A System for the Comprehensive Analysis and Synthesis of Management Systems of Organizations

M. A. Tyryshkin

(Presented by the scientific seminar of the Department of Economics)

Introduction. At the present stage in the development of our society, the problem of improving the management of the units of the national economy has acquired exceptional urgency: industrial and agricultural enterprises, institutions of public education and health care, districts, regions, branches of the national economy, etc., and the national economy as a whole. There exists an entire complex of factors that have determined the acuteness of the problems of improving management. It is obvious that the colossal potential possibilities laid at the foundation of socialist society cannot be transformed into real benefits without high-quality management.

Enormous work on improving management is being carried out in our country. Research and design organizations, groups at enterprises, and individual enthusiasts are engaged in it. One thing is now beyond dispute: the overwhelming majority of people, both those connected with managerial activity and those not connected with it, are convinced of the need to improve management systems. However, when one begins this “improvement,” a host of questions arises: what in the management system should be improved? to what extent? in what sequence? and so on. The object of “improvement” has proved to be so complex, specific, and comprehensive that, as a result, the effectiveness of the proposed measures has turned out to be insufficiently high. It is becoming obvious that, in order to increase the effectiveness of improving management systems, a refined methodology is needed for their analysis and synthesis, one that takes into account all the features of the object.

Meanwhile, at present, as far as we know, there is no such comprehensive methodology whose individual elements would be appropriately interconnected.

In the present work, one of the possible approaches to creating a system for the comprehensive analysis and synthesis of management systems of organizations (SCASMSO) is presented. Here the term “organization” is understood in the broadest sense: it may be an industrial enterprise, a shop or department of such an enterprise, institutions such as an educational establishment or health-care institution, etc. In other words, what is considered is the so-called class of goal-oriented systems that include people and collectives of people [1]. The terms “organization” and “system” should hereafter be understood as synonyms.

The basis of SCASMSO. The basis of the proposed system of comprehensive analysis and synthesis of organizational management systems was: 1) the ideas of systemic and goal-oriented description according to [1, 2]; 2) a comprehensive interpretation of the concept of “management,” as well as the structure and content of the science of management according to [3]; 3) the definition of the concept “structure of a management system,” as done in [4]; 4) certain ideas underlying the so-called system of comprehensive planning, set forth in [5]; 5) domestic, foreign, and personal experience in performing work in the area under consideration.

A major role in forming the conviction that it was necessary to create SCASMSO was also played by: the author’s development of the training course “Organization of Management of Socialist Production,” leadership of a city seminar for propagandists on the course “Fundamentals of the Economics and Management of Socialist Production,” lectures on management at enterprises, and the performance of research work.

Content of SCASMSO. The system of comprehensive analysis and synthesis of organizational management systems is the aggregate of tasks that must be solved in the process of analyzing existing management systems and designing new ones, the interrelationship among them, the principles of the approach to their solution (algorithms), and also the form in which the solution results are presented.

In this article we shall give only a list of the tasks of analysis and synthesis that must be solved in rationalizing existing systems, and we shall give their brief characterization. The algorithms for solving these tasks constitute an independent and complex field of research, which is currently being pursued.

SCASMSO includes the following tasks, which must be solved in rationalizing management systems.

1. Identification and analysis of the organization’s goals (OG). It is impossible to give an objective assessment of the results of the functioning of a management system (MS) if the OG are incompletely, unclearly formulated, or not formulated at all. The objects of goal-oriented description are the products and objects of labor, the means and process of labor, and also the workforce, in three languages: economic, natural (technical-technological), and also social. The results of the goal-oriented description are presented in the form of the corresponding matrix [2]. If in the process of “identification” it turns out that the organization lacks such a description or that the description is incomplete, then the task arises of synthesizing the goal matrix. The same task must be solved when designing a new organization. Let us note that the formation of the goals of activity is the starting point in constructing the management mechanism [3].

2. Identification and analysis of state parameters (SP), which are used to monitor the current states of the objects of the goal-oriented description. SP are presented in the form of the same matrices as in the goal-oriented description. It is obvious that for formulated OG there must exist a quite definite set of SP, by recording which it becomes possible to monitor the trends in the development of the organization. If in the process of “identification” a complete or partial absence of an SP description is found, then the synthesis task is solved—the formation of SP.

3. Identification and analysis of criteria for evaluating the organization’s activity. In systems that include a human being, the most important condition for their effective functioning is the correct selection of evaluation criteria [7]. The absence of justified criteria is a condition for posing the task of their synthesis. Moreover, this task must be solved as soon as possible.

more operationally, since under conditions of the absence of criteria, or their incorrect formulation, there is a greater probability that the system will operate inefficiently or, what is still more dangerous, in a direction harmful to the supersystem.

1. Analysis of the links between the TsO. There is a certain relationship among the various goals: the attainment of some promotes the attainment of others, some are more important, others less so, etc. The task of analyzing the links among goals reduces to identifying the “tree” of goals, the ratio of their weights, etc. In most existing organizations, as a rule, such “trees” have not been constructed; therefore the task of synthesis must be solved: the formation of the “tree.” The principles of construction, characteristics, and requirements for “trees” of goals are partially formulated in [1, 2, 5].

2. Determination of the links between PS by identifying the “tree” of PS. It is based on the “tree” of goals, is connected with it, and is its consequence. The absence of such a “tree” poses the task of synthesizing it.

3. Analysis of the links between criteria and identification of the “tree” of criteria. In its absence—synthesis.

4. Identification of the links between PS and TsO. A check must be carried out: goals are the state parameters that must be recorded while monitoring the functioning of the organization. The absence of unambiguous links is a condition for posing the synthesis task: the formation of matrices—goals—PS.

5. Identification of the links between goals and criteria, and, in their absence, their formation.

6. Identification of the links between criteria and state parameters, and in the case of a negative result—the formation of these links.

7. Identification of the types of activity (work, tasks) that are performed to ensure the attainment of goals. Construction of the goals—tasks matrix and its analysis. In the absence of these data, the task of forming the matrix must be solved. It should be noted that this stage is exceptionally important. The content of the duties of the corresponding performers in the management system and the direction of its functioning will depend on the quality of its execution.

8. Identification and assessment of the types and capacities of resources used in solving tasks, organization of the performance of work ensuring the attainment of goals, and analysis of their sufficiency. In the absence of the required balance, balancing of “tasks—resources” must be carried out.

9. Analysis of the links between the goals, tasks (work), and resources of organizations by representing them in the form of the “goals—tasks—resources” matrix.

10. Identification of the structure and content of the methods (ways) of influence used in the organization, and their analysis. Formation of this structure and content in the event that vagueness, specificity, and deviations from the norms determined by the laws of society are discovered. Here there is a connection with the section “methods of management” in the science of management [3].

11. Identification of the interrelations among methods of influence and their analysis.

12. Identification of the structure and content of the principles underlying the existing practice of management, and their analysis. In the case of absence or deviation from norms—their synthesis.

13. Identification, description, and analysis of the structure of the management system as a set of interrelated managerial positions (posts) and production elements (the task of representing the structure of the system).

1. Identification, description, and analysis of the structure and interrelations of managerial positions as a set of decision-making bodies.

2. Identification and analysis of the structure of the control system as a set of interrelated competencies (goals, tasks, resources, rights, responsibilities) [4]. In practice, this task may also be encountered under the name of the task of analyzing regulatory documents—regulations on subdivisions and job descriptions. In the event that these documents are found to be absent or unsatisfactory (and this happens not so rarely [8]), the task of synthesizing competencies must be posed (the problem of centralization and decentralization, the task of synthesizing regulatory documents).

3. Identification and analysis of the links between the competencies of individual managerial positions and the goals, tasks, and resources of the organization as a whole and with one another.

4. Identification and analysis of criteria for evaluating the activity of subsystems, their interrelations with one another and with the criteria of the organization as a whole.

5. Identification and analysis of the state of distribution of competencies among decision-making bodies in the corresponding managerial positions.

6. Identification of the structures of interrelations among works (tasks) performed in the control system, and of their information support (the task of constructing so-called schemes and systems for decision-making [9]). In the overwhelming majority of organizations these interrelations are not represented in the form of corresponding schemes. Therefore, when studying a specific organization, as a rule, the task arises of synthesizing such structures.

7. Identification of the nature of the distribution over time of works (tasks) performed by the corresponding decision-making bodies (the task of identifying calendar plans of activity).

8. Analysis of the interrelations of the calendar plans of various managerial positions. Obviously, most often this task will be solved as the task of synthesizing these interrelations.

9. Identification of the existence of algorithms (or decision tables) for the solution (execution) of the corresponding tasks (works) by the corresponding decision-making bodies. This task may be formulated as the task of identifying the rules for performing official duties. In this case the matter concerns traditional (normative), planned tasks that are the subject of labor in the control system. In the absence of algorithms for certain tasks, the task of synthesizing algorithms for their solution is addressed. In the process of the organization’s functioning, a bank of algorithms (tables) of decisions should be formed and built up [10].

10. Identification and analysis of the existing “technology” for resolving problems that arise in the process of functioning of the organization and its subsystems. Formation of a “technology” for resolving problems in the event of its absence or imperfection.

11. Assessment of the possibilities of solving the corresponding tasks addressed in the control system with the use of technical means (including electronic computing machines). Determination of the sequence for transferring the solution of these tasks to computers. Introduction of corrections into the competencies of decision-making bodies under these conditions.

12. Identification and analysis of the existing technical means used in the control system. Formulation of the task of increasing their capacities.

13. Identification and analysis of the existing requirements for the knowledge, abilities, and skills of managerial personnel. In the absence of clarity on this question—the synthesis of these requirements.

1. Analysis of the existing system for forming managerial personnel in the organization, and, in the event of its absence, synthesis of this system.

2. Identification of the existence of systems for modeling the processes of functioning of management systems. For most existing organizations such systems are absent; therefore this task, as a rule, becomes a task of synthesis.

3. Identification of the general characteristics of management systems (cost, number of people employed, relative characteristics, etc.) and of the principles for introducing changes into it.

4. Identification and analysis of the principles existing in the organization for preparing documents regulating the process of functioning of management systems. This task is one of assessing the form and content of provisions and job descriptions (regulatory documents).

The above list of tasks is, in the main, sufficient for analyzing the management systems of existing organizations. Their solution makes it possible to obtain interesting characteristics of what exists (to reveal the existing picture) and to carry out the necessary rationalization. The given sequence in which the tasks are enumerated roughly corresponds to the order of the sequence of analysis of a management system. There is a definite interconnection among the tasks of analysis, i.e., one or another task can be solved provided that a number of other tasks have been solved. In other words, a network model of analysis can be constructed (it is not presented in this article).

The corresponding tasks of analysis, naturally, must have detailed formulations and algorithms for solution. At present, for a number of these tasks such formulations and algorithms exist. However, the complete elaboration of the tasks and the construction of algorithms for their solution will require much effort. Work in this direction is continuing.

A variant has been obtained of a set of tasks and their interconnections (a network) applicable to the design (synthesis) of the management system of a new organization (or for an existing one, provided that the “destruction” of its management system is allowed). This set partially overlaps the tasks of analysis; however, there are also differences both in the formulations and in the sequence, interconnections, and overall set (there are about 40 of them).

What is the need for a system of comprehensive analysis and synthesis of management systems? It is, above all, to:

1) consciously select the objects of management improvement;

2) in carrying out one or another improvement, see its connections with others;

3) having a general field of improvement tasks, select in each specific case the most urgent ones;

4) carry out comprehensive improvement, for only in this case will the maximum effect be achieved.

LITERATURE

1. Yu. I. Chernyak. Regularities of goal formation in economic systems. — In: Information and Models of Management Structures. Moscow, “Nauka,” 1972.

2. Fundamentals of the Systems Approach and Problems in Creating a Territorial Automated Management System. Edited by F. I. Peregudov. Tomsk, 1973.

3. G. Kh. Popov. Problems of the Theory of Management. Moscow, “Ekonomika,” 1970.

4. M. A. Tyryshkin. On the analysis and synthesis of management systems for organizational complexes. — In: Cybernetics and the University, issue 5, Publishing House of Tomsk University, 1972.

1. N. P. Fedorenko, Yu. R. Leibkind, E. Z. Maiminas, A. A. Modin, S. S. Shatalin, O. M. Yun. A system of comprehensive planning.—“Economics and Mathematical Methods,” 1973, No. 3.

2. Yu. R. Leibkind, E. Z. Maiminas, Yu. M. Samokhin. On the methodology for developing national-economic programs.—“Economics and Mathematical Methods,” 1973, No. 4.

3. V. A. Trapeznikov. Man in the control system.—“Automation and Remote Control,” 1972, No. 2.

4. Yu. A. Tikhomirov. On the usefulness of bureaucratism.—“Literaturnaya Gazeta,” 1971, December, No. 46.

5. S. A. Valuev, S. N. Efimushkin, L. A. Odintseva. A decision-making system. Moscow, MESI, 1970.

6. S. Young. Systems management of an organization. Moscow, “Soviet Radio,” 1972.