Wk 4 Respond to 2 Colleagues 1 paragraph or more each

Read through your colleagues’ posts and respond to two or more of your colleagues in one or more of the following ways:

· Provide a different or expanded perspective by offering an insight that you gained by reading your colleague’s conclusions.

· Ask a question that will help your colleague think about his or her comparisons and conclusions more deeply or broadly. Make sure you provide context and/or references based from the class readings, your own investigation, or your experience.

OR:

· Provide an example that further illuminates complexity in organizations and compare it to what your colleague presented.

· Offer other lessons you learned and suggest ways your colleague could manage complexity.

1st Colleague to respond to:

Senge (2006) describes systems thinking as a discipline for seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, and for seeing patterns of change than static snapshots. Senge (2006) further explains systems thinking is a set of general principles, and it is a set of specific tools and techniques that originate in two threads. For example, in comparing detail complexity to dynamic complexity from a systems thinking viewpoint, detail complexity is the sort of complexity in which there are many variables. For example, following a complex set of instructions to assemble a machine, involves detail complexity. Another example of detail complexity, for instance, is taking inventory in a discount retail store (Senge, 2006).

While dynamic complexity is situations where cause and effect are subtle, the effects over time of interventions are not obvious. For example, conventional forecasting, planning, and analysis methods are not equipped to deal with dynamic complexity. Also, when the same action has a dramatically different effect in the short run and long run, dynamnic complexity exists. Furthermore, from a systems thinking viewpoint, when an action has one set of consequences locally and then a different set of consequences in another part of the system, there is dynamic complexity. Another example in comparing dynamic complexity to detail complexity is when obvious interventions can produce nonobvious consequences, there will be dynamic complexity (Senge, 2006).

Several concepts help distinguish the two complexities when using the appropriate systems thinking concepts to differentiate detail complexity and dynamic complexity. For instance, a shift in mindset helps to disconnect and interconnect the lines. For example, the two straight lines form a circle, causing The two antagonists’ individual, linear, or nonsystemic viewpoints to interact to create a system, a set of variables that influence one another. Furthermore, seeing interrelationships rather than linear cause-effect chains and also seeing processes of change rather than snapshots (Senge, 2006).

In identifying a few examples from the organization I work for is the organization illustrates detailed complexity by using a system that handles complex situations, for example, monitoring and tracking a wide range of services and goods. Furthermore, the organization follows complex processes that help in monitoring and tracking all goods and services the organization provides. However, as for the dynamic complexity, an example is there is an ongoing issue with entering services. The organization does a temporary fix to get by for the moment, but the fixe does not actually correct the ongoing issues. The short-term result may be met, but as for the long-term results, the issues are heightened and the consequences the organization faces are severe. The organization I work for needs to see the interrelationships and the delays between action and consequences, and it also requires seeing patterns of change, not just snapshots of continuing escalations (Senge, 2006).

Regards,

Resources:

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday.

     Retrieved from Walden Library databases.

2nd Colleague to respond to:

Peter Senge thinks the world is becoming is becoming more and more complex (Senge, 2006). How do we handle this complexity? We can use detail or dynamic complexity. When using detail complexity, the object is to try to control or manage the many variables involved. Try to do more things like set more initiatives or more goals on strategic plans. Detail complexity gives a sense of control and certainty. It makes us think we have a greater handle on things. In a complex word, cause and effect are not obvious and subtle (Senge, 2006, p.71).  A complex world needs dynamic complexity. Conventional forecasting, planning and analysis are not equipped to deal with dynamic complexity. Dynamic complexity understands that decisions made in one department can impact many others in another department without anyone being aware. It allows us to “see the major interrelationships underlying a problem leads to new insight into what might be done (Senge, 2006, p.72)”. Detail complexity helps us plan, but dynamic complexity helps us to understand.

A former organization that I worked for had a high attrition rate. Management at the time wanted to improve the attrition rate so they created an incentive to where employees received a referral bonus for every employee that they referred. The next year showed little to no improvement with the attrition rate. The organization used a detail complexity when trying to solve the problem with attrition. Detail complexity asks: What top initiative can improve the employee attrition this year?” The answer to that question was a bonus. If they would have asked, “How do we improve the employee attrition rate?” (Which is a dynamic complexity asked question) they would have concluded that they needed to offer a flexible schedule for students, an incentive program, and revise policies for rehire.

I worked for a utilization management company for several years. The company was contracted by different health plans to approve or deny radiology procedures. There were over a dozen health plans contracted who all had their own guidelines. I would speak with a nurse or representative from the pre- authorization department who would call in for an authorization for a cat scan for example. I would ask the same questions for each patient. One patient may get an approval, one may get a denial, a case may go in medical review for a physician to view the medical record and approve or deny the case. Senge says, dynamic complexity is when the same action has a dramatically different effects in the short and long run (Senge, 2006 p.71). The nurse must now schedule the one patient for radiology test, look up appeal information for the other patient, and set up a peer to peer review for the third patient. The patient who did not get an approval on the call can possibly face a delay in healthcare and possibly must settle for an MRI or X-ray. A physician practice can and often look at the whole and often decline to accept a healthcare plan because of the consequences in the long run such as no payment, denied claims, slow process to get paid, unable to get authorizations etc. Healthcare is a profession that demonstrates the many interconnections in a system and how parts of a whole fit together and provide a negative impact.

References:

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York, NY.