By T. M-Watt

It’s typical for organizations to prioritize their values and promote their business ideology as a central aspect of their operations. Within this framework, internal and external subsystems continually interface and interact, each playing a crucial role in sustaining the business or organization. However, a significant number of companies overlook the need for these systems to evolve to withstand the ever-changing external environment. As companies expand, operational systems often fail to keep pace, remaining outdated or nonexistent despite profitability and established status.

Analyzing your business’ internal systems is essential to understanding how different components interact to form a cohesive whole. However, a crucial subsequent step involves assessing changes in the external environment to proactively and strategically plan for organizational sustainability. Neglecting this process can have detrimental consequences.

While it might appear insignificant, elements like recruitment/training policies, I.T. systems, and fiscal control policies are pivotal for the success of any business. When leadership lacks experience or expertise in these areas, the organization can encounter significant challenges and start to falter. The downward trajectory may be gradual. Upgrading the entire I.T. system, establishing efficient virtual networks between all work sites, implementing robust H.R. policies/procedures, and instituting financial controls and capital planning procedures are all essential components of a sustainable and efficient system ecosystem. Although these upgrades may not directly contribute to production or manufacturing, they are critical for enhancing the operational and administrative backbone, ultimately enabling frontline work to flourish in the long term.

The absence of updated processes can bring a business to the brink of insolvency. Meadows aptly observes that “if pushed too far, systems may well fall apart or exhibit previously unseen behaviour” (Meadows 2008, p.75). This suggests the importance of comprehending the system one operates within and determining the appropriate amount of pressure to apply to prevent complete collapse. Change management and coaching may be necessary to assist leadership in navigating substantial adaptations to their business model.

Meadows suggests that systems generally display considerable resilience even when subjected to pressure. However, she emphasizes that resilience does not imply static or constant behaviour over time. Instead, resilient systems can exhibit elasticity and dynamic qualities, possessing the capacity to learn, become more complex, and evolve. Nevertheless, she cautions that overextending or overwhelming any system can lead to structural breakdown.

Some businesses and entities, such as government departments, operate within large and complex systems and subsystems, which can prove detrimental. Government departments often exhibit silos of work and processes, making it essential to consider the entire department when conducting a systems review. Essentially, this implies that the ability to redesign one part of a system or subsystem without negatively impacting other parts is severely limited, particularly if the elasticity of these systems is unknown (Vickers, 1978). If your systems have not undergone a review or overhaul in, for instance, a decade, caution must be exercised when restructuring and repairing.

References

Emery, F.E., & Trist, E.L. (1965). The Causal Texture of Organizational Environments

Meadows, D. (2008). Thinking in Systems, Chelsea Green Publishing; Illustrated edition.

Vickers, G. (1978). Some Implications of Systems Thinking.