|
p.3 The continuing transactional relationships with the environment point up the contingent character of social systems... The behavior of an organization is contingent upon the social field of forces in which it occurs and must be understood in terms of the organization's interaction with that environmental field.
p.20 It would be much better theoretically, however, to start with concepts that do not call for identifying the purposes of the designers and then correcting for them when they do not seem to be fulfilled. The theoretical concepts should begin with the input, output, and functioning of the organization as a system and not with the rational purposes of its leaders... Our theoretical model for the understanding of organizations is that of an energic input-output system in which the energic return from the output reactivates the system. Social organizations are flagrantly open systems in that the input of energies and the conversion of output into further energetic input consist of transactions between the organization and its environment. [JLJ - or perhaps threatened transactions. I strategically don't do this because you would probably do that.]
p.20 The stability or recurrence of activities can be examined in relation to the energic input into the system, the transformation of energies within the system, and the resulting product or energic output... To maintain this patterned activity requires a continued renewal of the inflow of energy. This is guaranteed in social systems by the energic return from the product or outcome. Thus the outcome of the cycle of activities furnishes new energy for the initiation of a renewed cycle.
p.21 Our two basic criteria for identifying social systems and determining their functions are (1) tracing the pattern of energy exchange or activity of people as it results in some output and (2) ascertaining how the output is translated into energy that reactivates the pattern.
p.22 This model of an energic input-output system is taken from the open system theory as promulgated by von Bertalanffy (1956).
p.22 System theory is basically concerned with problems of relationships, of structure, and of interdependence rather than with the constant attributes of objects.
p.24 how do we deal with social structures, where physical boundaries in this sense do not exist? The genius of F.H. Allport (1962) contributed the answer, namely that the structure is to be found in an interrelated set of events that return upon themselves to complete and renew a cycle of activities. It is events rather than things which are structured, so that social structure is a dynamic rather than a static concept.
p.26 The inputs into living systems do not consist only of energic materials that become transformed or altered in the work that gets done. Inputs are also informative in character and furnish signals to the structure about the environment and about its own functioning in relation to the environment... systems can react only to those information signals to which they are attuned. The general term for the selective mechanisms of a system by which incoming materials are rejected or accepted and translated for structure is coding. Through the coding process the "blooming, buzzing confusion" [JLJ - uncited James reference] of the world is simplified into a few meaningful and basic categories for a given system.
p.27 The general principle here is that of Le Chatelier (see Bradley and Calvin, 1956), who maintains that any internal or external factor that threatens to disrupt the system is countered by forces which restore the system as closely as possible to its previous state. Krech and Crutchfield (1948) similarly hold, with respect to psychological organization, that cognitive structures will react to influences in such a way as to absorb them with minimal change to existing cognitive integration. The initial adjustment to such disturbances is typically approximate rather than precise. If it is insufficient, further adjustment in the same direction will follow. If it is excessive, it will be followed by counteradjustment. The iterative process will continue to the point of equilibrium or until the process is broken by some further disruptive event... The basic principle is the preservation of the character of the system.
p.36 System theory in its general form, as Kenneth Boulding (1956) has observed, furnishes the framework or skeleton for all science.
p.36 A social system is a structuring of events or happenings rather than of physical parts and therefore has no structure apart from its functioning (Allport, 1962).
p.37 Social structures are essentially contrived. People invent the complex patterns of behavior that we call social structure, and people create social structure by enacting those patterns of behavior. Many properties of social systems derive from these essential facts... Social systems are anchored in the attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, motivations, habits, and expectations of human beings... The relationships of items rather than the items themselves provide the constancy.
p.51 The organization exists in a changing and demanding environment, and it must adapt constantly to the changing environmental demands. Adaptive structures develop in organizations to generate appropriate responses to external conditions.
p.55 In most formal organizations there arise, therefore, structures that are specifically concerned with sensing relevant changes in the outside world and translating the meaning of those changes for the organization. There may be structures that devote their energies wholly to the anticipation of such changes. All these comprise the adaptive subsystem of the organization... Our basic model of a social system is a structure that imports energy from the external world, transforms it, and exports a product to the environment that is the source for a reenergizing of the cycle. Substructures may develop that gather and utilize intelligence about these energic transactions. Such devices function to give feedback to the system about its output in relation to its input.
p.56 The mystique of the computer sometimes leads people to forget that it is limited by the quality of the information introduced into its memory and by the logic of the programs written to arrange that information... The systematic use of information to guide organizational functioning is the sine qua non of an organization.
p.75 Organizations do not exist in a static world. The surrounding environment is in a constant state of flux, and a rigid technical system... does not survive.
p.75 many organizations develop adaptive structures whose function it is to gather advance information about trends in the environment, carry out research on internal productive processes, and plan for future developments. The maintenance activities are directed at survival in the limited sense of preserving the organization as it is. They are internally oriented and mediate conflicts between internal demands and existing production structures. The adaptive mechanisms face out on the world and are concerned with solving the conflicts that arise between present organizational practices and future environmental demands.
p.86 The most general statement that can be made about all the mechanisms for maintaining stability is that they seek to formalize or institutionalize all aspects of organizational behavior.
p.103 Dahrendorf (1958) has contended that the structural-functional approach in sociology, with its orientation toward problems of integration, neglects conflict processes... Dahrendorf maintains that models of social structure must include recognition of built-in conflict associated with the dichotomy of positive and negative dominance roles... The general point is that organizations are less integrated than biological systems; their patterns of cooperative interrelationships also represent constrained adjustments of conflict and struggle. [JLJ - Dahrendorf concept directly applies to machines playing strategic games]
p.103 Many facts of organizational life can be readily understood if the model of organizations is one which views social patterns not as fixed and rigid interrelations but as the outcome of a continuing tug of war.
p.131 The main organizational responses to uncertainty involve control, direct or indirect... Another form of direct control is aimed at the environment. If the environment can be controlled, it need not be predicted... Organizational attempts at direct control are often limited by the reactive character of the environment. It, too, has some organized character and the ability to fight back.
p.270-271 The classical theorists of organization and the structural-functionalists tended to treat conflict as a peripheral issue or to disregard it entirely. Some theorists concerned with economic and political constraints, on the other hand, have viewed organizations as conflictual systems... Dahrendorf asserts the inadequacy of a general equilibrium principle. He takes Parsons and the structural-functionalists to task because he believes they make only one kind of assumption, namely the consensual or Utopian... Dahrendorf prefers a conflict model, which makes opposite assumptions:
- Change is ubiquitous.
- Social conflict is ubiquitous.
- Every element contributes to disintegration and change.
- Every society is based on coercion.
p.293 conflict models, such as those of Marx and Dahrendorf, ...view the social scene as the struggle or potential struggle of opposing groups. To the extent that society is held together, it is held together by coercion. Where equilibrium is achieved it is the tug of war of opposed forces and not a harmonious resolution.
p.362 Rokeach (1973) writes:
the functions served by a person's values are to provide him with a comprehensive set of standards to guide actions, justifications, judgments, and comparisons of self and others and to serve needs for adjustment, ego-defense, and self actualization.
p.507-508 In the analysis of organizational problems and in the assessment of alternative courses of action, decision makers must guard against the common fallible notions of causation... We are frequently guilty... of linear thinking, in which we see only a one-way sequence of cause and effect, whereas we are really dealing with a cycle in which cause and effect are mutually interacting... The modern scientific approach is to view causation as an aspect of a mutually interacting field of forces... The events in a field of forces are thus determined both by the elements in the field and by the structure of the field, that is, the transformation of those elements resulting from their relationship.
p.517 Often the test of an organization is its resilience in adapting to difficulties when plans do not work out well.
p.614 opponents in football or tennis or chess act directly against each other, and the success of one person or team depends to a large extent on successful interference with the activities of the other. [JLJ - in correspondence chess, each player struggles to present his opponent with a position that is misunderstood due to its complexity, or which contains hidden interactions which are not discovered even with deep analysis]
p.615-616 To define conflict as a particular kind of interacting behavior... implies that it can best be understood as a process... Some continuing struggle for existence is implied in the definition of organizations as open systems... They maintain themselves and their boundaries only by means of continuing advantageous interaction processes for resources (time, space, material, energy, etc.) that are almost always scarce in some sense and frequently contested. The consequent emergence of conflict seems to be unavoidable
p.635 All actions during a conflict process need not be direct behaviors against the opponent, of course. There may be conciliatory behaviors as well, and there may be threats and promises of varying degrees of aggressive or conciliatory content.
p.758 In human organizations the processes of energy transformation operate at two levels, the direct and the symbolic - the utilization or modification of energy as such (steam, electricity, muscle) and the use of energy as information exchange... These interpersonal transactions we have treated in several ways - as communication, influence, leadership, and as conflict.
p.759 Conflict within and between organizations is defined as a particular category of behavior in which two or more parties... attempt to block, damage, or incapacitate each other.
p.759 An organization is most efficient when, without any incapacitation of its resources over time, all of its inputs emerge as product.
|
