Critical and Systems Thinking - Essay Example

Critical and Systems Thinking Student’s Name Professor Institution Course Date Introduction Critical & Systems Thinking concerns the analytical thinking abilities pertinent to deciding and communicating management strategy particularly for large-scale projects. The entity is vital to developing skills necessary for making basic critical judgments on complex problem situations involving uncertainty, incomplete information, and dynamically interacting technical as well as non-technical contexts and systems (Kogetsidis, 2012). In particular, Critical & Systems Thinking focus on the capacity to articulate a critical, reflected and well-reasoned response at a level that significantly contributes to project strategy discussions. According to Bammer (2003), Critical & Systems Thinking primarily aims to combine participatory methods and systems thinking to address the various challenges of issues/problems characterized by large scale, uncertainty, complexity, imperfection, and impermanence (Kogetsidis, 2012). It permits nonlinear relationships, emergent properties, feedback loops, and hierarchies. Systems thinking equip learners with vital knowledge and communication competencies that are relevant to the academic culture. Also, it enables learners to engage with various concepts and theoretical frameworks to foster practice of robust methods for argument and questioning. It helps to organize and filter relevant issues and evidence, acknowledge critical assumptions and uncertainties, identify and evaluate logical connections, reach well-reasoned conclusions, present critical arguments in a more constructive manner, and develop and reflect on personal views (Kogetsidis, 2012). Generally, the aforementioned abilities are vital for a more detailed understanding of the relevance of epistemological and ontological considerations in relation to the extensive, meticulous analysis of complex system dynamics. Need for critical and systems thinking in project management Virtually all conventional project management practices result in the failure of publicly funded innovation deployment projects. The use of critical and systems thinking in project management is critical to making projects more successful (Remington & Pollack, 2007). Most innovation projects are widely successful mainly due to the use of systematic project management, including providing flexibility in planning and communicating as well as controlling activities. According to systems thinking theory, projects do not necessarily need to be formal to help manage uncertainty and complexity. On the other hand, most of the systems thinking methods often provide flexibility to foster successful management of complexity, uncertainty, and innovativeness in innovation projects. In essence, system thinking is crucial to the management of various innovation projects (Remington & Pollack, 2007). Lack of effective project management practice essential for innovation projects has compromised provision of constructs essential for the formation and development of better theory and practice. Meanwhile, deployment projects have comparatively low levels of technological uncertainty and novelty. However, they have higher levels of complexity since they deal with varied users and markets (Facione, 2010). Current theory asserts that publicly funded innovation deployment projects require careful process control over the activities, detailed planning, and a formalized communication process. Besides, overemphasis on operational control and lack of flexibility in the management of boundary relations as well as operational change are vital to the successful project management of uncertainty and complexity (Facione, 2010). Further research into the causal connectedness and constructs of equifinality is needed to effectively apply systems thinking in project practice and embed flexibility in project management. Operational control practices of conventional project management Conventional project management practice and theory were developed as a basis for enhancing project evaluation. Construction/engineering practitioner-led models which attained universal status through monopolization of accreditation formed the basis or foundation these project management practices and theories (Jackson, 1991). However, conventional project management also has its limitations. For instance, theory and practice often treat the project as an ‘island’, which depends upon prescribed formulae to successfully manage boundary relations. Also, problematic change management is another shortcoming of conventional project management, a consequence of tight operational control over scope creep. Apparently, the emphasis of operational control and close boundary in innovation projects results in two major problems. The first problem basically relates to the assumptions of linearity and rationality about boundaries and control (Jackson, 1991). This creates an irony and a paradox in project management practice and theory. Meanwhile, the complexity, uniqueness and uncertainty of most project activities complicate control as well as deviation from the plans more probable. Virtually all project plans are usually formulated for a specific set of contingencies that have no precedent hence cannot be preconceived. In every aspect, it is appropriate that all the variables of the project are managed and integrated together. How critical and systems thinking applies to project management Project management studies show lack of a standard generic model(s) to manage various innovation projects differently. Critical and systems thinking essentially help define and evaluate the levels of control as well as formulization in communication, planning and control in the innovation projects (Kogetsidis, 2012). Ideally, a lot of research about project management in organizational set up has successfully separated decision-making from the ultimate execution. Also, different managerial methodologies have been widely applied in a broad range of frameworks and contexts of systems thinking. Critical thinking helps in problem solving. Most projects are characterized by numerous variables that need to be integrated together for the success of the project. In this regard, a project manager is tasked with the responsibility of ensuring that nothing goes wrong during the process. That is, the manager has to know what to do at what time, what to use, how to implement the process and who to utilize for specific tasks. In this regard, the ‘what’, ‘how’, and ‘who’ become an integral part of the project. All these requires good analytical and subjective reasoning and judgment for the project to be a success. This can only happen if the project manager utilizes the critical thinking skills during the implementation of the project. Why do projects fail? Success rates of projects have improved and this is mostly attributed to enhancement in knowledge, practices and standards that have resulted to the professionalization of the field of project management. Unfortunately, there are numerous situations that are characterized by project failures. Despite the fact that quite a large percentage of these failures are attributed to management and decision-making practices, it is appropriate to mention at this stage to explore a set of systematic biases to determine if understanding the practices can help diagnose or prevent the failures from occurring (Fisher, 2004). In normal circumstances, a project management contains elements such as cost, procurement, management of time, quality, risk or scope of project. Each of the elements work as constraints and therefore helps in achieving the best result for the project considering the underlying environment (Fisher, 2004). That is, these constraints determine a completion of project activities and its success or failure. A good management team should therefore focus on the integration of these constraints for the success of the project. As experts ascertain, constrain that can be characterized as fuzzy can lead to description of data in distinct, as well as imprecise form, in a unified framework. In this regard, it is a fact that a project which is not carefully planned and organized to achieve a specific one-time effort is deemed to fail. According to Neoclassical organizational theory, the human relations movement evolved as a reaction to the tough and authoritarian structure. According to this theory, human capital should be made to operate in an environment in which they feel comfortable and appreciated. This also apply in project management. That is, the backbone of every project is the human capital. Therefore, proper strategies should be put in place to ensure that human capital is motivated to work. There is need for project managers to prioritize training in leadership skills and need for continuous professional improvement to enhance leadership outcome. It is worth noting that there no specific leadership model that can be solely considered to be appropriate for the success of the project. However, performance must be implemented in such a way that it align itself with the stages of the project duration (Fisher, 2004). Most projects fail because there is no clear project plan, which includes project’s goals and objectives, the specific tasks, the required resources, the underlying budgets, and timelines for completion. Another aspect that limits the success of a project is the improper implementation of the project plan. That is, the project plan might be readily available and well defined. However, inadequate goodwill and professionalism might results to improper implementation hence pushing the project away from the critical path. In conclusion, a good project should follow the major phases appropriately. That is, the feasibility study, project planning, implementation, evaluation and maintenance. Projects that appropriately follow these phases are less likely to fail. Conclusion Critical thinking had and will continue to become an integral part of project management. Critical & Systems thinking focus on the capacity to articulate a critical, reflected and well-reasoned response at a level that significantly contributes to project strategy discussions. The contemporary projects are characterized by complex projects that need more than just knowledge. The complex nature of the projects demands critical understanding of each and every aspect or variable of the project to make the project a success. References Facione, P.A., 2010, Critical thinking: What is it and why it counts, Insight Assessment, Measured Reasons and the California Academic Press, Millbrae Fisher, K., 2004, Critical self-reflection: what is it and how do you do it?, Southern Cross University, Lismore Flood, R. L., & Romm, N., R. A. (1996). Critical systems thinking current research and practice. New York, Plenum Press. Jackson, M. C. (2000). Systems approaches to management. New York, NY [u.a.], Kluwer Academic/Plenum. pp. 374 Jackson, M.C., 1991, chapter 1, The nature of systems thinking, in: Creative problem solving: total systems intervention, Wiley, Australia Kogetsidis, H., 2012, Critical Systems Thinking: A creative approach to organizational change Flood, R. Neuman, W.L., 2010, chapter 4, The meanings of methodology, in Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches, Boston, Mass, Allyn and Bacon Niewoehner, R. J., 2006, A critical thinking model for Engineering, 2nd International CDIO Conference, Linkoping, Sweden Novel approaches to organizational project management research: Translational and transformational. (n.d.). Copenhagen Business School Press. pp. 452 Remington, K., & Pollack, J. (2007). Tools for complex projects. Aldershot, England, Gower. Schwalbe, K. (2012). Information technology project management. Read More