The Process Of Systems Thinking

871 Words4 Pages
Senge opined that the process of systems thinking is critical for one to comprehend the dynamic complexity of a social system (Palaima & Skarzauskiene, 2010). Thus, when one applies and adapts the principles of systems thinking in one’s organization as in the case of the present learning team, it is usually beneficial. For instance, it assists the team to comprehend a complex problem much easier as well as the interrelationships of the different parts and the different cause –and –effect cycles associated with such a problem. In essence, it is a means to manage a complex system when the focus is on the whole, its different parts, and the interrelationships of the different parts (Palaima & Skarzauskiene, 2010). For example, the bicycling tour, which is a multiple- day event, will have a route across adjoining states in order to appeal to different types of bicycle enthusiasts across United States, with invitations to international cyclists as well, which means that there will be participants with diverse cultural backgrounds taking part. As a result, the event will have implications for cross-cultural understanding and a sense of community. The team will be combining some medical research into the bicycle tour with emphasis on healthy lifestyle. According to Wen (2014), an organization at any level needs to have a vision to build what is described as an ecological civilization in order to encourage permanent happiness in today’s human society. Consequently, Veisten, Flügel, Ramjerdi, and Minken (2011) explained that there appears to a positive evidence of what is called positive health effects of physical activity such as cycling. For instance, studies found that if a person does a moderate to vigorous physical activity daily suc... ... middle of paper ... ...the different parts (Palaima & Skarzauskiene, 2010). According to Andreadis (2009), a balanced scorecard is described as an inventive and holistic method to what is described as organizational outcomes management. The principle underlying the balanced scorecard tends to acknowledge the weaknesses of measuring organizational effectiveness only in terms financial metrics, which are usually considered as lagging indicators of performance. Thus, the balanced scorecard assesses organizational performance from four perspectives: financial perspective, customer perspective, internal process perspective, and innovation and learning perspective (Andreadis, 2009). Andreadis (2009) explained that though the financial perspective is critical, however, balanced only occurs when it incorporates a wider set of measures linked to customer behavior, process management, and learning.
Open Document