establishing a framework for the systematic and more effective use of knowledge, judgment and intuition of specialists; it obliges one to a certain discipline of thought.

In other words, systems analysis is systematic methods of assisting the decision-maker in choosing a course of action by examining the entire problem as a whole, identifying ultimate goals and various ways to achieve them, taking into account the possible consequences. Appropriate methods, if possible analytical, are used to obtain qualified judgment on problems.

System analysis is intended to solve primarily semi-structured problems, i.e. problems, the composition of elements and interrelations of which is only partially established, problems that arise, as a rule, in situations characterized by the presence of an uncertainty factor and containing non-formalized elements that cannot be translated into the language of mathematics.

One of the tasks of systems analysis is to reveal the content of the problems facing decision-makers, so that all the main consequences of decisions become obvious to them and they could be taken into account in their actions. System analysis helps the decision-maker to more rigorously assess possible options for action and choose the best one, taking into account additional, non-formalized factors and points that may not be known to specialists preparing the decision.

Let us briefly characterize the methodology of systems analysis using the definition of the methodology of science.

"The methodology of science characterizes the components of a scientific research, its object, subject of analysis, research task (or problem), a set of research tools necessary to solve a problem of this type, and also forms an idea of \u200b\u200bthe sequence of research movement in the process of solving problems."

First, we define the content of the system analysis object, i.e. find out its specifics and place among other related to him scientific directions.

The object of system analysis in the theoretical aspect is the process of preparation and decision-making; in the applied aspect - various specific problems arising in the creation and operation of systems.

In the theoretical aspect, these are, firstly, the general patterns of research aimed at finding the best solutions to various problems based on a systems approach (the content of individual stages of system analysis, the relationships that exist between them, etc.).

Second, specific scientific methods research - defining goals and ranking them, disaggregating problems (systems) into their constituent elements, determination of the relationships that exist both between the elements of the system and between the system and the external environment, etc.

Thirdly, the principles of integrating various research methods and techniques (mathematical and heuristic), developed both within the framework of systems analysis and within other scientific areas and disciplines, into a coherent, interdependent set of methods of system analysis.

In applied terms, system analysis develops recommendations for creating fundamentally new or improved systems.

Recommendations for improving the functioning of existing systems relate to a variety of problems, in particular, the elimination of undesirable situations (for example, a deterioration in the financial and economic situation of an enterprise) caused by a change in factors both external to the system under study and internal ones.

It should be noted that the object of system analysis is at the same time the object of a number of other scientific disciplines, both general theoretical and applied. For example, planning deals with the problems of drawing up a balanced plan. However, the development of such a plan will be greatly facilitated by the use of principles and methods that are developed in the framework of systems analysis to solve any problems.

We believe that it is not possible to single out the subject of systems analysis, that is, to classify systems analysis as a category of sciences, since a number of sciences and other scientific areas are engaged in solving the above problems. (Some of them will be discussed below.)

Unlike many sciences, main goal which is the discovery and formulation of objective laws and patterns inherent in the subject of study, system analysis is mainly aimed at developing specific recommendations, including on the basis of using the achievements of theoretical sciences for applied purposes.

“Its goals, as opposed to those of pure science, are primarily about making recommendations, or at least guesses, for choosing a course of action, rather than simply identifying a problem and predicting its development. Thus, systems analysis is closer to engineering disciplines than science ... science discovers new phenomena, while engineering disciplines use the results of science. Systems analysis differs from engineering disciplines by a more limited ability to use mathematical methods and quantitative information based on real measurements and fairly rigorous calculations, as well as a greater share of heuristic methods.

All this gives reason to talk about the dual nature of systems analysis: on the one hand, this is a theoretical and applied scientific direction, using for practical purposes the achievements of many other sciences, both exact (mathematics) and humanitarian (economics, sociology), and on the other hand - this is art. It combines objective and subjective aspects, and the latter are inherent in both the system analysis process itself and the decision-making process based on its data. In the latter case, the individual characteristics of decision-makers (official, professional, age, due to creative skills and life experience, etc.) have a direct impact on the final solution of the problem.

Systems analysis performs "the role of a framework that combines all the necessary methods, knowledge and actions to solve a problem."

System analysis means a conscious systematic application of the entire set of analysis methods, paying great attention to the issues of uncertainty and checking the results obtained for sensitivity to changes in indicators and factors that determine the functioning of the system. The degree of system sensitivity to changes in these indicators and factors indicates which of them should be paid special attention to, and which can be neglected.

Concluding the consideration of the main methodological components of system analysis, it should be noted that it is inherent in certain principles, logical elements, certain stages and methods of implementation. The presence (without exception) of all these components makes the analysis of any problem systemic.

The above definition of system analysis does not set hard boundaries for it. The question arises: is it possible, within the framework of the outlined concept of systems analysis, to more clearly define its boundaries? One possible approach is to categorize as systemic only analysis that has been performed by an interdisciplinary team.

This requirement is due to the need for an interdisciplinary approach to solving complex problems. However, the criteria for assessing the level of interdisciplinarity have not been established. What fields of expertise should the group belong to? If the team consists only of economists, mathematicians and lawyers, is it interdisciplinary or not? What are the educational requirements and outlook for the members of the interdisciplinary team? What category should the analysis be classified into if a group of analysts of the same scientific profile is headed by a prominent specialist who is well versed in related fields? What are the criteria that characterize the level of consideration of factors in related scientific areas? When can you say that these factors are taken into account? These and similar questions quite naturally arise when trying to categorize systems analysis performed only by an interdisciplinary group. Until there is a clear answer to them, using this constraint will not clarify the definition of systems analysis.

§ 3. The concept of a system

In systems analysis, studies are based on the use of the category of system, which is understood as the unity of interrelated and mutually influencing elements located in a certain pattern in space and time, acting together to achieve a common goal. The system must meet two requirements:

1. The behavior of each element of the system affects the behavior of the system as a whole; the essential properties of the system are lost when it is dismembered.

2. The behavior of the elements of the system and their impact on the whole are interdependent; the essential properties of the elements of the system are also lost when they are separated from the system. Hegel wrote that a hand, separated from the body, ceases to be a hand, because it is not alive.

Thus, the properties, behavior or state possessed by the system differ from the properties, behavior or state of its constituent elements (subsystems). The system is a whole that cannot be understood through analysis. A system is a set of elements that cannot be divided into independent parts.

The set of properties of the system's elements does not represent a general property of the system, but gives some new property. Any system is characterized by the presence of its own, specific pattern of action, which cannot be deduced directly from the mere modes of action of its constituent elements. Any system is a developing system, it has its beginning in the past and its continuation in the future.

The concept of a system is a way to find simple in complex in order to simplify analysis. An elementary system shown in general form is shown in Fig. 1.

Figure: 1. System in general

Its main parts are input, process, or operation, and output.

In any system, the input consists of elements classified according to their role in the processes taking place in the system. The first entry element is the one on which some process or operation is performed. This input is or will be the "load" of the system (raw materials, materials, energy, information, etc.). The second element of the system's input is the external (environment) environment, which is understood as a set of factors and phenomena that affect the processes of the system and are not amenable to direct control by its leaders.

External factors that are not controlled by systems can usually be divided into two categories: random, characterized by distribution laws, unknown laws or acting without any laws (for example, natural conditions); factors at the disposal of a system that is external and active, reasonably acting in relation to the system in question (for example, regulatory documents, targets).

The goals of the external system may be known, not known exactly, not at all known.

The third entry element provides placement and movement of system components, for example, various instructions, provisions, orders, that is, it sets the laws of its organization and functioning, goals, restrictive conditions, etc. Inputs are also classified by content: material, energy, informational or any combination thereof.

The second part of the system is the operations, processes, or channels through which the login elements pass. The system should be arranged in such a way that the necessary processes (production, training, material and technical supply, etc.) act according to a certain law on each input, at the appropriate time to achieve the desired output.

The third part of the system is the output, which is the product or result of its activity. The system at its output must satisfy a number of criteria, the most important of which are stability and reliability. On exit, they judge the degree of achievement of the goals set for the system.

Distinguish between physical and abstract systems. Physical systems are made up of people, products, equipment, machines, and other real or artificial objects. They are opposed to abstract systems. In the latter, the properties of objects, the existence of which may be unknown, except for their existence in the mind of the investigator, are symbols. Ideas, plans, hypotheses and concepts in the field of view of the researcher can be described as abstract systems.

Depending on their origin, they distinguish between natural systems (for example, climate, soil) and those made by man.

According to the degree of connection with the external environment, systems are classified into open and closed.

Open systems are systems that exchange material resources or energy with the environment in a regular and understandable way.

The opposite of open systems are closed systems.

Closed systems operate with relatively little exchange of energy or materials with the environment, for example a chemical reaction in a hermetically sealed vessel. In the business world, closed systems are practically non-existent and the environment is considered to be the main factor in the success and failure of various organizations. However, representatives of various schools of management of the first 60 years of the last century, as a rule, did not care about the problems of the external environment, competition and everything else that is external to the organization. The closed-system approach assumed what should be done to optimize the use of resources, taking into account only what is happening within the organization.

The realities of the surrounding world forced researchers and practitioners to come to the conclusion that any attempt to understand the socio-economic system, considering it closed, is doomed to failure. Moreover, reality is by no means an arena dominated by order, stability and balance: instability and disequilibrium play the dominant role in the world around us. From this point of view, systems can be classified into equilibrium, weakly equilibrium, and strongly nonequilibrium. For socio-economic systems, a state of equilibrium can be observed over a relatively short period of time. For weakly equilibrium systems, small changes in the external environment make it possible for the system in new conditions to achieve a state of new equilibrium. Strongly nonequilibrium systems, which are very sensitive to external influences, under the influence of external signals, even small in magnitude, can rearrange in an unpredictable manner.

By the type of components included in the system, the latter can be classified into machine (car, machine tool), by the type "man - machine" (aircraft - pilot) and by the type "man - man" (the collective of the organization).

According to target criteria, they are distinguished: single-purpose systems, that is, designed to solve one single target task and multi-purpose. In addition, it is possible to single out functional systems that provide a solution or consideration of a separate side or aspect of the problem (planning, procurement, etc.).

Although the main provisions of systems analysis are common to all classes of systems, the specificity of their individual classes requires a special approach to their analysis. The pronounced specificity of socio-economic systems in relation to biological and even more technical ones is due primarily to the fact that a person is an integral part of the former. Therefore, in relation to this class of systems, the analysis should be carried out taking into account the needs, interests and behavior of a person.

With a systematic approach, the country's economy, individual organizations are considered as systems consisting of functionally and structurally separate subsystems that form a number of stable hierarchical levels of management to achieve the ultimate goal.

The consequence of the hierarchical organization is the presence of vertical and horizontal links. Vertical links mediate the interaction of subsystems at various levels of the organization, horizontal - one level. The principle of hierarchical organization is associated with the concept of the relative isolation of subsystems at different levels. Relative isolation means that such subsystems have some independence (autonomy) in relation to the higher and lower subsystems of the hierarchical row, and their interaction is carried out by inputs and outputs. The higher-level systems act by giving a signal to the input of the lower-level ones and observe their state at the output, in turn, the lower-level subsystems act on the higher-level ones, reacting to their signals.

The same object can have many different systems. If we consider a manufacturing enterprise as a collection of machines, technological processes, materials and products that are processed by machines, then the enterprise is presented as a technological system. You can consider the enterprise from the other side: what kind of people work at it, what is their relationship to production, to each other, etc. Then the same enterprise is presented as a social system. Or you can study the enterprise from a different point of view: find out the attitude of managers and employees of the enterprise to the means of production, their participation in the labor process and the distribution of its results, the place this enterprise in the system of the national economy, etc. Here the enterprise is considered as an economic system.

The scientific and technological revolution has caused the emergence of a new object of research in the field of management, called "large systems".

The most important characteristics of large systems are:

1. purposefulness and controllability of the system, the presence of a common goal and purpose for the entire system, set and adjusted in systems of higher levels;

2. a complex hierarchical structure of the organization of the system, providing for a combination of centralized control with the autonomy of parts;

4. integrity and complexity of behavior. The complex, intertwining relationships between variables, including feedback loops, cause a change in one to change many other variables.

Large systems include large production and economic systems (for example, holdings), cities, construction and research complexes.

The overwhelming majority of economic and managerial tasks are of such a nature when it can already be said that we are dealing with large systems. Systems analysis provides special techniques with the help of which a large system, which is difficult for a researcher to consider, could be divided into a number of small interacting systems or subsystems. In this way, large system it is advisable to name one that cannot be investigated otherwise than by subsystems.

In addition to large systems, complex systems are distinguished in the problems of economic management. It is advisable to call a complex system such a system that is built to solve a multipurpose, multidimensional problem. An immediate conclusion from the concept of a complex system for the analysis and design of control systems is the requirement to take into account the following factors:

1. The presence of a complex, composite goal, the parallel existence of different goals or a sequential change of goals.

2. The presence of many structures at the same time in one system (for example, technological, administrative, functional, etc.).

3. The impossibility of describing the system in one language, the need to use a range of languages \u200b\u200bfor the analysis and design of its individual subsystems, for example, a technological scheme for manufacturing products; regulatory legal acts establishing the distribution of responsibilities and rights; document flow diagram and meeting program; the order of interaction between services and departments when developing a draft plan. It is possible to cope with the tasks of analyzing large complex systems only when we have at our disposal a properly organized research system, the elements of which are subordinated to a common goal. This is the main content of Ashby's Law of Necessary Diversity7, from which an important practical recommendation follows. To comprehensively study the economic system and be able to manage it, it is necessary to create a research system comparable in complexity to the economic one; it is impossible to effectively manage a large system with a simple control system; it requires a complex control mechanism. As the complexity of the tasks being solved grows, the control system's ability to solve these tasks should increase. Large organizations require complex, multidimensional plans. For a comprehensive study of the brain and the construction of equivalent models, a research system is needed that is comparable in complexity to the brain.

One of the concepts on which important principles of systems management are based is the concept of feedback. It was it that contributed to the establishment of fundamental analogies between the organization of management in such qualitatively different systems as machines, living organisms and human collectives.

Feedback means the connection between the outputs and the input of the system, carried out either directly or through other elements of the system (Fig. 2.). (When considering Fig. 2. we do not take into account the classification of feedbacks into positive and negative).

Figure: 2. Feedback example

With the help of feedback, the signal (information) from the output of the system (control object) is transmitted to the control body. Here, this signal, containing information about the work performed by the control object, is compared with a signal that specifies the content and amount of work (for example, a plan). In the event of a discrepancy between the actual and planned state of work, measures are taken to eliminate it.

The main feedback functions are:

1. Counteracting what the system itself does when it goes beyond the established limits (for example, responding to a decline in quality);

2. Compensation of disturbances and maintenance of a stable state of equilibrium of the system (for example, equipment malfunction);

3. Synthesis of external and internal disturbances seeking to bring the system out of a stable equilibrium state, reducing these disturbances to deviations of one or several controllable quantities (for example, developing control commands for the simultaneous appearance of a new competitor and reducing the quality of products);

4. Development of control actions on the control object according to a poorly formalized law. For example, the establishment of a higher price for energy resources causes complex changes in the activities of various organizations, changes the final results of their functioning, requires changes in the production and economic process by means of influences that cannot be described using analytical expressions.

Violation of feedbacks in socio-economic systems for various reasons leads to serious consequences. Certain local systems lose their ability to evolve and subtly perceive emerging new trends, long-term development and scientifically based forecasting of their activities for a long period of time, effective adaptation to constantly changing environmental conditions.

A feature of socio-economic systems is the fact that it is not always possible to clearly express feedbacks, which, as a rule, are long in them, pass through a number of intermediate links, and their clear viewing is difficult. The controlled quantities themselves often do not lend themselves to a clear definition, and it is difficult to establish many constraints imposed on the parameters of the controlled quantities. It is also not always known the real reasons for the controlled variables to go beyond the established limits.

The system can be stable and unstable. The stability of a system is a state that means the invariability of its essential variables. Instability is expressed in the fact that a system organized to perform certain functions ceases to perform them under the influence of any reasons (for example, the state of the Russian economy during the financial crisis of August 1998).

In a changing environment or under the influence of various “disturbances” that reach the threshold of stability, the system can cease to exist, turn into another system, or disintegrate into constituent elements. For example, bankruptcy of enterprises.

The ability of a system to remain stable through changes in its structure and behavior is called ultrastability. Thus, many modern, primarily large companies ensure a high level of their stability due to their high adaptability to the external and internal conditions of their functioning. Such companies promptly stop some areas of their activities and start others, enter new markets in time and leave unpromising ones.

4. Rules for applying a systematic approach

So, from the above material, it becomes clear that the systems approach and systems analysis are two interrelated concepts. Thus, the systematic approach is based on in-depth studies of causal relationships and patterns of development of socio-economic processes. And since there are connections and patterns, then there are certain rules. Let's consider the basic rules for applying a systematic approach. Rule 1. It is not the components in themselves that constitute the essence of the whole (system), but on the contrary, the whole as primary generates the components of the system during its division or formation.

Example. The firm as a complex open socio-economic system is a collection of interconnected departments and production units. First, one should consider the firm as a whole, its properties and connections with the external environment, and only then - the components of the firm. A firm as a whole does not exist because, say, a pattern-maker works in it, but, on the contrary, a pattern-maker works because the firm functions. In small systems, there may be exceptions: the system functions thanks to an exceptional component.

Rule 2. The sum of properties (parameters) or a separate property of the system is not equal to the sum of the properties of its components, and the properties of its components cannot be derived from the properties of the system (the property of non-additivity of the system).

Example... All parts as components of a technical system are technologically advanced, and the product is not technologically advanced, since its layout is unsuccessful, the combination of parts is complex. When designing the product, the principle "simplicity of design is the measure of the designer's mind" was not followed. To ensure the manufacturability of a technical system, it is necessary to simplify its kinematic diagram and layout, reduce the number of components, and ensure approximately the same accuracy of connections.

Rule 3... The number of system components that determine its size should be minimal, but sufficient to achieve the goals of the system. The structure of, for example, a production system is a combination of organizational and production structures.

Rule 4. To simplify the structure of the system, it is necessary to reduce the number of control levels, the number of connections between the components of the system and the parameters of the control model, automate the production and management processes.

Example... It is required to analyze the complexity of the structure of a small system - a company of five people, which provides intermediary services in the field of transportation of small-sized cargo. The structure of the company: administration, accounting, marketing, technical, production, financial departments, garage, control room, personnel department, i.e. the company has nine divisions. She must develop regulations on her divisions, plan, record and control the work performed and their payment. Obviously, nine divisions for five people is a contrived structure of the company, "meeting" the requirements of fashion, but not the rationality of the structure and cost savings. In practice, at an early stage of the formation of market relations, the structures of firms often meet to a greater extent not the requirements of the economy, but rather the ambitions of investors. Rational structure of the company: manager, accountant-dispatcher, three drivers. The functions of administration, marketing, technical and production departments are performed by the head of the company. The functions of the accounting, financial department, dispatching office are carried out by the accountant-dispatcher. Drivers carry out production assignments and maintain their vehicles.

Rule 5... The structure of the system should be flexible, with the least number of rigid connections, capable of quickly readjusting to perform new tasks, provide new services, etc. The mobility of the system is one of the conditions for its rapid adaptation to market requirements.

Example... It is required to compare the level of rigidity of two production systems that produce similar products. The first system has a flow-mechanized conveyor organization of production, the second - the organization of production on the basis of integrated production automated modules, characterized by fast readjustment from one operation (part) to another. The organization of labor in the first system is conveyor, with the assignment of each worker to a specific operation (workplace), in the second - brigade. The mobility of the second system is higher than that of the first, both in the flexibility of the means of labor and in the organization of labor itself. Therefore, in conditions of reduced product life cycle and duration of its release, the second system is more progressive and efficient in comparison with the first.

Rule 6... The structure of the system should be such that changes in the vertical connections of the components of the system have a minimum impact on the functioning of the system. To do this, it is necessary to justify the level of delegation of powers by the subjects of management, to ensure the optimal independence and independence of management objects in socio-economic and production systems.

Rule 7... The horizontal isolation of the system, that is, the number of horizontal connections between the components of one level of the system should be minimal, but sufficient for the normal functioning of the system. A decrease in the number of connections leads to an increase in the stability and efficiency of the functioning of the system. On the other hand, the establishment of horizontal connections allows for the implementation of informal relationships, facilitates the transfer of knowledge and skills, and ensures the coordination of the actions of the components of the same level to achieve the goals of the system.

Rule 8... The study of the hierarchy of the system and the process of its structuring should begin with the definition of higher-level systems (to whom or where this system is subordinate) and establishing its links with these systems.

Rule 9... Due to the complexity and multiplicity of the description, the system should not try to learn all of its properties and parameters. Everything should have a reasonable limit, an optimal limit.

Rule 10... When establishing interconnections and interaction of the system with the external environment, it is necessary to build a "black box" and formulate first the "output" parameters, then determine the impact of macro- and microenvironment factors, requirements for, "input", feedback channels and, last of all, design the process parameters in system.

Regulation 11... The number of connections of the system with the external environment should be minimal, but sufficient for the normal functioning of the system. Excessive growth in the number of links complicates the controllability of the system, and their insufficiency reduces the quality of control. At the same time, the necessary independence of the system components must be ensured. To ensure the mobility and adaptability of the system, it must be able to quickly change its structure.

Regulation 12... In the context of the development of global competition and international integration, one should strive for an increase in the degree of openness of the system, subject to ensuring its economic, technical, informational and legal security.

Regulation 13... To build, operate and develop the system in the context of expanding international integration and cooperation, it is necessary to achieve its compatibility with other systems in terms of legal, information, scientific-methodological and resource support based on country and international standardization.Currently, international standards for systems of measures have been put into effect and measurements, quality systems, certification, audit, financial reporting and statistics, etc.

Regulation 14... To determine the strategy for the functioning and development of the system, a tree of goals should be built.

Rule 15. To increase the feasibility of investments in innovative and other projects, it is necessary to study the dominant (prevailing, strongest) and recessive features of the system and invest in the development of the first, the most effective ones.

Regulation 16. Of all the goals of the first level listed in rule 14, priority should be given to the quality of any objects of management as the basis for meeting market requirements, saving resources on a global scale, ensuring safety, and improving the quality of life of the population.

Rule 17. When forming the mission and goals of the system, priority should be given to the interests of the system of a higher level as a guarantee of solving global problems

Rule 18. Of all the quality indicators of systems, priority should be given to their reliability as a combination of the manifested properties of reliability, durability, maintainability and preservation.

Regulation 19... The efficiency and prospects of the system is achieved by optimizing its goals, structure, management system and other parameters. Therefore, the strategy for the functioning and development of the system should be formed on the basis of optimization models.

Rule 20... When formulating the goals of the system, one should take into account the uncertainty of information support. The probabilistic nature of situations and information at the stage of forecasting goals reduces the real effectiveness of innovation.

Rule 21... When building a tree of goals and formulating a system's strategy, it should be remembered that the goals of the system and its components in semantic and quantitative meanings, as a rule, do not coincide. However, all components must perform a specific task to achieve the goal of the system. If the goal of the system can be achieved without any component, then this component is superfluous, contrived, or it is the result of poor-quality system structuring. This is a manifestation of the system's emergence property.

Regulation 22... When constructing a tree of goals of the system and optimizing its functioning, one should study the manifestation of the property of its multiplicativity. For example, the reliability of a system is determined not by adding, but by multiplying the reliability factors of its components.

Regulation 23... When building the structure of the system and organizing its functioning, it should be borne in mind that all processes are continuous and interdependent. The system functions and develops on the basis of contradictions, competition, a variety of forms of functioning and development, the ability of the system to learn. The system exists as long as it functions.

Rule 24. When forming the strategy of the system, it is necessary to provide an alternative way of its functioning and development on the basis of forecasting various situations. The most unpredictable pieces of the strategy should be planned in several ways, taking into account different situations.

Rule 25. When organizing the functioning of the system, it should be borne in mind that its efficiency is not equal to the sum of the efficiency of the functioning of the subsystems (components). When the components interact, a positive (additional) or negative synergy effect occurs. To obtain a positive synergy effect, it is necessary to have a high level of organization of the system.

Rule 26 To reduce the inertia of the functioning of the system, that is, to increase the rate of change in the output parameters when changing the input parameters or the parameters of the functioning of the system, production should be oriented towards integrated automated modules and systems that ensure the mobility of production and a quick response to changes.

Rule 27. In the context of rapidly changing parameters of the external environment, the system must be able to quickly adapt to these changes. The most important tools for increasing the adaptability of the system's functioning are strategic market segmentation and the design of goods and technologies based on the principles of standardization and aggregation.

Rule 28. To improve the efficiency of the system functioning, it is necessary to analyze and predict the parameters of its organization: indicators of proportionality, parallelism, continuity, direct flow, rhythm, etc., to ensure their optimal level.

Regulation 29... The structure and content of the system are formed on the ideas and principles of standardization, without which it cannot function. Global competition is increasing the share of standardized systems and their components, especially on an international scale.

Rule 30. The only way to develop organizational, economic and production systems is innovative. The introduction of innovations (in the form of patents, know-how, R&D results, etc.) in the field of new goods, technologies, methods of organizing production, management, etc. serves as a factor in the development of society.

Conclusion

The initial flaw in the approaches of various schools to management is that they focus on only one important element, and do not consider management effectiveness as a result, depending on many different factors. Applying systems theory to management made it easier for managers to see the organization in the unity of its constituent parts, which are inextricably intertwined with the outside world. This theory also helped integrate the contributions of all schools that dominated management theory and practice at various times.

The work I have done was more interesting to me because the knowledge gained can be directly applied in the future. In addition, there is an increasing interest in the use of a systems approach in decision-making on the part of management specialists and business leaders. It was increasingly called a new type of management thinking. And at present, almost any scientific work on economic and management problems contains references to the use of a systematic approach. I believe that the expansion of the application of a systematic approach in making managerial decisions will help to increase the efficiency of the functioning of the country's economic system as a whole and its individual objects.

List of used literature

1. Bagrinovsky K.A. Modern management methods: Textbook. - M .: Infra - M, 2002. 2. Great Soviet Encyclopedia. 3rd ed. - M .: Soviet encyclopedia. T. 16. 3. Blauberg IV, Godin EG Formation and essence of the system approach. - M .: Science, 1973. 4. Vesnin VR Management: Textbook. - M .: Prospect, 2004. 5. Vikhanskiy OS Management: Textbook. - M .: Economist, 2004. 6. Voronin A. G. Municipal economy and management: problems of theory and practice: Textbook. - M .: Nauka, 1984. 7. Golubkov EP. The use of system analysis in making planning decisions. - M .: Economics, 1982. 8. Golubkov EP Methods of system analysis in making managerial decisions. - M .: Knowledge, 1973.

9. Daft R. Management: Textbook. - SPB .: Peter, 2001.

10. Kildrake D. Management Theory from Taylorism to Japaneseization: Textbook. - SPB .: Peter, 2001.

11. Cleland D., King V. System analysis and target management. - M .: Soviet radio, 1974.

12. Nikanorov SP Preface to S. Optner's book System analysis for solving business and industrial problems. - M .: Soviet radio, 1969.

13. Sundin H. Organized manager: Textbook. - M .: Finance and Statistics, 2002.

15. Fatkhutdinov R.A. Management decisions: Textbook. - M .: Infra - M, 2002.

Introduction to the systems approach. Introduction to the systems approach The role of the systems approach in managing an organization

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………… 2

Example: a bank from a systems theory perspective

Let's turn to history.

3. Systems theory

The value of a systems approach in management

Rules for applying a systematic approach

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Course work

in the discipline "Management Theory"

INTRODUCTION

DCHAPTER 1. ESSENCE, CHARACTERISTIC AND PRINCIPLES OF THE SYSTEM APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT OF THE ORGANIZATION

2.1 The value of a systems approach in the management of an organization

2. 2 Analysis of the systematic approach to personnel development at OJSC Sibnefteprovod Ishimskoe UMN

CONCLUSION

LIST USED \u200b\u200bLITERATURE

Similar documents

Recent

You need to know