Systems thinking is a management discipline concerned with understanding a system by examining the connections and interactions between the components that make up the entirety of that system. defined system. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayThe whole system is a systemic view of the organization as a whole in relation to its environment. It provides a way to understand, analyze and talk about the design and construction of the organization as an integrated and complex composition of many interconnected systems (human and non-human) that must work together for the whole works successfully. composed of systems, the basic unit, which includes several entities (e.g. policies, processes, practices and people) and can be decomposed into other subsystems. Systems can be seen as having clear external boundaries (closed) or having connections to their environment (open). An open systems perspective is the most common and realistic. The boundaries of an entire system can be chosen and defined at a level appropriate to the particular objective under consideration; for example, the education system or a complete school system. Likewise, systems can be chosen and defined at different levels and can operate alongside each other as well as hierarchically; for example, financial system, decision-making system, accountability system. An organization as an entity can experience systemic failure. This occurs system-wide or in a high-level system where there is a failure between and within elements of the system that must work together for overall success. Factors for systemic failure can include confused goals, poor system-wide understanding, faulty design, individual problems. incentives that encourage loyalty to subordinate (rather than superior) goals, inadequate feedback, poor cooperation, lack of accountability, etc. System-wide success requires a performance management system that sits above the level of individual systems and their functional leadership. . Features may include group or team-level goal setting, development, incentives, communication, evaluations, rewards, and accountability. The objective is to focus on what binds individuals together and what binds systems together rather than on performance in functional silos. Failure of an entire system can coexist with functional success. Silo leadership may be successful individually but not sufficiently integrated into the overall system due to a lack of systems design, management, or understanding. A system as a whole can only succeed through the collaboration of managers within and across a number of functional systems. The system as a whole can only fail when leadership at the level of the system as a whole fails and when multiple senior managers are involved. Therefore, such a failure can be termed as a systemic failure of leadership. In the event of systemic failure, individual leaders who operate at a lower subsystem level can be absolved of responsibility and blame. They might argue (rightly) that it is the system as a whole that has failed. They may claim that some of the systems built into their own work have failed them. However, responsibility and accountability for’.