A Sociotechnical Systems Model of Organizational Complexity and Design and its Relation to Employee Cognitive Complexity

2009 ◽  
Vol 53 (16) ◽  
pp. 1028-1032 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hal W. Hendrick
Keyword(s):  
Systems Theory ◽  
Cognitive Complexity ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Sociotechnical Systems ◽  
Organizational Complexity ◽  
Systems Model ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

The Sociotechnical model of organizational complexity is described, including its implications for organizational design, based on the Macroergonomic Analysis of Structure method. The nature of cognitive complexity and the relationship of employee complexity to organizational complexity are summarized, including stratified systems theory and empirical examples from the author's consulting and research.

The Evolution of Organizational Design from Independent to Dependent Variable

1987 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-172
Author(s):  
Ogden Brown
Keyword(s):  
System Design ◽  
Systems Theory ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Sociotechnical Systems ◽  
Design Models ◽  
Sociotechnical Systems Theory ◽  
Independent Variable ◽  
The Relationship

The concept of organizational design is presented and the relationship between structure and process is discussed in the context of design. Three organizational design models and their characteristics are set forth. Principal contingency variables are identified and their relationships to organizational design are discussed. Evolution of organizational design as an independent variable to the role of a dependent variable is shown. Finally, system design based upon sociotechnical systems theory is identified and discussed.

Cognitive and Organizational Complexity and Behavior

2011 ◽  
pp. 147-159
Author(s):  
Hal W. Hendrick
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Complexity ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Traumatic Event ◽  
Organizational Complexity ◽  
Complexity Level ◽  
Organizational Position ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Perception Group ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Relationship Of

Historical findings concerning the nature of the higher-order structural personality dimension of cognitive complexity and related conceptual systems and the sociotechnical model of organizational complexity are summarized, including the relationship of the two. The author’s own research findings on early trainer and traumatic event effects on one’s complexity level are described. The relation of complexity level to creativity, leader behavior and influence, interpersonal and self-perception, group task performance, and matching individual and organizational position complexity, are reviewed. Implications of complexity level for organizational design and the design of information and training systems are noted.

Matching Individual and Job Complexity: Validation of Stratified Systems Theory

1986 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 999-1001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hal W. Hendrick
Keyword(s):  
Systems Theory ◽  
Cognitive Complexity ◽  
Job Complexity ◽  
Complexity Level ◽  
Hotel Managers ◽  
The Relationship

Stratified systems theory holds that hierarchical differentiation of jobs in organizations differ systematically in their cognitive complexity requirements, and that managers perform most effectively and are happiest when their own complexity level matches that of their position. In the present study, the cognitive complexity level of 22 hotel managers was assessed, and their potential for promotion to Area Manager was evaluated. The relationship between the two was significant beyond .01. Of the seven who were actually promoted during a three-year period, all but two were high on complexity. One of the two low on complexity later was demoted.

In Search of the Cognitively Complex Person: Is There a Meaningful Trait Component of Cognitive Complexity?

2021 ◽  
pp. 108886832097229
Author(s):  
Shailee R. Woodard ◽  
Linus Chan ◽  
Lucian Gideon Conway
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Complexity ◽  
Temporal Stability ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Moderate Amount ◽  
Situational Influences ◽  
Complex Thinking ◽  
Trait Variance ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

Researchers have long assumed that complex thinking is determined by both situational factors and stable, trait-based differences. However, although situational influences on complexity have been discussed at length in the literature, there is still no comprehensive integration of evidence regarding the theorized trait component of cognitive complexity. To fill this gap, we evaluate the degree that cognitive complexity is attributable to trait variance. Specifically, we review two domains of evidence pertaining to (a) the generalizability of individuals’ complex thinking across domains and the temporal stability of individuals’ complex thinking and (b) the relationship of complex thinking with conceptually related traits. Cumulatively, the literature suggests that persons’ cognitive complexity at any point in time results partially from a stable and generalizable trait component that accounts for a small-to-moderate amount of variance. It further suggests that cognitively complex persons are characterized by chronic trait-based differences in motivation and ability to think complexly.

scholarly journals Macroergonomics --- A Reappraisal

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 924-928
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Smith ◽  
Michelle M. Robertson ◽  
Robert A. Henning
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Organizational Design ◽  
Community Support ◽  
Sociotechnical Systems ◽  
Transfer Of Knowledge ◽  
Quality Performance ◽  
Systems Model ◽  
The Face ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
New Challenges

A series of organizational design and management (ODAM) challenges have emerged in recent decades that call for a reappraisal of the field of macroergonomics. These challenges can be grouped into three categories: updates to the sociotechnical systems model, and structural and transactional ODAM factors. The first two map to recent trends in globalization, technology, and demographics. The latter one maps to a series of new types of transactional demands on management related to community support, customer treatment, diversity, environmental impact, social media, sustainability, quality performance and treatment of workers. This analysis underscores that ODAM is a highly dynamic process mediated by the creation, retention and transfer of knowledge within an organization, defined as organizational learning. We conclude that this updated perspective of macroergonomics will improve the likelihood of this E/HF sub discipline remaining relevant in the face of a growing number of new challenges faced by present-day organizations.

Human Factors in Organizational Complexity

2009 ◽  
Vol 53 (16) ◽  
pp. 1026-1027
Author(s):  
Hal W. Hendrick
Keyword(s):  
Complex Systems ◽  
Human Factors ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Sociotechnical Systems ◽  
International Level ◽  
National Program ◽  
Organizational Complexity ◽  
Systems Model ◽  
Successes And Failures

Competitive demand for more rapidly responsive and flexible organizational designs has created new demands for human factors application – particularly at the macroergonomic level. This invited symposium presents four papers that provide different perspectives and understandings of the human factors aspects of organizational complexity. These include a sociotechnical systems model of organizational complexity and its relation to employee complexity, organizational complexity and communications, lessons learned from complex systems' successes and failures, and a case study of the expansion of a company's national program to the international level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document