An Analysis of Weick’s Information Systems Approach to Organizations

Abstract

Karl Weick, an organizational theorist, developed the theory known as Information Systems Approach to Organizations. Such theory have made a significant impact in the field of organizational communication and other allied disciplines. The paper provides an analysis and builds on the existing commentaries about Weick’s theory.

 

Introduction

Karl Weick is an organizational theorist who is widely known for the ideas of loose coupling, and sensemaking. His research interests ranges from the topics about collective sensemaking under pressure, high-reliability performance, to continuous change. His theory is chiefly called Information Systems Approach to Organizations. Its main focus is on the indispensable role of human communication in the organization. Furthermore, he focuses process-oriented organizing than the structure-oriented organization.

He accentuates that organizing is a lively process, and is also similar to information processing. He notes that both encounter the same problems: (1) uncertainty, and (2) equivocality.  To elaborate, uncertainty denotes a lack of information. Hence, if people are uncertain, they look for more facts and a way to interpret them. On the other hand, equivocality refers to situations wherein two interpretations are valid. Then, things will be fuzzy and will cause confusion; misunderstanding will emerge. Therefore, to reduce equivocality, interaction is needed.

 

Discussion

In every organization, there is an unceasing flow of different sorts of information and hence effective communication plays an absolutely crucial role. “Effective communication is when people understand exactly what the other person or group is telling them, interpreting in a way as how the giver of the message understand it” (Thorne, 2012). Both parties, then, will have no misunderstanding. Ergo, clarity and certainty will emerge.

Definitely, the best interaction is face-to-face. However, interaction does not mean heated debates and vehement arguments, wherein people need to choose who is right, and who is wrong. The main intention of interaction is to seek mutuality among people, and to figure out what works best. Through interaction, organizations (1) lessen uncertainty; (2) clarify equivocal information; and (3) promote harmonious relationships among the people.

Weick proposes an unprecedented perspective on organizational studies. Contrary to the widely accepted adage that plan first, and then act next, he suggests the opposite: act first, and then plan next. He explains that if one acts to implement something, one creates the environment.

Many former planning advocates now speaks about strategic thinking rather than strategic planning. They emphasize that organizations require new skills. Instead of the ability to analyze and predict, we need to know how to stay acutely aware of what’s happening now, and we need to be better, faster learners from what just happened (Weick, as cited in Wheatley, 1999).

Probably, what Weick is trying to say is that in the modern world where the only constant is change, organizations need to respond in a quick, agile, and intelligent way. Whether public or private, organizations must interact first with the world to see what probably will happen next because through interacting they induce their futures.

Figure 1. A T-shirt Business Scheme

He also raises the concept of coupling which means how people and work are linked. There two types of it: (1) loose coupling, and (2) tight coupling. A T-shirt Business Scheme (Fig. 1) manifests tight coupling wherein connections are strong. For instance, the format and ink section completely shuts down hence the succeeding steps cannot be continued, so the whole process of the organization will be dropped. Thus, components of a system are directly dependent on one another.

Figure 2. A Sample K+12 School Scheme

On the split side of the coin, loose coupling means parts of the system, people and work are connected, but those dependencies are weak. For example, if the whole Science department completely shuts down because all of teachers are sick or for whatsoever reason, the school can still continue to operate because other departments are still present. Therefore, in this context, the flow of work is designed to be flexible.

Additionally, Weick presents a three-stage process of social-cultural evolution. The following are: (1) enactment, (2) selection, and (3) retention. Enactment refers to action. Selection pertains to choosing the the rules and cycles to apply. Lastly, retention denotes what information is helpful, and worth utilizing again.

 

Conclusion

In studying this theory, I find Weick’s Information Systems Approach to Organizations is influential and important in the arena of organizational communication and other disciplines. It also made a significant impact to abolish the singular mechanistic view on organizations. However, there are some humble points for improvement that I must enumerate. Since it was made several years ago, I suggest that advancement of this theory is essential. Particularly through expanding and revision. I see that there are some loopholes that are in need to review and to revisit, however. The following are as follows. On the top of my list, Weick should have thoroughly explained the differences between the organizing and the organization. Clarification is also needed when he preferred organizing rather than organization.

I believe organization, the structure itself, plays also an important factor, and one factor to be considered in any organization. Such must not be disregarded. Hierarchy, positions, and status must also be taken into deliberation too. His theory highlights the process of organizing, but neglects the role of the people in the organization. Understanding how members engage is also pivotal, and must not be abandoned. Additionally, “act first, and then plan next” approach is highly controversial. This is intuitive. This may or may not be effective. And there is no assurance or guarantee to it. In other words, this depends on a case to case basis.

 

References

Griffin, E. (2006). A first look at communication theory (6^th ed.). New York:  McGraw-Hill

Thorne, A. (2012). Management communication: Student’s book. Pretoria: Troupant Publishers Ltd

Walls, J. (2007 August). Sensemaking and school failure: Lessons from two cases. Journal of Organizational Theory in Education, 2, 1-26.

Wheatley, M. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world (2^nd ed.). California: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.