Human Systems Management

This paper attempts to facilitate the transfer of management theory to practice by surveying the contemporary philosophical foundations of administrative science. Attention is directed toward three key dimensions of the problem. First, the assumptions and value matrix of management research and practice is examined. The importance of basic assumptions about the moral nature of human beings in organizations and the rationality premise are reviewed. Next, the feasibility of applying scientific methods to management and the possibility of operationalizing currently ambiguous concepts and terms are analyzed. Finally, some basic issues in research design strategies are presented. It is concluded that the present state of management theory and research is sufficiently flexible to encourage more applied endeavors and the cooperative spirit necessary for meaningful action oriented research.

The systematic description of basic social structure and process presented in this paper supports a primary editorial thrust of Human Systems Management: “Before the world can be changed it must be understood.” The world experience described in this paper is understood to be a complexity of generic structures and functions that translate into conceptual, existential, and transactive societal networks. The paradigm draws upon knowledge across many disciplines, particularly modern knowledge of general systems, neurological functioning, and social systems structure. A logical, descriptive process of inductive reasoning, supported continuously by practical examples, is used to develop the paradigm. The result is an architectural outcome in the sense that the paradigm defines, differentiates and integrates the generic structures and functions of everyday social experience and its developmental complexity. The development of social power, the function of social dialectics, the pervasiveness of social contradiction, and the experience of social conflict are a few of the phenomenon that are systematically described and illustrated.

The discussion of normative implications of the paradigm has been deliberately excluded from this work. The author is currently writing a sequel to this paper that describes the application of many of the concepts to the design of a professional association as a societal network.

Both managerial academic research and the management of the enterprise are based upon and are manifestations of underlying social paradigms. A social paradigm is a subjectively shared cognitive structure, a set of initial assumptions delineating the nature of social reality and determining how that reality is to be analyzed. Insofar as such paradigms may be in error, research anomalies and dysfunctional organization operations may result. This analysis will review the nature and significance of social paradigms and indicate how paradigmatic errors may be analyzed and corrected. Problems relating to paradigmatic transformation will also be briefly reviewed.

Bogdanov's Tektology represents a unique contribution to the field of organizational theory and practice. It is a general organizational science which is concerned with universal structural regularities, general types of systems, general laws of their transformation and the basic laws of organization of any elements in nature, practice and cognition.

The paper outlines the basic concepts of tektology and provides some pertinent facts about its author and his other related works. It also offers an explanation for an unusually long period of neglect of tektology by contemporary scholars and indicates the relevance of tektology to modern generalizing sciences.

An integrative ecological conception of the activities in the world focuses upon areas of interaction. This emphasizes the complexity of interrelationships, much of which is beyond our current comprehension. Our ignorance demands our respect.

It is of heuristic value to regard any activity as a subsystem and determine the areas of interaction of that activity, to note its suprasystemic concerns and its costs. Does the measure of performance of the activity relate to and augment what is of greater ultimate value to us: human happiness and fulfillment? We need to note the true costs of activities. But these are not always known, and may be unknowable. We have few ways to envision the future potential uses of resources, whether human or otherwise. The future costs to ourselves and our children may very well be large unless we adopt a ‘caretaker’ approach to our resources. Our resources are precious and limited, sometimes irreplaceable and finite. They are gifts to be cherished and cared for, to ensure their lasting benefit for our existence.

All activities have functional limits; should these be exceeded, catastrophic disruptions occur. It is best for the humans and all other subsystems to live within their means in order to achieve greater stability and further viability. This remains a great task for us today.