Connections Between Components Comprises †Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Connections Between Components Comprises? Answer: Introduction Systems thinking is a discipline in management that is specifically concerned with the inherent comprehension and examination of connections between components that comprises a particular process. According to Weinberg (2011), systems thinking is an important concept in project management, quality and portfolio management, improving business processes and ensuring organisational maturity. Besides, Gharajedaghi (2011) defines systems thinking as the inherent ability to develop reliable insinuations about particular actions by establishing a progressively deep understanding of the fundamental structures. Through system thinking, innovative conception of facts can be stimulated opening up new possibilities, help in the identification and management of various risks and enhance communication. Moreover, the research by Leveson (2011) clearly stipulates that system thinking can effectively facilitate faster response to diverse changes during project execution as it can significantly improv e organisational leadership skills by raising awareness of various project objectives. Therefore, this research gives coherent exploration of relevant literatures on the concepts of systems thinking and how such relates to project, program and portfolio management. The research further identifies different tools of systems thinking, and will include the management of risks, value and systems engineering. Correspondingly, assorted forms of systems thinking that are important in project and portfolio management are discussed, and include, organizational forms, models, system engineering, and value and risk management. An explanation of the systems thinking approaches and a comparisons with the traditional methods is also given.; Significance of systems thinking to a project and an organisation According to Flood (2010), the application of systems thinking in project managements is becoming more paramount in most organisations. The research by Gharajedaghi (2011) point at the inherent need for increased transparency and comprehensive understanding of how diverse elements of systems thinking influences project management among other organizational facets. The underlying principles applicable here include the ability to develop quality thinking when solving various problems, increased candidness and identification of defective solutions. According to Weinberg (2011), some of the traditional approaches to project management majorly revolves around defusing complex elements of a project through accurate planning and establishing more control over the associated processes. However, such traditional approaches have limited influence on project management given that there are numerous arising issues that may occasionally necessitate critical thinking. Given the dynamic environments in which modern organizations operates in, project management is increasingly becoming a hard task. As such, by the research by Leveson (2011) perceive systems thinking as the most viable solution to the present and future challenges that relates to project management. To understand the significance of systems thinking, we must first understand the problem-solving processes in the context of project management. In their research, Best and Holmes (2010) further explains that problem-solving in an organization involve the precise identification of challenges that may interfere with the status quo. These challenges must be identified and properly understood by the decision-makers. Once the problems have been identified, systems thinking will enable an organization to adopt a holistic approach to problem solving. Such approaches include the determination of various opinions and techniques of thinking and how the status quo affects project implementation (Flood, 2010). Such holistic approaches include the identification of facts and related events, examining the subtle aspects of the identified challenges and developing instructive and characteristic reactions to the complex project dynamics (Kerzner, 2013). Another importance of systems thinking is that it enables an organization to clearly appreciate the cause-and-effect processes that are related to a particular phenomenon. This facilitates the establishment of network of interactions during project implementation based on an understanding of how problems can be connected to become complex organizational issues. According to by Leveson (2011) feedback loops are used in understanding variables that can influence project execution and interactions between such variables. The recapitulating patterns identified in the feedback loop can be used in the documentation of possible reasons for the complex problems. According to Leveson (2011), systems thinking is also instrumental in planning scenarios and modelling actions that simplifies the incorporation of diverse viewpoints. Such an approach to systems thinking majorly assumes that an organization relishes in relevant project information which can be used to solve arising challenges. Correspondingly, the research by Mingers and White (2010) clearly stipulates that systems thinking in project management can be used in the determination of specified behaviours and team approaches to project implementation. According to Nguyen et al. (2011), such approaches to systems thinking necessitates a higher level of adaptation to possible modifications to the present circumstances. For example, adapting to new technological innovations and increased level of knowledge sharing as some of the social processes that must be considered. As such, Best and Holmes (2010) further point that the project team must be more open and agile in the management of related activities. Besides, an organizational culture should be based on constant transformations in various aspects of the organisation that my limit the ability of the project team to adapt. The table below indicates alternative approaches and comparisons towards project management. Approaches Traditional approach Agile approach Systems thinking approach Comparisons Project solving and goals Gives a comprehensive delineation of project objectives based on the SMART model Such definition of project objectives is based on the strict examination of the diverse project requirements Gives a general explanation of concepts and possible outcome of the project The primary objective of the project team is to avail various project values to the clients Assumes an all-inclusive or holistic approach to solving related problems Gives a comprehensive definition of a project based on varied perceptions Gives a clear representation of project objectives among other phases of a project Project management cycle Assumes a linear cycle in project management that include clear explanation of various phases the project Project planning is strictly based on exhaustive timeframes which forms the basis of project management Assumes an iterative project management cycle that stresses on the delivery of functional elements Explains how organizations can adapt to changing situations Offers a close interaction with project beneficiaries such as clients Project executions processes are significantly simplified Assumes a non-linear cycle in project management that is majorly based on a cause-effect relationship in complex project setting Enables the examination of collaboration between various project elements Facilitates the development of potential substitute project scenarios Offers the project team an opportunity to adapt and manage changes in a dynamic project environment Organisational aspects A Work Breakdown Structure defines the organisational structure Project is highly formalized Majorly focuses on establishing a balance especially between fundamental project limitations such as cost and quality constraints Simplified organizations structures Majorly focuses on organizational flexibility, efficiency and adaptability Organizational structures moderately formalized Flexible, efficient and functional organizational structure Facilitates the development and adaptability to dynamic or complex project settings A highly competent project team Project team The oject team comprise of a narrow group of specialists The project team depicts high level of competency and experience Integrative (democratic) style of leadership is depicted The management style is majorly task-oriented The project teams are self-disciplined and organized The team comprises of a competent group of professionals Higher level of cooperation especially in decision making Increased communication especially among the project team members Incorporating project clients in the creation of final value The leadership and management styles stresses on cooperation and directing other team members. The project team comprise of a various interdisciplinary groups Project challenges are holistically examined The primary assumption is that the identified project problem is more complex than earlier anticipated The deciphering of the identified project problems based on the stipulated cause-and-effect relations in a complex project situation Encourages the sharing of thoughts on project implementation Stresses on the application of creative thinking to solve the identified problems The style of leadership common here is democratic that encourages project team members to freely participate in the process. Therefore, from the above comparisons, it is clear that systems thinking can complement other approaches to project management. Tools and techniques of systems thinking According to Davis et al. (2014), systems thinking tools are instrumental in facilitating the generation and organization of situations during project management. Some of the tools and techniques that comprise systems thinking include risk management, value and systems engineering. According to Senge (2014), systems engineering refers to the processes of designing and managing dynamic systems in the life cycle of a project. It include the ability to accurately test and evaluate, design and implement complex projects. Specifically, in this context, systems engineering deals with various project-related processes and aim at reducing the possible need for re-planning and optimization of the identified risk margin (Conti, 2010). Correspondingly, risk management refers to the processes involved in the assessment and elimination project risks. It includes increasing performances to ensure an iterative management of perceived project risks. According to Underwood and Waterson (2014), systems engineering also enable organizations to liaise and co-ordinate with pertinent bodies and other facets of project implementation. The figure below shows a functional systems engineering process. How systems thinking influences organisational structures, forms and business cultures According to Barile and Saviano (2011), systems thinking introduces a new insight on organisational structures, forms and business cultures. This is because it encourages a comprehensive and different look at organizational problems, and encourages the project team to freely interact and share important information. Systems thinking is also important in addressing various organizational challenges such as fragmentation and inadequate sharing of information among various departments (Caldwell, 2012). Specifically, systems thinking introduces a culture of cohesiveness and increased ability to handle complex systems based on a unique and all-inclusive learning process. ; How systems thinking influences Portfolio alignment and portfolio management process cycle Essentially, portfolio management focuses on the introduction of relevant change initiatives to a management system. As such, systems thinking facilitates the coordination and alignment of strategic business planning and corporate governance among other important functions to attain effective alignment of organizational portfolio (Caldwell, 2012). This ensure the creation of structures that can coordinate project activities and successfully deliver strategic project objectives. In essence, portfolio management as a form of systems thinking stresses on the prioritization of such processes that can result in the best possible outcome. This will enable an organization to avoid duplicating projects and initiating initiatives that can help in attaining the stipulate organizational objectives. How systems thinking influences business value model According to Conti (2010) business value model is an important form of systems thinking that can help an organization to better understand its problems that should be solved. This model assess such values that can drive customer satisfaction and possible limitations that can affect a business desire to establish relevant solutions. By establishing a business value model, an organization can be able to create a shared ideas and align the project team members to attain organizational objectives (Kerzner, 2013). How systems thinking influences organisational maturity Every company is pursuing absolute maturity in project management and implementation. Thus, systems thinking are seen as important factor in the successful implementation of organizational objectives. According to Barile and Saviano (2011), maturity in organizational setup aim at attaining near perfect development of organizational abilities. The company established that weak supply chain systems was a significant barrier to its market performances. The barrier meant that Costco would not adequately meet the growing demand of its organic food products among its customer bases. As such, they introduced a systems thinking model that focused on acquiring more organic food suppliers. This increased their capital prowess and improved their relationship with the customers. Thus, the company is guaranteed of organic food supplies and a positive return on its investments and increased value to customers.; Conclusions Indeed, systems thinking is a very powerful problem solving tool and technique especially in complex project situations (Caldwell, 2012). Notably, the research has clearly specified different literature, theories and how systems thinking can be applied in project management. Through system project, the research ascertains that an organization solve challenges related to project execution through a comprehensive perspective that acknowledges various systems and components constantly interacting during a particular process. Notably, systems thinking the management of an organization can significantly improve given the amplified level of information provided. This is because systems thinking encourages organizational management to approach issues through first assessing the perceived impacts and consequences of their resolutions. Such analyses will further help an organization to use systems thinking to generate alternative solutions to diverse issues arising in project and portfolio management (Kerzner, 2013). Furthermore, systems thinking encourages the formulation of optimal decisions and solutions that can benefit an organization in its entirety. Thus, the importance of systems thinking in project and portfolio management cannot be ignored whatsoever. The case study of Costco depicts a classic application systems thinking to increase organizational competence and customer value. References Barile, S. and Saviano, M. (2011) Foundations of systems thinking: the structure-system paradigm Best, A. and Holmes, B. (2010) Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards better models and methods, Evidence Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice,6(2), pp.145-159. Caldwell, R. (2012) Systems thinking, organizational change and agency: A practice theory critique of Senge's Learning Organization, Journal of Change Management,12(2), pp.145-164. Conti, T. (2010) Systems thinking in quality management, The TQM Journal,22(4), pp.352-368. Davis, M.C., Challenger, R., Jayewardene, D.N. and Clegg, C.W. (2014) Advancing socio-technical systems thinking: A call for bravery, Applied ergonomics,45(2), pp.171-180. Flood, R.L. (2010) The relationship of systems thinkingto action research, Systemic Practice and Action Research,23(4), pp.269-284. Gharajedaghi, J. (2011) Systems thinking: Managing chaos and complexity: A platform for designing business architecture. Elsevier. Kerzner, H. (2013) Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley Sons. Leveson, N. (2011) Engineering a safer world: Systems thinking applied to safety. MIT press. Leveson, N.G. (2011) Applying systems thinking to analyse and learn from events, Safety Science,49(1), pp.55-64. Mingers, J. and White, L. (2010) A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science, European Journal of Operational Research,207(3), pp.1147-1161. Nguyen, N.C., Bosch, O.J. and Maani, K.E. (2011) Creating learning laboratories for sustainable development in biospheres: a systems thinking approach, Systems Research and Behavioral Science,28(1), pp.51-62. Schiuma, G., Carlucci, D. and Sole, F. (2012) Applying a systems thinking framework to assess knowledge assets dynamics for business performance improvement, Expert Systems with Applications,39(9), pp.8044-8050. Senge, P.M. (2014) The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. Crown Business. Underwood, P. and Waterson, P. (2014) Systems thinking, the Swiss Cheese Model and accident analysis: a comparative systemic analysis of the Grayrigg train derailment using the ATSB, AcciMap and STAMP models, Accident Analysis Prevention,68, pp.75-94. Weinberg, G.M. (2011) An introduction to general systems thinking. New York: Wiley.