lOMoARcPSD|22517024
Liberty University BUSI 710
Discussion
Advanced Business Research Methods (Liberty
University)
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
Using the three theoretical principals of rational, natural, and open systems
allow for a more principled approach to organizational sciences.
Organization rationalization focuses on reason and practicability to help
business units implement goals. The modern organizational theory emerged
during the first half of the 1900s in response to the need to improve
efficiency by reducing costs and increasing productivity. The Bible teaches
us in 1 Corinthians 14:40 (ESV), "But all things should be done decently and
in order." The establishment of organizations brings order out of chaos due
to competing priorities that are present in everyday business environments.
The concept is based on the idea that organizations are collectivities
oriented to pursue particular goals though highly formalized cultural
structures. Each system concentrates on essential components that include
scientific management, administrative concepts, decision making
formalization, and organizational bureaucracy. Establishing the principles of
organization rationalization is a vital step toward achieving the goal of a
more efficient organization.
Developing an enterprise structure revolves around the goals and mission
statement that an organization revolves around. The structure outlines the
system of relationships that occur amongst various business components.
Each of these components is sub- divided into groups that attain specific
objectives by supporting the overall strategic plan. Enterprise analysis and
modeling tools have developed functional properties that give advantages
over competitors through the use of risk simplification and the optimization
of results (Kauspadiene, Ramanauskaite, Cenys, Janulevicius, & Rastenis,
2018, p. 1). Suitable management streamlines the realization of the
development and diversification of structural activities. Preventing
duplication of efforts is a principal function to align maximum effort with
nominal efforts. Different governance systems provide influence over an
organizational structure by allowing diversified responsibilities to influence
the coordinated approach of the strategic direction. Thus, corporations
change over time, as agility is a crucial dynamic needed in today's global
business environment.
Each theoretical principle is the mainstay of executive function. Roles and
responsibilities dictate the policies, procedures, and operational models that
support efficient administration at all levels. The corporate structure relies
on the chosen principal to derive position and authority, which provides an
influence on achievement or failure within a company. A rational, natural, or
open system encourages the broadening of energies to synchronize evolved
relationships in different ways. Today, the modern landscape demands the
agility necessary to direct and coordinate efforts through responsible
relationship management. Growth is an indispensable attribute that all
corporations maintain through productivity and a balanced measure of
stakeholder management. All of these lead to defining characteristics of
each system.
Defining Characteristics
Rational decision making follows a distinct process that depends on clear
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
facts, objective criteria while discarding ethical motivations. Reconfiguration
of established processes produces organizational challenges as it disrupts
the routine and requires a change in behavior in various steps (Dooley,
2018, p.72). The first step is to identify the
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
problem or issue at hand, which involves identifying the cause of a topic,
determining its root causes, and then developing a plan for solving those
problems. The second step is to determine the logical way to address it,
which involves identifying the appropriate resources. The third step is to
create an approach for overcoming the problem or issue through the
identification of immediate solutions and selecting suitable alternatives.
Using these efforts to concentrate on structure permits a group of
individuals to use their collective work in the pursuit of exacting
objectives.
Natural systems expand the theory that knowledge and interpersonal
structures are more important than conventional organizational structures.
These include the organization's ability to organize itself, its capacity to
manage information and change, and its ability to communicate effectively
with others. Proponents of the natural system believe that it is more
important than any other organizational structure when identifying and
evaluating an alternative approach. Supporters argue that learning occurs in
groups rather than individually, and group members learn from each other
with the ability to share their ideas and opinions with others. Informal
structure cultivates influence and leads the development of collaborative
systems by respecting individual relationships in their pursuit of interests
that align with the organization's goal. Racko (2019, p. 765) describes
support as "interests including not only those of investors, shareholders,
creditors, business owners, customers, and suppliers, but also the interests
of society as a whole." A decentralized approach works in matrix styled
organizations through the melding of formal structure and independent
stakeholders. Understanding that competition drives and motivates
employees helps annunciate the framework of natural systems.
Open systems are business environments that publicly deal with customers,
the competition, and wide-ranging commercial activity. These organizations
have a tendency to be highly competitive and therefore require high levels
of collaboration while advancing approaches that allow for flexible and
innovative solutions. The theory of Von Bertalanffy's establishes that open
systems are evolutionary with the ability to adapt to changing environments
to modify undesirable behavior that threatens long- term viability (Rezaee,
Azar, Erz, & Nayeri, 2019, p. 276). Building on traditional methods, open
systems tend to involve people who are not directly involved in the process.
This can include employees, suppliers, or consumers all working together to
solve complex common goals. Predicting the interdependencies of a
functioning system can define the intent and composition of an
environment. Either passive or static dynamics dictate interactions in an
open system by applying applicability within concepts and principled
behaviors. Thus, the emphasis on conventional organization structures
accounts for restrictions of individual actions instead of streamlining
processes.
Relationships Between the Three
Each of these approaches to organizational principals still has a structured
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
approach to modeling within a company. Defined work activities still have to
be divided due to the demands of modern corporations. Reporting
relationships define the capabilities of organizations by demonstrating a
sophisticated understanding of change management
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
pressures, internally or externally. Resources are still finite no matter if the
corporation is rational, natural, or open; the devotion to support systems
enables groups of people to formalize a social structure within each. Value is
the critical output that any organization using these three models strive.
However, each is done differently through unique common behaviors of
participants, governance, and respective corporate cultures.
The focus on organizations that have different systems allows for the
understanding of which environment each exists in. The structure of
organizations can follow relevant truths that force behaviors that focus on
inspiration, dedication, and the systematic concept of any organization.
Conceptualized frameworks differ wildly from small to large businesses
allowing each to determine a rational, natural, or open approach to their
marketspace. Behavior in each could be dictated by internal and external
demand as systematic knowledge is gained through market transactions.
General engagement strategies include engagement with stakeholders to
balance competing principals to identify strategies, practices, and determine
outcomes (MacQueen, Eley, Frick, & Hamilton, 2018, p. 40). Strategic
planning plays a part in developing interactions between business groups by
developing them through policy and governance guidelines. Understanding
the environment of the market space allows for all three systems to work
interdependently of each other while still relying on aspects of each.
Even though structural models may differ and manifest as behavioral
differences, the model of consistency through predictability, reliability, and
stability within the work environment allows for all three models to be
implemented successfully.
Theoretical Viewpoints
Assumptions between each principal seem to contradict each other viewing
them as competing perspectives. Within a macro lens, there still is corporate
culture, a defined structure, and governance functions that allow each
principal to operate as they see fit. Within each, the study of collective goals
within rational, natural, and open organizational scenarios face based on
various perspectives. Implementation of corporate governance practices
should be adapted to the legal status of improving corporate performance
(Boubaker & Nguyen, 2018, p. 3). The purpose of each is to make capital
investment decisions that correlate to their strategic intentions while
expanding market share within a regulated system that produces stable and
predictable outcomes.
Reducing the perspective of rational, natural, and open systems to first
principal solutions take out assumptions and studies the constant behaviors
in each. Since human interaction is one of the primary efforts that take place
within a business environment to produce an output, there is a tendency to
overlook the importance of this fact. Corporate culture has an enormous role
to play within an organization and is the basis of the first principal approach
to principled system analysis. Within contingency management, culture is an
independent variable endogenous to the firm consisting of the beliefs and
values developed by and within an organization (Deshpande & Webster,
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
2018, p. 6). Influential behavior can sway any notion of value or belief by
setting new expectations that may not be aligned with the corporate
mission. Since there is such a
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
strong influence in culture, management teams provide limitations and
standards for stakeholders to align with a rational, natural, or open system.
Cooperative conduct provides uniqueness within a market for companies to
emphasize orderly results- oriented characteristics.
Personal Perspectives
There is an argument to make for a rational, natural, or open approach to
organizational management. However, each one presents the overall
problems. As discussed in this paper, there are unique elements of each that
are problem excellent quantifiable attributes. One of the essential aspects of
the business environment is to be agile.
Agility in the market space allows a company to approach issues with
multiple solutions for management teams to adjust resource allocations.
Change is the most prominent proponent for an organization structured in
such a way as to promote agility. The rapid response to changing conditions
allows a company to adjust to market space changes in a smaller amount of
time than their competitors. Assets enable firms to perform activities that
create competitive advantages in particular markets deriving from external
industry sources to drive firm resource management strategies (Bel, 2018,
p. 1680).
When this happens, opportunity can be exploited in a way that can create
Blue Ocean Environments that allow new revenue streams to develop.
Taking the lead with agility allows for the market-leading force upon others
that may enter the space, and give a distinct advantage to a company.
Competing in the current agile environment requires business units inside an
organization to deliver solutions based around disruptive forces by shaping
them into a framework that exemplifies the strengths of a company. There
are very few companies that can work within one principal theoretical
system and be successful today or in the future. Firms are being urged to
innovate their business models to pursue higher-level efficacy and
competitive advantage as an essential part of economic growth in transition
economies (Liao, Liu, & Ma, 2019, p. 1213). Transformation needs to be
understood in the context of each system by taking adaptative measures to
ensure that stakeholders are working towards a specific goal that accounts
for consumer demands. Many large corporations are facing an existential
threat to their business models by adhering to a rational, natural, and open
approach. Their lack of agility has failed to deliver new revenue streams by
not being able to collaborate with stakeholders efficiently. Only through a
newfound ability to raise their skillfulness in the marketplace will they be
able to compete. Each system has attributes that can help an organization
grow and create agility. Management teams need to find which one's work
within the culture they established and provide the correct framework so
that they can develop, grow, and be successful.
References
Bel, R. (2018). A property rights theory of competitive advantage.
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
Strategic Management Journal, 39(6), 1678-1703.
d
o
i
:
10
.
10
0
2
/
s
m
j
.
27
0
7
lOMoARcPSD|22517024
Boubaker, S. & Nguyen, D. K. (2018). Governance issues in business and
finance in the wake of the global financial crisis. Journal of Management
& Governance, 22(1), 1-5.
d
o
i
:
10
.
10
0
7
/
s
10
9
97
-
0
17
-
9
3
7
9
-
3
Deshpande, R., & Webster, F. E. (2018). Organizational culture and
marketing: Defining the research agenda. Journal of Marketing, 53(1), 3-
15. doi:10.1177/002224298905300102
Dooley, K. (2018). Routine rigidity and environmental sustainability: Why
rational innovations are regularly ignored. Business Strategy and the
Environment, 27(1), 70-81.
d
o
i
:
1
0
.
1
00
2
/
b
s
e
.
1
9
8
4
Kauspadiene, L., Ramanauskaite, S., Cenys, A., Janulevicius, J., & Rastenis, J.
(2018).
Modeling of enterprise management structure for data
leakage evaluation. Information Security Journal., 27(1),
1-
13. doi:10.1080/19393555.2017.1423136
Liao, S., Liu, Z., & Ma, C. (2019). Direct and configurational paths of open
innovation and organisational agility to business model innovation in
SMEs. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 31(10), 1213-
1228. doi:10.1080/09537325.2019.1601693
MacQueen, K. M., Eley, N. T., Frick, M., & Hamilton, C. (2018). Using theory of
change frameworks to develop evaluation strategies for research
engagement: Results of a pre‐pilot study. Journal of the International AIDS
Society, 21. doi:10.1002/jia2.25181
Racko, G. (2019). Does economic rationalization decrease or increase
accounting professionals' occupational values? Journal of Business
Ethics, 158(3), 763- 777.
d
o
i
:
1
0
.
1
00
7
/
s
1
0
5
5
1
-
0
1
7
-
3
7
29
-
6
Rezaee, Z., Azar, A., Erz, A. M. B., & Nayeri, M. D. (2019). Application of
viable system model in diagnosis of organizational structure. Systemic
Practice and Action Research, 32(3), 273-295.
d
o
i
:
1
0
.
1
00
7
/
s
1
1
2
1
3
-
0
1
8
-
9 4 54
-
y