A   General   Systems   Model,   for Management   and   Business

By David Alderoty © 2015Chapter 5) Informational Inputs and Outputs

From   One   Organizational   Subsystem to Another, and Problems That can Result from Related Managerial Dysfunctions

Over 2,900 WordsTo contact the author use: David@TechForText.com

Or left click for a website communication form If you want to go to the previous chapter left click on the following link

www.TechForText.com/M/Chapter-4To go to the table of contents of this CHAPTER,   left   click   on   these   words

Notes for this E-BookThe concepts presented in this e-book are primarily focused on management and business. However, most of these concepts also apply to other types of systems that involve human beings. Thus, anywhere you see the words business or organization in this e - book, the material I am presenting may also apply to any type of system that is partly or totally comprised of human beings, such as a factory , a home-based business , a microbusiness , a school , a social club , a city , a state , a nation , a family , and an individual . In this e-book, I call the above entities, underlined in red, human systems .

In this e-book, I frequently use the word business, company, and organization interchangeably, as synonymous terms. In addition, I use the word employee, or employees to refer to non-managerial personnel.

Web Links in this E-BookThis e-book contains links to web-based articles and videos from other authors, f or additional information , supporting material , and for alternative: perspectives, interpretations, explanations, and opinions. The links are the blue underlined words. In this e-book brown text, like these words, represent quotes. You can access the original source, by clicking on a link presented just before a quote. If a link fails, use the blue underlined words as a search phrase, with www.Google.com , or for a video use www.google.com/videohp. The search will usually bring up the original website or one or more good alternatives.

Section 1) The Input and Output of Information Between the Subsystems   of   an   Organization, And   Redefining Managing, and Management

In   Terms   of   the   Above

Topic 1) The Input and Output of Information Between the Subsystems   of   an   Organization

The subsystems that comprise an organization produce inputs and outputs of information. That is each organizational subsystem transmits information to other subsystems. In addition, each organizational subsystem also receives information from other subsystems. This includes in-house communication,

between managers at different levels, between managers and employees, between various departments, and between individual employees. We can also include the external subsystems of an organization. This includes communication between consumers and sales personnel, product support specialists and customers, as well as communication between suppliers and purchasing agents.

The informational inputs and outputs between the organizational subsystems must be adequate in both quality and quantity for a well-functioning organization. Problems can develop when the inputs and outputs of information between subsystems is inhibited or distorted, misinterpreted, or simply not received or transmitted. This will be discussed in more detail, with examples later on in this chapter.

Topic 2)Redefining Managing in Terms of the Input and Output of   Information,   from the Organizational Subsystems, to a

Controlling   Subsystem,   called   Management Managing was previously defined in Chapter 3. In this section, I am redefining managing in terms of the input and output of information . The resulting definition does not contradict the previous definition of managing, but it provides some additional insight into the concept. The new definition is in two parts. The first involves the input of information, obtained by managerial observations and communications. The second part involves the output of information,

such as managerial orders and directions. This definition is presented below.Based on the way I am using the terminology, managing is a process that

involves the input of information to management , which is obtained by direct communication , observations , and monitoring of the subsystems of an organization. The input of information is evaluated, and processed by management, to produce an output of information for directing , correcting , and/or improving organizational subsystems. The information might also be used for organizational planning and goal setting.

In this definition, and the definition that follows management means one or more managers. For this definition, subsystems of the organization include both dynamic and static entities, including all of the following: departments within the organization, employees, customers, suppliers, stockholders, equipment, tools, furniture, workspace, etc.

Topic 3) What is Management, and What Does Management Do,   from   the   Perspective of the Input and Output of

Information,   from   One   Subsystem   to Another In this topic, I am redefining management, and explaining the functions of management in terms of the input and output of information. This is presented in the following paragraph.

Management is a subsystem of an organization , comprised of one or more manages, and it receives information from the other subsystems by direct

communication, and observation. The information obtained by management is evaluated and processed, to produce an output of information for directing, correcting, and/or for improving the subsystems of the organization. Management might also use the information it gathers for planning and goal setting.

Section 2) Chain of Command, and Communication Channels, Explained in Terms of the

Input   and   Output   of   Information from one   Organizational Subsystem to Another

Topic 4) Note for the Following Material Most of the material in the remainder of this chapter applies to large organizations, especially companies that are dealing with potentially dangerous technologies. This primarily involves organizations that have a chain of command and formal communication channels, which can sometimes be problematic. Most of the following material will be irrelevant to small and medium-sized businesses.

Topic 5) The Chain of Command, Formal Communication Channels, And   the   Input   and Output of Information Between

The   Subsystems   of   an   Organization A very important concept for most organizations is the chain of command from one subsystem to another. This also represents the formal communication channels within an organization. Generally, it is a hierarchy, with the CEO or president of the organization on the top of the hierarchy. It is often represented by an organizational chart, and in some cases it can be quite complex, especially if the organization is very large. A very simplified example, for a medium-size organization, is upper management, middle management, first-line manages, and employees.

With a typical organizational hierarchy, employees may have to communicate through a first-line manager, to transmit information to upper management. This might discourage or limit any unnecessary communication from employees, to upper or middle management. Usually, the formal communication channels can serve as a filter that protects upper and middle management from unnecessary communication from employees or customers.

In general, formal communication channels tend to inhibit communication from the individuals at the bottom of the hierarchy who want to communicate to managers at the top of the hierarchy. However, the inhibiting is usually only one way, which involves a resistance when information is transmitted from the

bottom up to upper management. Thus, upper management can easily communicate with middle managers, first-line managers, and employees. The formal communication channels usually do not inhibit communication with people that are on the same level of the hierarchy.

Topic 6) Typical, Formal Communication Channels, Illustrated   with   a   Hypothetical   Organization

To clarify the above concept, I am going to use a hypothetical organization with formal communication channels that are probably typical for most large organizations. Specifically if an employee with low organizational status, wanted to speak to the president of a large company, he or she would have to contact the receptionist and request an appointment, or a phone conversation. If the receptionist thought the request was appropriate, he or she may briefly discuss the matter with the president to see if an appointment should be scheduled. However, the receptionist would most likely refer the employee to a different individual and the organization, such as a first-line manager.

If the employee attempted to communicate with e-mail or a formal letter, the correspondence might be ignored, or read and answered by another individual in the organization, or skim read by the president. This might result in a brief reply that may or may not relate to the issues presented in the correspondence.

The situation would be very different from the above, if the employee were an individual with high organizational status. In such a case, the receptionist

would probably connect the employee by phone directly to the president. If the employee decided to communicate by correspondence, his or her documents would be most likely carefully read, and appropriately acknowledged. The correspondence of individuals of high organizational status are likely to be read with more care, and answered with more precision, then would be the case for an individual of the lower organizational status.

In general, individuals of low organizational status, (who are most likely to have first-hand information about problems, and potential disasters) may have great difficulty in conveying the information to upper management.

Topic 7) Problems and Disasters that can Develop from a Problematic Chain of Command, and Formal Communication Channels

In general, formal communication channels tend to inhibit communication from the individuals at the bottom of the hierarchy, to the top of the hierarchy. This can sometimes result in problems, and even serious disasters. This is because employees at the lower level of the hierarchy often have firsthand information about problems, and potential disasters, which may be unknown or poorly understood by management. This can include inadequate or damaged safety equipment, and/or lack of funding to maintain equipment. Employees at the lower level of the hierarchy may also have firsthand information about production problems, and potential or actual marketing failures. Even when vital information starts to travel up the hierarchy,

it might be stopped or slowed down before it reaches upper management. All of the above can sometimes result in serious problems, which is explained in detail in the next section, with real-life examples.

Section 3) Management Problems, and Dysfunctional Transmission of Information Through

Formal   Communication Channels

Topic   8)   Serious   Problems   can   Sometimes   be Triggered   by   Dysfunctional   Communication   Channels,

and/or   Upper   Management   Efforts   to   Save   Money Or   to   Complete   a   Project   on   Schedule

Sometime serious disasters can be triggered by dysfunctional management efforts. For example, upper management may want to cut expenses of an external facility, such as a pesticide factory that is losing money, or an offshore oil-drilling rig. Upper management might pressure the technical personnel to cut expenses. This might result in the reduction of maintenance, and inadequate or damage safety equipment. Upper management may not be aware of the risks, or they may underestimate the significance of the risks. It may be difficult for

engineers and safety personnel to adequately explained and transmit the required information through formal channels of communication. This might require convincing upper management to spend substantial sums of money on maintenance and safety equipment. All of the above appears to have been factors that triggered some of the disasters that are listed in the following paragraphs.

Topic   9)   Presented   in   Web - Based   Videos, Real - life   Disasters   that   may   have   Been   Triggered   by Dysfunctional

Management Strategies, and/or Failures   in   Communication   Channels The disasters presented in the following web-based videos, appear to have been partly or totally, triggered by failures in communication channels, and/or problematic management strategies. This included engineers and/or technicians that fail to successfully communicate and/or convince upper management of impending disasters. Based on the information presented in the videos, it appears that most of the disasters could have easily been prevented, if the communication channels functioned well enough to transmit enough information to upper management to convince them to take IMMEDIATE corrective action .

Because of the complexity involved, the triggers of some of the disasters can be interpreted differently than the dynamics presented in the videos, as well as differently than the above. Note some of the disasters are explained in two

videos, which in some cases involve slightly different interpretations.1) Seconds From Disaster - S03E18 Space Shuttle Explosion Space Shuttle

Challenger, NOTE THIS DISASTER IS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN TOPIC 9, 2) Seconds From Disaster Bhopal Nightmare, 3) The Bhopal Disaster ( INDIA ) Nat Geo Full Documentary, 4) Zero Hour - S03E02 - Falling Star - Space Shuttle Columbia Disaster, 5) Space Shuttle Columbia - Recreating Events, 6) Deepwater Disaster - BP Oil Spill (Documentary), 7) Seconds From Disaster The Deepwater Horizon .

The following are video search pages that deal with a number of major disasters, many of which appear to have been triggered by dysfunctional management. 8) YouTube Seconds from disaster, 9) Google video search Seconds from disaster, 10) YouTube channel "Seconds from disaster"

Topic 10) A Detailed Discussion of the Challenger,   Space   Shuttle   Disaster

The following web link is for a video that involves the space shuttle Challenger disaster, and it serves as an excellent illustration of the problems discussed in the previous paragraphs: Web link to video on Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster More details are provided in the following short article on the disaster: “Engineer tried to halt shuttle launch The night before the 1986 explosion, Boisjoly and four others argued that joints in the shuttle's boosters couldn't withstand a cold-weather launch.” (The above is a web link, and a quote from an article by

Ralph Vartabedian.)A description of the problem: an engineer, Boisjoly, and four of his

colleagues, were aware that the space shuttle would blowup, if it was launched. He tried to convince upper management and other officials to stop the launch, with no success.

This engineer (Roger Boisjoly, and his colleagues) had specialized knowledge that the other individuals working on the project did not have. With complex technological projects, such as the space shuttle Challenger, usually each engineer, or engineering team, has specialized knowledge that relates to specific sections of the project. Boisjoly, and his colleagues, apparently had specialized knowledge, about the O-rings, used on the solid fuel rocket engines. The O-rings are made of a rubberlike material, which prevents gas from leaking out of the joints of the rocket engine. When this material is exposed to low temperatures, it contracts, and it is reduced and thickness. As a result, it will allow flammable gases to leak through the joints of the rocket engines. The space shuttle Challenger and its rocket engines were exposed to very low temperatures, for several days before the launch.

The engineer, Roger Boisjoly, carried out the basic steps to stop this disaster, which involved attempts to communicate with upper management and other officials. However, when these steps failed, he should have taken the steps listed in the following topic.

Topic 11) How to Prevent Serious Disasters, when Management   and/or   Communication   Channels   Fail

Assuming there is a serious managerial or communication problem in an organization that may result in the loss of life or property, the first step is to send: letters, e - mails , and/or reports explaining the risks to several individuals in upper management, including the CEO or president. Ideally, the above should be supported by several individuals that have appropriate expertise, such as by signing the documents mentioned above. If the above documents are sent by several individuals, the impact might be even greater. Sending multiple copies to several individuals within the organization might also be helpful. If time permits, some of these documents can be send by registered or certified mail, so there will be legal proof that the information was transmitted to the correct officials.

The above should be coupled with attempts to reach upper management by phone, and/or by scheduling one or more face-to-face discussions. This is because people do not always read all of the documents they receive. Sometimes busy individual simply skim read a document, which can prevent them from understanding the serious nature of a problem. Even when technical documents are thoroughly read by non-technical personnel, they can be misunderstood. (Note, if time is very limited, the underlined words above, should be the first step.)

If the ideas presented above do not result in adequate corrective

action, the next step is to notify other individuals in the organization about the problem. This includes individuals that are ordered to initiate or activate a project. For example, with the shuttle Challenger disaster, if Roger Boisjoly, notify the astronauts , and ground crew , that the shuttle would probably blow up if it is launched, most likely everyone concerned would disobey the orders of upper management. Thus, the launch would be canceled, and the disaster would be prevented.

If all of the strategies mentioned above fail to initiate adequate corrective action, the next step is to release all the available information to the press, general public , as well as all of the employees and officials in the organization This can also include the direct release of the information to individuals outside of the organization, such as government officials. The documents and statements released to the press and officials should explain the risks, and emphasize that a serious disaster may result, if corrective action is not taken. With this step, it is important that all of the officials in the organization are aware that the information was released to the press.

The steps presented above represent a good strategy to stop a disaster that may result from problematic management or dysfunctional communication channels. However, this strategy might result in loss of employment for the whistleblower, especially if the problem progresses to the point where information is released to the press. Another problem is you can never be absolutely-certain that a disaster is going to take place. For example, if

the O-rings on the shuttle solid booster rocket engines warmed up from sunlight, just before the launch, or even during the launch, the space shuttle probably would have not blown up.

Topic 12) Structuring a Technological Organization, to Prevent   Safety   Hazards,   and   Disasters

When an organization is structured in the traditional way, upper management generally makes most of the final decisions. In addition, upper management has the power to overrule the other managers and employees in the organization. Engineers, scientists, and technicians can be overruled by upper management, even if they are requesting expenditures that will reduce risks of disasters. In general, upper management makes the final decisions, with the traditional organizational structure.

The important idea to understand is upper management generally does not have the technical and scientific background needed to make technological decisions, especially if it involves safety. Usually, upper managers are skilled in human relations, and assessment of marketing and financial risks. Even when upper management has an adequate engineering or scientific background, they probably would not have the detailed knowledge of engineers and scientists that are actually working on a project. As a result, they are not qualified to make decisions that involve risk assessments that involve complex technology.

The problem described above can be greatly aggravated by scientific and

technical personnel that are not trained in communicating at a non-technical level. It takes a great deal of knowledge and skill to explain highly technical information, and related technical hazards, in language that can be FULLY understood by managers that do not have an adequate scientific and technical background.

A potential solution to the problems presented above is to structure an organization in a nonconventional way. This would involve an engineering and safety department that has the authority to make safety decisions, and to override the orders of upper management whenever safety is involved. With this structure, upper management must follow the orders of the engineering department went safety is involved. However, if upper management does not want to invest in safety equipment for a project, or spend money on reducing hazards in a production facility, they can cancel the project, or close the facility. This structure would maintain upper management control, and authority, without risking life and property.

To go to the top of this webpage, left click on these words

Hyperlink Table Of ContentsBelow is the hyperlink table of contents of this chapter. If you left click on any of the blue underlined words, a section or topic heading will appear on your computer screen.

Section 1) The Input and Output of Information Between the Subsystems   of   an   Organization, And   Redefining Managing, and Management In   Terms   of   the   Above ............. 2

Topic 1) The Input and Output of Information Between the Subsystems   of   an   Organization ................... 2

Topic 2)Redefining Managing in Terms of the Input and Output of   Information,   from the Organizational Subsystems, to a Controlling   Subsystem,   called   Management 3

Topic 3) What is Management, and What Does Management Do,   from   the   Perspective of the Input and Output of Information,   from   One   Subsystem   to Another 4

Section 2) Chain of Command, and Communication Channels, Explained in Terms of the Input   and   Output   of   Information from one   Organizational Subsystem to Another .... 5

Topic 4) Note for the Following Material ...... 5

Topic 5) The Chain of Command, Formal Communication Channels,

And   the   Input   and Output of Information Between The   Subsystems   of   an   Organization ............ 6

Topic 6) Typical, Formal Communication Channels, Illustrated   with   a   Hypothetical   Organization 7

Topic 7) Problems and Disasters that can Develop from a Problematic Chain of Command, and Formal Communication Channels ................................................... 8

Section 3) Management Problems, and Dysfunctional Transmission of Information Through Formal   Communication Channels ................................................... 10

Topic   8)   Serious   Problems   can   Sometimes   be Triggered   by   Dysfunctional   Communication   Channels, and/or   Upper   Management   Efforts   to   Save   Money Or   to   Complete   a   Project   on   Schedule ....... 10

Topic   9)   Presented   in   Web - Based   Videos, Real - life   Disasters   that   may   have   Been   Triggered   by Dysfunctional Management Strategies, and/or Failures   in   Communication   Channels ......... 11

Topic 10) A Detailed Discussion of the Challenger,   Space   Shuttle   Disaster ........... 12

Topic 11) How to Prevent Serious Disasters, when Management   and/or   Communication   Channels   Fail 13

Topic 12) Structuring a Technological Organization, to Prevent   Safety   Hazards,   and   Disasters ...... 16