Hi all, Pam here! I’m your friendly neighborhood Stories Incorporated communications intern this summer! I’m in the middle of my master’s degree at Georgetown — the program is called Communication, Culture, and Technology, and I learned a ton my first year that I’d love to share with you.

Today, let’s get a little theoretical. I’m a big practice person, but I’m equally a big theory person. I think it’s vital to understand the framework behind tangible outcomes. One set of organizational theories that illuminated the reasoning behind some practices I saw was the rivalry between a “management” and a “systems” approach. Management science traditionally understands organizations as machines, where employees are parts that all work together to be seamless and efficient. This implies that employees, then, are akin to widgets or replaceable parts. Those working in these environments are chiefly motivated by a fear of losing their job and/or the expectation of a raise or promotion. Organizations with a management approach are often saddled with layers of bureaucracy and policies that hinder outside-the-box thinking or change of any kind. This also tends to encourage organizational division, silos, and guarding of resources.

A systems approach, on the other hand, is “a line of thought in the management field which stresses the interactive nature and interdependence of external and internal factors in an organization.” It views organizations as a living organism with great interconnected complexity. Those with this mentality recognize that individual influence matters, see the effect of organizational culture based on individuals, and prioritize management of relationships with groups and individuals. It espouses the idea that anyone can be a leader with the right skills. It’s integrated and interdisciplinary.

That’s great in theory, but how does it work in practice? One main ramification we see is the stifling of creativity, innovation, and change in a management approach. And a management approach in a systems situation tends to make employees feel as though they are powerless to change anything at all — that nothing is “allowed.” We see this often in bureaucracies or large institutions, like school districts or departments of government. Organizations with systems approaches tend to provide their employees with the tools they need to do their job well — as well as the trust to carry it out — making for much more satisfied, engaged employees. Open communication and transparency run rampant. We see this in Best Buy’s initiative, BlueShirt Nation, where front line employees were provided with an internal social networking tool — which they took to the next level, generating ideas, providing solutions, and offering insights to everyday customer issues.

Do you see your organizational structure or leadership leaning more to one of these theories than the other? If any change at all is so discouraged in a management approach, how does one affect the ultimate change — changing to a systems approach, where change is encouraged?

Pamela Kaye does PR and Communications for Stories Incorporated. Questions, comments, concerns, poetic insights? Let me know at info@storiesincorporated.com; I’d love to hear from you!

For further reading:

Best Buy Takes Employee Empowerment to a New Level

Systems Approach to Management Theory

Classical Schools of Management