Organizational diagnosis is a creative method to get to know an organization at all levels, from the superficial levels to the deeper hidden parts that are not visible to the naked eye. Performing an organizational diagnosis is very similar when a doctor tries to diagnose his patients.
Some doctors diagnose differently by focusing on nutrition, foods, and natural remedies, while others diagnose using chemical medications, or even trying a remedy, seeing if it has positive effects, and then trying something new.
Advertisements
This is very similar to what we have learned to do in the business sense with organizations. They can be used different diagnostic models in different situations depending on the wishes, needs and objectives of our clients.
Advertisements
In this article you will find:
Types
Diagnostic types can be divided in two ways: open systems and closed systems.
Organizational open system diagnosis
Open systems theory simply refers to the concept that organizations are strongly influenced by their environment. The environment is made up of other organizations that exert various forces of an economic, political or social nature.
Advertisements
Virtually all modern theories of organization use the open systems perspective. As a result, open systems theories come in many flavors.
For example, contingency theorists argue that organizations are organized in the way that best suits the environment in which they are embedded. Institutional theorists view organizations as a means by which social values and beliefs are integrated into the organizational structure and expressed in organizational change.
Advertisements
Resource dependency theorists see that the organization adapts to the environment as dictated by its resource providers. Although there is a wide variety of perspectives provided by open systems theories, share the perspective that the survival of an organization depends on its relationship with the environment environment.
Organizational diagnosis of closed system
A closed system perspective views organizations as relatively independent of environmental influences. The closed system approach conceives the organization as a management system, technology, personnel, equipment and materials, but tends to exclude competitors, suppliers, distributors and regulators governmental.
Advertisements
This approach allows managers and organizational theorists to analyze problems by examining the internal structure of a company with little regard for the external environment. The closed system perspective basically sees an organization as a thermostat.
Limited ambient input is required outside of temperature changes for effective operation. Once configured, thermostats require little maintenance in their continuous self-boosting function.
Although the closed system perspective was dominant during the 1960s, scholarship and research from organizations later emphasized the role of the environment. Until the 1960s, it wasn't that managers ignored the external environment, like other organizations, markets, government regulations, and the like.
Unlike closed systems, the open system perspective sees an organization as an entity that takes input from the environment, transforms them and releases them as outputs along with reciprocal effects on the organization itself along with the environment in which the organization Opera. That is, the organization becomes an integral part of the environment in which it is located
Models
The 12 organizational diagnostic models listed below are in the order in which they first appeared in the literature. Models reviewed in this section include:
- Lewin force field analysis (1951): The model is based on the process of change, with the social implications built into the model (eg, an imbalance is expected to occur until equilibrium is reestablished). The overall goal of this model is to intentionally move to a desirable equilibrium state. adding driving forces, when important, and removing restraining forces, when corresponds. These changes are believed to occur simultaneously within the dynamic organization.
- Leavitt model (1965): Some time after Lewin conceptualized force field analysis, Leavitt designed another relatively simple model. This model specifies particular variables within organizations, rather than driving forces; These variables include: task variables, structure variables, technological variables, and human variables.
- Likert system analysis (1967): The organizational dimensions that Likert addresses in his normative framework include motivation, communication, interaction, decision-making, goal setting, control, and performance.
- Weisbord six-box model (1976): He proposes six broad categories in his organizational life model, which include purposes, structures, relationships, leadership, rewards, and useful mechanisms. The purposes of an organization are the mission and objectives of the organization.
- Nadler and Tushman Congruence Model for Organizational Analysis (1977): The Nadler-Tushman congruence model is a more complete model, specifying inputs, returns, and outputs, which is consistent with open systems theory (Katz and Kahn, 1978). This model is very similar to the Leavitt model; it also retains the formal and informal systems of the Weisbord six-box model.
- Marco McKinsey 7S (1980): The seven S variables include structure, strategy, systems, skills, style, staff, and higher goals (ie, sharing values).
- Galbrath's Star Model (1982): the star model is a framework for making design decisions and decisions about organizational strategy and execution. The model includes five design elements or variables that leaders can use to influence the behavior and performance results in an organization (Strategy, Structure, People, Processes and Awards).
- Tichy Technical, Political and Cultural Framework (TPC) (1983): Similar to some of the earlier models, Tichy's model includes inputs, returns and outputs, which is consistent with the open systems perspective discussed previously.
- Nelson and Burns High Performance Programming (1984): Similar to Likert systems analysis, Nelson and Burns describe four organizational systems that are more or less effective. These systems, or frameworks, as Nelson and Burns call them, include the high-performance organization (level 4), the proactive organization (level 3), the responsive organization (level 2) and the reactive organization (level 1).
- Diagnosis of Harrison's model of individual and group behavior (1987): The model represents an open systems perspective with minimal boundaries between the organization and the external environment.
- Burke-Litwin Model of Performance and Organizational Change (1992): This model includes several key features that go beyond the models discussed above.
- Falletta's organizational intelligence model (2008): The IO model is a diagnostic framework for organizational diagnostic purposes, as well as an analytical framework in the design and interpretation of employee and organization survey efforts.