A unified open systems model for explaining organisational change - Information Systems Foundations: Constructing and Criticising - page 139

Figure 11.7 portrays how homeostasis, adaptation and transformation constitute the
punctuated equilibrium model, and how they are interrelated. The graph represents the
systemic behaviour, caused by the interaction among the organisation's subsystems and
between them and the external environment. The pattern of such interaction is funda-
mentally determined by the system's structure (Cavaleri and Obloj, 1993) and can be
measured by the system's output (Kramer and De Smith, 1977). The interaction between
organisations and their environment results in variation in the system's behaviour. Phase
A represents a system in a convergence period ( β 1 ), which is mainly typified by its
maintenance of a homeostatic condition (or steady state) - a condition in which the
system is attempting to realign or adapt itself to the minor changes in the environment.
Phase B represents a reorientation, which is characterised by a discontinuous and dis-
ruptive change that results in a reformulation of the organisation's basic constituents
(i.e. structure, strategy, process/technology and psychological component) and is tran-
sient in nature. If the transformational change is successful the organisation will attain
another equilibrium state (or convergence period) β 2 and remain in this state until con-
ditions prompt another transformation. At β 2 a new organisational form, which is more
complex and more capable of dealing with the environmental contingencies would be
expected to have emerged. Therefore, the unified model, which constitutes the traditional
open systems model and the dissipative structure model, can portray the whole change
phenomenon.
Tools for system manipulation
Organisations as complex systems can be manipulated by using the 'Management Systems
Model' or MSM (Cavaleri and Obloj, 1993). The MSM has five systemic tools or factors,
which are available for managers to manage or manipulate organisations in a desired
way, namely:
1. Strategy
2. Structure
3. Procedures (technology/process)
4. Culture
5. Leadership
This model implies that each systemic tool should be applied in a harmonised and
thoughtful manner to yield the best possible result as each particular tool or factor, when
applied, would yield a different systemic result. While leadership and strategy are
generally tools for inflicting changes or destabilisation on organisations, culture, proced-
ures or technology and structure are systemic tools that are typically used to impose
stability and regulation in the organisation. Moreover, the dynamic behaviour of the
organisation is a result of the interplay between these endogenous factors and the envir-
onment and the interaction among these endogenous factors themselves (e.g. the inter-
action among strategy, leadership, structure, procedures and culture).
Rather than being considered as one of the manipulating tools, each factor can also be
treated as an organisational property that can be changed to suit both external and in-
ternal contingencies. However, the effort required to change each property varies from
one to another. For example, in adaptation, or shallow change, it is common for an or-
ganisation to realign itself with the changing environment by adjusting one or more of
its properties (e.g. procedures/ technology, strategy, structure), which requires energy
and effort, although relatively little compared to transformational change. Transformation
(or deep change), however, requires a tremendous amount of energy, in terms of resources