Organizational Development in Health Care: Theory and Application

Complex Adaptive Systems vs. Traditional Systems
Author Name
Institutional Affiliation

Complex Adaptive Systems vs. Traditional Systems
One similarity between complex adaptive systems and traditional management systems is the objective that underpins these systems. Both complex adaptive systems and traditional management systems aim to achieve organizational goals (Espinosa & Walker, 2011). Their approaches are, however, different. Complex adaptive systems try to bring the best out of individuals by adapting to changes in the operating environment (Holland, 2006). Traditional systems, however, are conservative and tend to adopt one way of doing things across the management continuum.
Conventionally, organization systems were thought to be closed. As such, management systems were designed hierarchically, such that control decision-making processes flowed from the topmost managers to the lowermost operatives (Collins, 2016).That is the basis of traditional management systems (T.M.S). Complex Adaptive Systems (C.A.S), on the hands, view organizations as open systems, where participants follow simple rules to manage themselves while solving complex problems. There are no bosses in complex adaptive systems. T.M.S and C.A.S also differ in terms of operations (Collins, 2016). While T.M.S emphasize the understanding all of systemic factors and mechanics of their operations, C.A.S emphasize how these systemic components relate to each other. Complex Adaptive Systems view organizations as a universal scheme, in which standards and protocols change, functions overlap, and roles diversify over time.

Complex adaptive systems are structurally multidimensional, and therefore accentuate leadership and collaboration. Traditional management systems, on the other hand, focus on management functions and chains of command (Hunter & Boynton, n.d). People at the top of the hierarchy do the control function. Information also flows in one direction through commands. The complex adaptive systems, on the other hands, employ positive and negative support systems that recognize achievements and focus on correcting behaviors rather than individuals.
In measuring improvements, conventional healthcare management systems look at the ability to realize all the key operating activities, noting those that were accomplished and those that were not realized. Complex Adaptive Systems, however, uses both projected and actual outcomes as the improvement measurement metrics (Hunter & Boynton, n.d). In traditional management systems, the efficiency of every part is paramount since it is the way to achieve improvements. This is different from the situation in complex adaptive systems where agility, trends, and changes are the focus of achieving improvements.

References
Hunter, G., & Boynton, B. (n.d.). Complex Adaptive Systems in Healthcare: A Leaders Perspective – Part 1. Retrieved January 27, 2018, from https://www.manageupprm.com/blog/2016/4/11/complex-adaptive-systems-in-healthcare-a-leaders-perspective-part-1Holland, J. H. (2006). Studying complex adaptive systems. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 19(1), 1-8.
Espinosa, S. A. M., & Walker, J. (2011). A complexity approach to sustainability: Theory and application. London: Imperial College Press.
Collins, R. (2016, June 15). The Management Wisdom of Complex Adaptive Systems. Retrieved January 27, 2018, from http://optimityadvisors.com/insights/blog/management-wisdom-complex-adaptive-systems