This post is the second to the last series of reflections during the 25th Anniversary of the historic EDSA Revolution in the Philippines on February 25, 2011. Still relevant as the Christendom celebrates Lent.
Like Lent, nobody can domesticate the EDSA Revolution. Even the so called EDSA heroes cannot claim exclusive right to the historical and mystical event in the Philippines. For the spirit of EDSA is inclusive. It is above all and encircles all.
What happened in EDSA 25 years ago reflects the truism of systems theory. Much of the systems theory grew out of the business management literature. According to Cleland and King (1972), several factors have contributed to the development of the systems theory and the system analysis into a distinct field. These factors included new ways of viewing cost efficiency, new management techniques, and the era of the computer.
The key concepts of the systems theory are wholeness, relationship, and homeostasis. Wholeness implies that the product of interaction by the elements within the system is greater than the additive sums of the separate parts. The concept of relationship asserts the importance of the pattern and structure of elements in the system, equally important as the elements themselves. Homeostasis, which is the tendency of the physiological system of higher animals to maintain an environment of organized stability even when its natural function or condition has been disrupted, suggests that most living systems seek a balance to maintain and preserve the system.
The beauty of systems theory is represented by the rainbow. While there are only three primary colors (red, yellow, blue) there is a multiplication of colors when these link, interact, and overlap. Try to separate one from the other, and the beauty of rainbow is gone. So with EDSA. It is a culmination of respective struggles participated in by the basic masses who since time immemorial always take the lead as they are ones affected.
Then comes various sectors of diverse orientation, status, political and ideological leanings, colors and shapes. Youth, professionals, church people, businessmen and women, government officials, military and others. All have contributed their share in shaping the Philippine history. Try to isolate one, and the beauty of the event is gone.
Such inclusive spirit should have been the character of Christians in their attitude towards others. As this is exemplified by Jesus the Christ. His teachings and actions consistently abhor exclusivist attitude. Biblical accounts reveal some of his skirmishes with bigots during his time. In fact, the Gospel of Mark attributes Jesus’ altercation with the temple leaders in Jerusalem as the final blow leading to his arrest and subsequent execution. “On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple courts and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. And as he taught them, he said, “Is it not written: My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations. But you have made it ‘a den of robbers.” The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching. (11: 15-18)
Ted Grimsrud in his blog, Jesus’ Death and the Powers: Religious Exclusivism, has an interesting post on Jesus encounter with religious bigots.
Showing posts with label Systems Theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Systems Theory. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Social Work, Systems Theory and the CBMA
The celebration of the World Social Work Day highlights the role of social workers in responding to individual, family and community crises. In another site, I discussed Social Work as a Profession. Yesterday’s blog pointed out that social workers are also skilled in analyzing the frameworks of social conditions, and know how to change them to foster a more dignified life for all people, in all communities. This makes our discussion on systems theory and networking more relevant as they contribute to the development of such skills. Speaking by experience, the CBMA has benefited from my past learnings in social work when I led the association for six years. I feel a discussion on this topic is helpful before we resume the Gains in networking…
Ann Hartman (1970), as cited in Johnson (1995), noted that the systems theory is useful to social workers for it gives a means for conceptualizing linkages and relationships among seemingly different entities: individuals, families, small groups, agencies, communities, and societies. It notes similarities and differences among different classifications of systems. It aids social workers in considering both private troubles and public issues within the nurturing system and the sustaining system of a situation they are assessing.
The application of system analysis to social work practice was best described in the book written by Allen Pincus and Anne Minahan in 1973 entitled Social Work Practice: Model and Method. Their basic premise, that there is a common core of skills and concepts, which are essential to the practice of social work, is in fact basic to most theoretical interpretations of systems theory.
Pincus and Minahan theorize that there are four basic systems in social work practice: (1) a change agent system, (2) a client system, (3) a target system, and (4) an action system. The change agent system is composed of professionals who are specifically employed for the purpose of creating planned change. Also part of the change agent system is the employing organizations of the change agent.
The client system is composed of the people who sanction or ask for the change agent’s services, who are expected beneficiaries of the service, and who have working agreement or contract with the change agent.
The target system is composed of the people, agencies, and/or organizational practices that one wishes to change in some measurable way in order to reach the goals of the change agent. As such, by analyzing the changes of the target system, one can measure effectiveness and provide a mechanism for accountability.
The last is the action system, which is used to describe those factors with which a social worker works in his/her effort to accomplish the tasks and achieve the goals of the change effort. One may need to involve a number of different action systems in different aspects of a planned change effort to accomplish all of the different goals of the change agent. In the Pincus and Minahan model, the four basic systems are not mutually exclusive, but can and do overlap in many cases.
Following the Pincus and Minahan framework there is overlapping among the basic systems in the process of development. This means that a person, which may be considered a client system may also become a target system, a change agent or even an action system just like the processes, experienced by other systems. In the same way, that the social worker, who is considered basically a change agent, may at times become a client system, a target system or an action system.
This is true with those considered as action system. They may also become a target system or a change agent system or even a client system, as the need arises. Each system, therefore, is a contributor to and recipient of development which is the by-product of the whole interaction processes and relationships between and among NGOs and the network and their environment.
Pastors can apply this in their ministry, in dealing with the parishioners, officers, lay leaders, auxiliary and fraternal/maternal organizations, government and other institutions in the community. The framework can served as guide to respective actions.
Ann Hartman (1970), as cited in Johnson (1995), noted that the systems theory is useful to social workers for it gives a means for conceptualizing linkages and relationships among seemingly different entities: individuals, families, small groups, agencies, communities, and societies. It notes similarities and differences among different classifications of systems. It aids social workers in considering both private troubles and public issues within the nurturing system and the sustaining system of a situation they are assessing.
The application of system analysis to social work practice was best described in the book written by Allen Pincus and Anne Minahan in 1973 entitled Social Work Practice: Model and Method. Their basic premise, that there is a common core of skills and concepts, which are essential to the practice of social work, is in fact basic to most theoretical interpretations of systems theory.
Pincus and Minahan theorize that there are four basic systems in social work practice: (1) a change agent system, (2) a client system, (3) a target system, and (4) an action system. The change agent system is composed of professionals who are specifically employed for the purpose of creating planned change. Also part of the change agent system is the employing organizations of the change agent.
The client system is composed of the people who sanction or ask for the change agent’s services, who are expected beneficiaries of the service, and who have working agreement or contract with the change agent.
The target system is composed of the people, agencies, and/or organizational practices that one wishes to change in some measurable way in order to reach the goals of the change agent. As such, by analyzing the changes of the target system, one can measure effectiveness and provide a mechanism for accountability.
The last is the action system, which is used to describe those factors with which a social worker works in his/her effort to accomplish the tasks and achieve the goals of the change effort. One may need to involve a number of different action systems in different aspects of a planned change effort to accomplish all of the different goals of the change agent. In the Pincus and Minahan model, the four basic systems are not mutually exclusive, but can and do overlap in many cases.
Following the Pincus and Minahan framework there is overlapping among the basic systems in the process of development. This means that a person, which may be considered a client system may also become a target system, a change agent or even an action system just like the processes, experienced by other systems. In the same way, that the social worker, who is considered basically a change agent, may at times become a client system, a target system or an action system.
This is true with those considered as action system. They may also become a target system or a change agent system or even a client system, as the need arises. Each system, therefore, is a contributor to and recipient of development which is the by-product of the whole interaction processes and relationships between and among NGOs and the network and their environment.
Pastors can apply this in their ministry, in dealing with the parishioners, officers, lay leaders, auxiliary and fraternal/maternal organizations, government and other institutions in the community. The framework can served as guide to respective actions.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Networking enhances development
As pointed out in the previous blogs, networking is an application of system theory. The beauty of systems theory and its application in networking is represented by the rainbow. While there are only three primary colors (red, yellow, blue) there is a multiplication of colors when these link, interact, and overlap. I used this comparison in my reflection on the 25th anniversary of EDSA Revolution last month.
Sharma (as cited in Philippine Journal of Public Administration Vol. XXXIV No. 1 January 1990) noted that the systems approach emphasizes wholeness first, then moves to the consideration of parts, including interaction among them, and between them and the whole. The systems theory, with its emphasis on holism, offers the promise of being an effective guide to management practice.
The systems theory focuses on communication patterns and the transactions and relationships among parts. As pointed out by Hartman (1970), the relationship among parts and the whole are of prime interest when considering the structure of a social system, This relationship is relatively stable. Sometimes, the relationship between systems is referred to as network.
Ann Hartman (1970), as cited in Johnson (1995), noted that the systems theory is useful to social workers (pastors, too and all those involved in the development of people) for it gives a means for conceptualizing linkages and relationships among seemingly different entities: individuals, families, small groups, agencies, communities, and societies. It notes similarities and differences among different classifications of systems. It aids social workers in considering both private troubles and public issues within the nurturing system and the sustaining system of a situation they are assessing.
The overlapping of various systems makes relationship complex. Since the systems theory gives prime importance to relationship, such overlap contributes to the dynamism of networking. Defined as development and maintenance of communication and ways of working together among people of diverse interests and orientations (Johnson, 1995), networking is a form of coordination. As part of the administrative function, Aldaba (1990) states, networking is necessary for the formation of a broad consensus and the promotion of collective action so that social transformation and genuine development can occur.
As viewed through the systems theory, networking is both a relationship among systems and a sub - system in itself. In this sense, it affects the development of each system while it is also being affected by other sub systems that compose the whole. In like manner, networks and respective members work as a system operating collaboratively in order to address the pressing issues and concerns related to development of people. Each organization, therefore, works as a “component unit” and, as such, affects each other, so that a modification of one will stimulate corresponding change on another and, in general, the whole system.
Next post: Resumption of Gains and Pains in Serving the Pastors in relation to networking
Sharma (as cited in Philippine Journal of Public Administration Vol. XXXIV No. 1 January 1990) noted that the systems approach emphasizes wholeness first, then moves to the consideration of parts, including interaction among them, and between them and the whole. The systems theory, with its emphasis on holism, offers the promise of being an effective guide to management practice.
The systems theory focuses on communication patterns and the transactions and relationships among parts. As pointed out by Hartman (1970), the relationship among parts and the whole are of prime interest when considering the structure of a social system, This relationship is relatively stable. Sometimes, the relationship between systems is referred to as network.
Ann Hartman (1970), as cited in Johnson (1995), noted that the systems theory is useful to social workers (pastors, too and all those involved in the development of people) for it gives a means for conceptualizing linkages and relationships among seemingly different entities: individuals, families, small groups, agencies, communities, and societies. It notes similarities and differences among different classifications of systems. It aids social workers in considering both private troubles and public issues within the nurturing system and the sustaining system of a situation they are assessing.
The overlapping of various systems makes relationship complex. Since the systems theory gives prime importance to relationship, such overlap contributes to the dynamism of networking. Defined as development and maintenance of communication and ways of working together among people of diverse interests and orientations (Johnson, 1995), networking is a form of coordination. As part of the administrative function, Aldaba (1990) states, networking is necessary for the formation of a broad consensus and the promotion of collective action so that social transformation and genuine development can occur.
As viewed through the systems theory, networking is both a relationship among systems and a sub - system in itself. In this sense, it affects the development of each system while it is also being affected by other sub systems that compose the whole. In like manner, networks and respective members work as a system operating collaboratively in order to address the pressing issues and concerns related to development of people. Each organization, therefore, works as a “component unit” and, as such, affects each other, so that a modification of one will stimulate corresponding change on another and, in general, the whole system.
Next post: Resumption of Gains and Pains in Serving the Pastors in relation to networking
Monday, March 7, 2011
Networking and Systems Theory
The break before resuming Gains in Serving the Pastors… might be extended as many were delighted about the presentation on networking. While recollection of past achievements has been therapeutic to me, I am inclined to respond to the interest of followers of this blog including those in facebook and email. My primary purpose in starting this blog was more personal - to challenge myself and consolidate my thoughts. It was a pastor friend’s advice to help my healing process, knowing how most of my time is spent at home due to limited mobility. The sudden interval brought about by illness had been devastating to me in first months. More so, that even an hour in the computer was an agonizing experience during those period. That was the time when I valued much even a mediocre accomplishment. Recently, I find fulfillment in succeeding to post daily for 6 days a week. Receiving feedbacks, and advice to view blog statistics made me realize, there are followers of the blog. Hence, a couple of posts on networking before resuming the gains…
Networking is an application of system theory. Lewis and Harris (1995) pointed out that networking can be analyzed through systems theories, i.e., as “additional systems within the individual’s environment that must be considered in assessment and intervention.” Much of the systems theory grew out of the business management literature. According to Cleland and King (1972), several factors have contributed to the development of the systems theory and the system analysis into a distinct field. These factors included new ways of viewing cost efficiency, new management techniques, and the era of the computer. Consequently, a new phenomenon has emerged in business management, i.e., systems analysts. Their work focuses on viewing “the relationships between divisions in companies or organizations in order to obtain the most efficient mechanism for communication, management, planning, and development.” This work includes designing and utilizing sophisticated computer programs with emphasis on data processing and analysis of relationship. The last aspect makes systems analysis useful to pastors, social workers, and other helping profession or development endeavors.
The key concepts of the systems theory are wholeness, relationship, and homeostasis. Wholeness implies that the product of interaction by the elements within the system is greater than the additive sums of the separate parts. The concept of relationship asserts the importance of the pattern and structure of elements in the system, equally important as the elements themselves. Homeostasis, which is the tendency of the physiological system of higher animals to maintain an environment of organized stability even when its natural function or condition has been disrupted, suggests that most living systems seek a balance to maintain and preserve the system.
The beauty of systems theory and its application in networking is represented by the rainbow. While there are only three primary colors (red, yellow, blue) there is a multiplication of colors when these link, interact, and overlap. I used this comparison in my reflection on the 25th anniversary of EDSA Revolution last month. Visit my other blog.
Networking is an application of system theory. Lewis and Harris (1995) pointed out that networking can be analyzed through systems theories, i.e., as “additional systems within the individual’s environment that must be considered in assessment and intervention.” Much of the systems theory grew out of the business management literature. According to Cleland and King (1972), several factors have contributed to the development of the systems theory and the system analysis into a distinct field. These factors included new ways of viewing cost efficiency, new management techniques, and the era of the computer. Consequently, a new phenomenon has emerged in business management, i.e., systems analysts. Their work focuses on viewing “the relationships between divisions in companies or organizations in order to obtain the most efficient mechanism for communication, management, planning, and development.” This work includes designing and utilizing sophisticated computer programs with emphasis on data processing and analysis of relationship. The last aspect makes systems analysis useful to pastors, social workers, and other helping profession or development endeavors.
The key concepts of the systems theory are wholeness, relationship, and homeostasis. Wholeness implies that the product of interaction by the elements within the system is greater than the additive sums of the separate parts. The concept of relationship asserts the importance of the pattern and structure of elements in the system, equally important as the elements themselves. Homeostasis, which is the tendency of the physiological system of higher animals to maintain an environment of organized stability even when its natural function or condition has been disrupted, suggests that most living systems seek a balance to maintain and preserve the system.
The beauty of systems theory and its application in networking is represented by the rainbow. While there are only three primary colors (red, yellow, blue) there is a multiplication of colors when these link, interact, and overlap. I used this comparison in my reflection on the 25th anniversary of EDSA Revolution last month. Visit my other blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)