Systems' Performance - Revision history

Flc at 02:26, 16 September 2025

2025-09-16T02:26:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:26, 16 September 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Performance_Systems.png\|right\|~~600px~~]]		[[File:Performance_Systems.png\|right\|450px]]
			=Introduction=
	The models of performance based on systems are among the important approaches that have been researched and are used to manage individual and organizational performance<ref>[[Performance_Models\|See here an overview on performance models.]]</ref>. After a review of the definition and of the most dominant models, this article offers a critique of the approach based on systems.		The models of performance based on systems are among the important approaches that have been researched and are used to manage individual and organizational performance<ref>[[Performance_Models\|See here an overview on performance models.]]</ref>. After a review of the definition and of the most dominant models, this article offers a critique of the approach based on systems.

Flc: Flc moved page Performance by Systems to Systems' Performance without leaving a redirect

2025-08-26T00:32:37Z

Flc moved page Performance by Systems to Systems' Performance without leaving a redirect

← Older revision	Revision as of 00:32, 26 August 2025
(No difference)

Flc at 16:09, 15 August 2025

2025-08-15T16:09:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:09, 15 August 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Performance_Systems.png\|right\|600px]]		[[File:Performance_Systems.png\|right\|600px]]

	~~Performance by~~ systems ~~is one of seven~~ approaches used to manage individual and organizational performance ~~that we've identified at GRI. Systems-based or systemic~~ performance models ~~emphasize~~ the ~~importance~~ of ~~an organization's means~~, ~~such as inputs, outputs, resource acquisition, and processes. The design~~ of the ~~organization is~~ based on an open system approach; inputs, transformation processes, and outputs are viewed as parts of a whole rather than independent components<ref>Yuchtman, E., Seashore, S. E. (1967). A System resource approach to organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32, 891-903.</ref>.		The models of performance based on systems are among the important approaches that have been researched and are used to manage individual and organizational performance<ref>[[Performance_Models\|See here an overview on performance models.]]</ref>. After a review of the definition and of the most dominant models, this article offers a critique of the approach based on systems.

	=Generalities=		=Generalities=
	With performance models based on systems, the objectives to be achieved by the organization are not the primary focus—without<ref>[[Performance_by_Objectives \|See here a review of performance based on objectives ~~in GRI’s wiki~~]]</ref>, however, being ignored—but the means employed to achieve them, and more generally, the viability and strength with which the system operates. The organization must have internal consistency. Its resources must be efficiently used.		Systems-based or systemic performance models emphasize the importance of an organization's means, such as inputs, outputs, resource acquisition, and processes. The design of the organization is based on an open system approach; inputs, transformation processes, and outputs are viewed as parts of a whole rather than independent components<ref>Yuchtman, E., Seashore, S. E. (1967). A System resource approach to organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32, 891-903.</ref>.

			With performance models based on systems, the objectives to be achieved by the organization are not the primary focus—without<ref>[[Performance_by_Objectives \|See here a review of performance based on objectives.]]</ref>, however, being ignored—but the means employed to achieve them, and more generally, the viability and strength with which the system operates. The organization must have internal consistency. Its resources must be efficiently used.

	With the system-based models, a successful organization defines its operating mechanisms and ensures they function in the best possible way<ref>Campbell, J. P. (1977). On the nature of Organizational effectiveness. In P. S. Godman & J. M. Pennings (Eds.), New perspectives on organizational effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pp. 13-55.</ref>.		With the system-based models, a successful organization defines its operating mechanisms and ensures they function in the best possible way<ref>Campbell, J. P. (1977). On the nature of Organizational effectiveness. In P. S. Godman & J. M. Pennings (Eds.), New perspectives on organizational effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pp. 13-55.</ref>.

	Systems-oriented models mainly concentrate on system variables that are not specifically related to individuals. They originate from approaches focused on operational and economic processes<ref>Melèse J. (1990). Systemic approaches to organizations. Towards the company with human complexity. Organization Editions. First published: 1979.</ref>. They can be described as technical, in contrast to other models within the stakeholders<ref>[[Performance_by_Stakeholders \| See here a review of performance based on stakeholders ~~in GRI’s wiki~~]]</ref> and Value approaches<ref>[[Performance_by_Values \| See here a review of performance based on values ~~in GRI’s wiki~~]]</ref>, which emphasize the human and social variables of the systems. Seven systemic models are reviewed below, before we conclude by looking at the other forms of models and what the GRI approach to performance tells us.		Systems-oriented models mainly concentrate on system variables that are not specifically related to individuals. They originate from approaches focused on operational and economic processes<ref>Melèse J. (1990). Systemic approaches to organizations. Towards the company with human complexity. Organization Editions. First published: 1979.</ref>. They can be described as technical, in contrast to other models within the stakeholders<ref>[[Performance_by_Stakeholders \| See here a review of performance based on stakeholders.]]</ref> and Value approaches<ref>[[Performance_by_Values \| See here a review of performance based on values.]]</ref>, which emphasize the human and social variables of the systems. Seven systemic models are reviewed below, before we conclude by looking at the other forms of models and what the GRI approach to performance tells us.

	=Operations Research Model=		=Operations Research Model=

Flc: /* Critique of the Systemic Models */

2025-08-06T19:33:17Z

Critique of the Systemic Models

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:33, 6 August 2025
Line 81:		Line 81:
	The use of a system’s variables, such as power or satisfaction, is never neutral; ideological, political, or philosophical considerations influence it. It is not neutral when viewed from the adaptive profiles either, which affect the way decisions are made and impact an organization’s culture and norms. It is thus helpful to extend the logic of the variables used in the system to continuously revise the system’s ultimate goals, vision, and mission statements, both for the system itself and for its stakeholders.		The use of a system’s variables, such as power or satisfaction, is never neutral; ideological, political, or philosophical considerations influence it. It is not neutral when viewed from the adaptive profiles either, which affect the way decisions are made and impact an organization’s culture and norms. It is thus helpful to extend the logic of the variables used in the system to continuously revise the system’s ultimate goals, vision, and mission statements, both for the system itself and for its stakeholders.

	~~</references>~~		=References=

	[[Category:Articles]]		[[Category:Articles]]
	[[Category:Performance]]		[[Category:Performance]]

Flc: /* Critique of the Systemic Models */

2025-08-06T19:32:27Z

Critique of the Systemic Models

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:32, 6 August 2025
Line 77:		Line 77:
	As evidenced at GRI with the adaptive profiles, values, and preferences from a behavioral standpoint, may adapt, but are consistent over time. Individuals prefer to express some behaviors, think, feel, and perform in specific ways. This, in turn, affects their decisions and the way they influence the organization and its systems.		As evidenced at GRI with the adaptive profiles, values, and preferences from a behavioral standpoint, may adapt, but are consistent over time. Individuals prefer to express some behaviors, think, feel, and perform in specific ways. This, in turn, affects their decisions and the way they influence the organization and its systems.

	Some system variables or criteria are not better or superior to others. An example is the survival criterion for an organization; under specific circumstances, it might be better for an organization and its stakeholders not to survive.		Some system variables or criteria are not better or superior to others. An example is the survival criterion for an organization; under specific circumstances, it might be better for an organization and its stakeholders not to survive<ref>Kaufman, H. (1976). Are government organizations immortal? Washington, D. C.: Brookings.</ref>.

	The use of a system’s variables, such as power or satisfaction, is never neutral; ideological, political, or philosophical considerations influence it. It is not neutral when viewed from the adaptive profiles either, which affect the way decisions are made and impact an organization’s culture and norms. It is thus helpful to extend the logic of the variables used in the system to continuously revise the system’s ultimate goals, vision, and mission statements, both for the system itself and for its stakeholders.		The use of a system’s variables, such as power or satisfaction, is never neutral; ideological, political, or philosophical considerations influence it. It is not neutral when viewed from the adaptive profiles either, which affect the way decisions are made and impact an organization’s culture and norms. It is thus helpful to extend the logic of the variables used in the system to continuously revise the system’s ultimate goals, vision, and mission statements, both for the system itself and for its stakeholders.

			</references>

	[[Category:Articles]]		[[Category:Articles]]
	[[Category:Performance]]		[[Category:Performance]]

Flc: /* Legitimacy Model */

2025-08-06T19:31:27Z

Legitimacy Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 6 August 2025
Line 68:		Line 68:
	This legitimacy model is often linked to the population ecology perspective, which views organizational survival as its primary goal.		This legitimacy model is often linked to the population ecology perspective, which views organizational survival as its primary goal.

	The organization succeeds when its structures and functions match the demands of the environment and relate directly to its survival or demise. Non-performance is shown by the organization not being selected by the environment. Organizational survival depends on environmental selection rather than solely on actions guided by organizational preferences and values.		The organization succeeds when its structures and functions match the demands of the environment and relate directly to its survival or demise. Non-performance is shown by the organization not being selected by the environment. Organizational survival depends on environmental selection rather than solely on actions guided by organizational preferences and values<ref>Hannan, M. T., Freeman J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929-964.</ref>.

	The organization aims to establish its legitimacy with the outside world and the general public to ensure its longevity and prevent rejection by the environment.		The organization aims to establish its legitimacy with the outside world and the general public to ensure its longevity and prevent rejection by the environment.

Flc: /* Social Regulation Approach */

2025-08-06T19:29:40Z

Social Regulation Approach

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:29, 6 August 2025
Line 50:		Line 50:

	=Social Regulation Approach=		=Social Regulation Approach=
	According to the social regulation approach, to maintain balance, adapt, and anticipate changes in its environment, the organizational system is regulated either autonomously by the actors themselves or through top-down management control. From this perspective, social regulation is the complex set of adjustment mechanisms that the company's social system develops and continuously applies, either officially (control regulation) or unofficially (autonomous regulation by the actors themselves).		According to the social regulation approach, to maintain balance, adapt, and anticipate changes in its environment, the organizational system is regulated either autonomously by the actors themselves or through top-down management control. From this perspective, social regulation is the complex set of adjustment mechanisms that the company's social system develops and continuously applies, either officially (control regulation) or unofficially (autonomous regulation by the actors themselves)<ref>Donnadieu, G. (1999). Overall performance: what determinants, what measure? In: D. Weiss et al., Les Ressources Humaines, Editions d’Organisation.</ref>.

	The modes of regulation and control of social action consist of three types: acting on the organization, intervening in the interactions of actors, and influencing culture. The channels of control and regulation are, in turn, of four types: supervisors, trade unionists, professional facilitators, and communication (sociologists), as well as participants (involvement of grassroots actors).		The modes of regulation and control of social action consist of three types: acting on the organization, intervening in the interactions of actors, and influencing culture. The channels of control and regulation are, in turn, of four types: supervisors, trade unionists, professional facilitators, and communication (sociologists), as well as participants (involvement of grassroots actors).

Flc: /* Katz & Kahn Model */

2025-08-06T19:27:03Z

Katz & Kahn Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:27, 6 August 2025
Line 45:		Line 45:

	=Katz & Kahn Model=		=Katz & Kahn Model=
	Performance, from the Katz & Khan model, is defined by the components of political effectiveness and efficiency . The higher the political effectiveness and efficiency, the better the organization's performance. Efficiency here refers to the ratio of energy outputs to inputs within the organization as a system. The greater the efficiency, the higher its profitability, stored energy, long-term survival, and growth.		Performance, from the Katz & Khan model, is defined by the components of political effectiveness and efficiency<ref>Katz D., Kahn, R.L. (1978). The social psychology of organization. New York: Willey. Originally published in 1966.</ref>. The higher the political effectiveness and efficiency, the better the organization's performance. Efficiency here refers to the ratio of energy outputs to inputs within the organization as a system. The greater the efficiency, the higher its profitability, stored energy, long-term survival, and growth.

	Political efficiency involves maximizing short-term inflows to the organization through advantageous transactions with outside agencies, groups, and members. This includes purchasing products or services at better prices via improved negotiations or lobbying efforts that result in more favorable legislation.		Political efficiency involves maximizing short-term inflows to the organization through advantageous transactions with outside agencies, groups, and members. This includes purchasing products or services at better prices via improved negotiations or lobbying efforts that result in more favorable legislation.

Flc: /* The Resource Model */

2025-08-06T19:25:52Z

The Resource Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:25, 6 August 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:
	With this model, performance, at least implicitly, depends on how closely the organizational structure aligns with technology and the environment<ref>Perrow, C. (1972). Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman.</br>Mohr, L. B. (1971). Organizational Technology and Organizational Structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 444-459.</br>Hickson, D. J., Pugh, D. S., Pheysey, D. C. (1969). Operations Technology and Organizational Structure: An Empirical Reappraisal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 378-397.</br>Pennings, J. M. (1975). The relevance of the Structural-Contingency Model for the Organizational Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quaterly, 20, 293-410.</ref>.		With this model, performance, at least implicitly, depends on how closely the organizational structure aligns with technology and the environment<ref>Perrow, C. (1972). Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman.</br>Mohr, L. B. (1971). Organizational Technology and Organizational Structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 444-459.</br>Hickson, D. J., Pugh, D. S., Pheysey, D. C. (1969). Operations Technology and Organizational Structure: An Empirical Reappraisal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 378-397.</br>Pennings, J. M. (1975). The relevance of the Structural-Contingency Model for the Organizational Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quaterly, 20, 293-410.</ref>.

	=~~The~~ Resource Model=		=Resource Model=
	The resource model was developed in the 1960s in response to what was then seen as blind faith in the goals model. The organization's performance is defined by its ability to use its environment to acquire scarce and valuable resources. To obtain its resources, the organization must negotiate its position.		The resource model was developed in the 1960s in response to what was then seen as blind faith in the goals model<ref>Georgopoulos, B. S., Tannenbaum, A. S. (1957). A study of Organizational Effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 22, 534-540.
			</ref>. The organization's performance is defined by its ability to use its environment to acquire scarce and valuable resources. To obtain its resources, the organization must negotiate its position<ref>Yuchtman, E., Seashore, S. E. (1967). A System resource approach to organizational effectiveness. American Sociological Review, 32, 891-903.</ref>.

	Energy, as a human activity, is an example of a resource. It is rare, valued, and universally required by all organizations. Other universal resources might include physical facilities such as warehouses or manufacturing workshops, technologies, or money that can be exchanged for other resources. Additional dimensions have been identified: liquidity, stability, relevance, universality, and substitution. Organizational performance is strongest when the organization maximizes its negotiating abilities and optimizes its resource procurement.		Energy, as a human activity, is an example of a resource. It is rare, valued, and universally required by all organizations. Other universal resources might include physical facilities such as warehouses or manufacturing workshops, technologies, or money that can be exchanged for other resources. Additional dimensions have been identified: liquidity, stability, relevance, universality, and substitution. Organizational performance is strongest when the organization maximizes its negotiating abilities and optimizes its resource procurement.
Line 37:		Line 38:
	Psychological determinants are relatively limited within the resource model compared to other factors. The environment plays a key role, but how environmental variables are utilized and the nature of internal or external stakeholders are not specified. Although this approach focuses on resources, implicitly considering them legitimate regarding an official objective, the resource model is, in fact, similar to goal-oriented models.		Psychological determinants are relatively limited within the resource model compared to other factors. The environment plays a key role, but how environmental variables are utilized and the nature of internal or external stakeholders are not specified. Although this approach focuses on resources, implicitly considering them legitimate regarding an official objective, the resource model is, in fact, similar to goal-oriented models.

	Without a clear definition of objectives, the concept of resource value remains ambiguous. The issue of how resources should be allocated and utilized cannot be overlooked.		Without a clear definition of objectives, the concept of resource value remains ambiguous<ref>Mohr, L. B. (1971). Organizational Technology and Organizational Structure. Administrative Science Quarterly ,16, 444-459.
			</ref>. The issue of how resources should be allocated and utilized cannot be overlooked. Some argue that because resources can be unique to each organization, acquiring them doesn’t offer a performance measure useful for comparing different organizations<ref>Price, J. L. (1972). The study of organizational effectiveness. Sociological Quaterly, 13, 3-15.
			</ref>.

	~~Some argue that because resources can be unique to each organization, acquiring them doesn’t offer a performance measure useful for comparing different organizations .~~ Additionally, like objective models, it’s hard ~~in this approach~~ to define a performance measure that applies to the organization as a whole. Conflicts arise from resource acquisition, meaning improving performance in one area can lead to decline in another. Making trade-offs is necessary, but the resource approach doesn’t provide solutions for this. In fact, the resource model is hard to put into practice.		Additionally, like objective models, it’s hard with the resource model to define a performance measure that applies to the organization as a whole. Conflicts arise from resource acquisition, meaning improving performance in one area can lead to a decline in another. Making trade-offs is necessary, but the resource approach doesn’t provide solutions for this. In fact, the resource model is hard to put into practice.

	=Katz & Kahn Model=		=Katz & Kahn Model=

Flc: /* Structural Contingency Model */

2025-08-06T19:19:09Z

Structural Contingency Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:19, 6 August 2025
Line 28:		Line 28:
	For example, if the environment and technologies are uncertain, organizations need to be flexible, decentralized, informal, and participative. Conversely, when technologies and the environment are certain, routine, and predictable, organizations should be structured differently.		For example, if the environment and technologies are uncertain, organizations need to be flexible, decentralized, informal, and participative. Conversely, when technologies and the environment are certain, routine, and predictable, organizations should be structured differently.

	With this model, performance, at least implicitly, depends on how closely the organizational structure aligns with technology and the environment.		With this model, performance, at least implicitly, depends on how closely the organizational structure aligns with technology and the environment<ref>Perrow, C. (1972). Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman.</br>Mohr, L. B. (1971). Organizational Technology and Organizational Structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 444-459.</br>Hickson, D. J., Pugh, D. S., Pheysey, D. C. (1969). Operations Technology and Organizational Structure: An Empirical Reappraisal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 378-397.</br>Pennings, J. M. (1975). The relevance of the Structural-Contingency Model for the Organizational Effectiveness. Administrative Science Quaterly, 20, 293-410.</ref>.

	=The Resource Model-		=The Resource Model=
	The resource model was developed in the 1960s in response to what was then seen as blind faith in the goals model. The organization's performance is defined by its ability to use its environment to acquire scarce and valuable resources. To obtain its resources, the organization must negotiate its position.		The resource model was developed in the 1960s in response to what was then seen as blind faith in the goals model. The organization's performance is defined by its ability to use its environment to acquire scarce and valuable resources. To obtain its resources, the organization must negotiate its position.