Holism in Managerial Decision Making

Özet: Bu makale sistem düşüncesi ve sistem dilinin yönetsel karar verme ve problem yönetiminde olgunlaşan yapısını ele almaktadır. Sistem düşüncesi ve sistem dilinin dayandığı varsayım realitenin ana yapı taşlarının onu meydana getiren tek tek parçalarından değil, bu parçaların birlikteliğinden oluşan bütünden—sistemden olmasıdır. Bu sistemin içerisinde 'hasta yapılı'—sosyal ve davranışsal özellikler—gösteren ve 'sistemsel'—parçalar arasındaki bağlılıklardan oluşan— problemler pozitif bilimlerin indirgeme yöntemine dayanan teknik ve metotları ile çözülemezler. Bu tür problemler daha iyi teçhiz olmuş bütüncül bir yaklaşımla çözülmelidirler. Bu bağlamda, sistem düşüncesi ve sistem dili problem yönetiminde birleştirici bir yaklaşımla önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Bütüncül yaklaşım yönetsel karar verme süreçlerinde değişik sistem analojileri ve sistem metodolojilerinin birbirlerini tamamlayıcı rolüne vurgu yapar ve karar veren yada problem çözen firma yöneticilerine sistem fikrini aşılar.

Holism in Managerial Decision Making

Abstract: The paper mirrors the rising maturity of systems thought and systems language in managerial decision-making or problem management. It is based upon the assumption that building blocks of reality are not parts but wholes—systems in which ill-structured and systemic problems having social and behavioral aspects and interdependency cannot be worked out with the methods and techniques of reductionist positivist science. They require better-equipped 'holism' to deal with. In this regard, systems thought and systems language play a significant role as a unified approach to problem management. It emphasizes the complementary role of various systems metaphors and systems methodologies in managerial decision-making and liberates the consciousness of managers/problem-solvers/decision-makers to cope with organizational issues through systems idea.

Kaynakça

[1] Jackson, M.C. (2000). Systems Approaches to Management. London: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

[2] Jackson, M.C. (2003). Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers. Chichester: Wiley.

[3] Diesing, P. (1971). Patterns of Discovery in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Aidine-Atherton.

[4] Checkland, P.B. (1981). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Chichester: Wiley.

[5] Kaplan, A. (1964). The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co.

[6] Pantin, C.P.A. (1968). The Relations Between the Sciences. London: Cambridge University Press.

[7] Keat, R. & Urry, J. (1976). Social Theory as Science. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

[8] Giddens, A. (1979). Central Problems in Social Theory. London: Macmillan.

[9] Flood, R.L. & Carson, E.R. (1992). Dealing With Complexity: An Introduction to the Theory and the Application of Systems Science. 2nd Ed. New York: Plenum.

[10] Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics. New York: Wiley.

[ll]Ashby, W.R. (1956). An Introduction to Cybernetics. London: Methuen.

[12] Selznick, P. (1948). Foundations of the theory of organization. American Sociological Review, 13(1), 25-35.

[13] Parsons, T. (1956). Suggestions for a sociological approach to the theory of organisations-1. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1,63-70.

[14] Burns, T. & Stalker, G.M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.

[15] Lawrance, P.R. & Lorsch, J.W. (1969). Developing Organizations: Diagnosis and Action. Reading MA: Addison Wesley.

[16] Hannan, M.T. & Freeman, J.H. (1989). Organizational Ecology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

[17] Pepper, S.C. (1982). Metaphor in philosophy. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 3(3), 197-205.

[18] Morgan, G. (1986). Images of Organization. Beverly Hills: Sage.

[19] Morgan, G. (1997). Images of Organization. London: Sage Publications.

[20] Alvesson, M. & Deetz, S. (1996). Critical Theory and Postmodernism Approaches to Organizational studies. (Ed.: Clegg, R.; Hardy, C. & Nord, W.R.). Handbook of Organization Studies. London: Sage.

[21] Gerth, H.H. & Mills, C.W. (1970). From Max Weber. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

[22] Fayol, H. (1949). General and Industrial Management. London: Pitman.

[23] Taylor, F.W. (1947). Scientific Management. London: Harper and Row.

[24] Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. New York: Macmillan.

[25] Roethlisberger, F.J. & Dickson, W.J. (1939). Management and the Worker. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

[26] Maslow, A.H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row.

[27] Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 46, January, 53-62.

[28] McGregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill.

[29] Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General System Theory. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

[30] Chernsr A. (1987). Principles of sociotechnical design revisited. Human Relations, 40(3), 153-162.

[31] Peters, T.J. & Waterman, R.H. Jr. (1982). In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper and Row.

[32] Trist, E.L. (1983). Referent organizations and the development of inter-organizational domains. Human Relations, 36(3), 269-284.

[33] Simon, H.A. (1947). Administrative Behavior. New York: Macmillan.

[34] Galbraith, J.R. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley.

[35] Beer, S. (1979). The Heart of Enterprise. Chichester: Wiley.

[36] Beer, S. (1981). Brain of the Firm. 2nd Ed. Chichester: Wiley.

[37] Beer, S. (1985). Diagnosing the System for Organizations, Chichester: Wiley.

[38] Argyris, C. & Schön, D.A. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading: Addison Wesley.

[39] Child, J. (1981). Culture, contingency and capitalism in the cross-national study of organizations. (Ed.: Cummings, L.L. & Staw, B.M.). Research in Organizational Behavior, 3, 303-356.

[40] Pascale, R.T. & Athos, A.G. (1981). The Art of Japanese Management. New York: Warner.

[41] Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 339-358.

[42] Pfeffer, J. (1981). Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of organizational paradigms. (Eds.: Cummings, L.L. & Staw, B.M.). Research in Organizational Behavior, 3, 1-52.

[43] Maanen van, J. & Barely, S.R. (1985). Cultural organization. (Eds.: Frost, P.J., et al.). Organizational Culture. London: Sage.

[44] Weick, K.L. (1977). Enactment processes in organizations. (Eds.: Staw, B.M. & Salancik, G.R.). New Directions in Organizational Behavior. Chicago: St. Clair.

[45] Garfınkel, H. & Sacks, H. (1986). On formal structures of practical actions. (Ed.: Garfinkel, H.). Ethnomethodological Studies of Work. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

[46] Fox, A. (1966). Industrial sociology and industrial relations. Research Paper 3. Royal Commission on Trade Unions and Employers' Associations, HMSO, London.

[47] Bacharach, S.B. & Lawler, E.T. (1980). Power and Politics in Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

[48] Coser, L.A. (1956). The Functions of Social Conflict. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

[49] Crozier, M. (1964). The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. London: Tavistock.

[50] Pondy, L.R. (1967). Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(2), 296-320.

[51] Thomas, K.W. (1976). Conflict and conflict management (Ed.: Dunnette, M.D.). Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.

[52] Bachrach, P. & Baratz, M.S. (1962). Two faces of power. The American Political Science Review, 56(4), 947-952.

[53] Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A Radical View. London: Macmillan.

[54] Freud, S. (1953). Three essays on the theory of sexuality. The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, 7, 125-243.

[55] Freud, S. (1959). Character and anal eroticism. The Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, 9, 167-175.

[56] Coward, R. (1983). Patriarchal Precedents, Sexuality and Social Relations. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

[57] Becker, E. (1973). The Denial of Death. New York: Free Press.

[58] Klein, M. (1957). Envy and Gratitude. London: Tavistock.

[59] Bion, W.R. (1961). Experiences in Groups. London: Tavistock.

[60] Winnicott, D.W. (1958). Transitional objects and transitional phenomena, in Collected Papers. London: Tavistock.

[61] Jung, C.G. (1959). The Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

[62] Maturana, H.R. & Varela, F.J. (1980). Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

[63] Maruyama, M. (1963). The second cybernetics: Deviation amplifying mutual causal processes. American Scientist, 51(2), 164-179.

[64] Engels, F. (1940). Dialectics of Nature. (Ed.: Dutt, C). New York: International Publishers.

[65] Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: the Making of a New Science. London: Abacus.

[66] Stacey, R.D. (1992). Managing Chaos. London: Sage.

[671 Wheatley, M.J. (1992). Leadership and the New Science: Learning About Organization from an Orderly Universe. San Francisco: Berret-Kohler.

[68] Baran, P. & Sweezy, P.M. (1966). Monopoly Capital. New York: Monthly Review Press.

[69] Mouzelis, N.P. (1967). Organization and Bureaucracy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

[70] Braverman, H. (1974). Labour and Monopoly Capital. New York: Monthly Review Press.

[71] Salaman, G. (1981). Class and The Corporation. London: Fontana.

[72] Reich, M.; Gordon, D. & Edwards, R. (1973). Dual labor markets: A theory of labor market segmentation. American Economic Review, 63(2), 359-365.

[73] Peboard, G. (1967). The Society of Spectacle. Paris: Buchet-Chastel.

[74] Bakhtin, M. (1984). Rabelais and His World (Translated by H. Iswolsky). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

[75] Wittgenstein, L. (1974). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.

[76] Winch, P. (1958). The Idea of a Social Science and Its Relation to Philosophy. New Jersey: Humanities Press.

[77] Boje, D.M.; Luhman, J.T. & Cunliffe, A.L. (2003). A Dialectic Perspective on the Organization Theatre Metaphor. American Communication Journal, 6(2), 1-16.

[78] Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. London: Heinemann.

[79] Gergen, K.J. & Joseph, T. (1996). Organizational Science in a Postmodern Context. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(4), 356-378.

[80] Alvesson, M. & Deetzs, S. (2000). Doing Critical Management Research. Boulder: Sage.

[81] Taket, A.R. & White, L.A. (2000). Partnership and Participation: Decision-making in the Multiagency Setting. Chichester: Wiley.

Kaynak Göster