Uncovering system teleology: a case for reading unconscious patterns of purposive intent in organizations

Abstract

Contemporary organizations are teleological-purposive-structures, designed to fulfil myriad societal needs. The purposive efforts of any organization are shaped by knowledge. Organizational knowledge includes both conscious and unconscious dimensions. This paper argues that a similar duality applies to organizational teleology. Organizational behaviour unfolds in service to consciously understood teleological aims (such as corporate strategies and business plans) and also unconscious teleological aims (that are undesigned or emergent), which are subtler to detect. Said differently, organizational behaviour is always purposive. Many of the intentions driving organizational behaviour are publicly understood and sanctioned; others are less well understood and unsanctioned. To the degree that some purposive behaviour in organizations remains unconscious, it may detract resources from managerial objectives and confound organizational change efforts. Drawing from facets of systems theory, this paper briefly discusses collective, purposive, and patterned characteristics of unconscious behaviour that may help practitioners to detect and respond to it.

Leisure and settlement distress: the case of South Australian migrants

“…For providing links, the statements were numbered and similar statements were linked based on keywords assigned to each statement. Identification of similarity followed the principles of similarity of keywords, meaning, intent, synonyms and origin metaphors (Alexander 1964;Buckle 2003). The Ucinet6 software then produced the idea network diagram.…”

Maturity Models for Systems Thinking

“…In many fields, such a requirement is institutionally recognized: to be an accountant, one must have accounting knowledge; to be an historian, one must study history; to be an engineer, one must know one of several core disciplines; etc. [28]. It follows that the same logic would apply to an epistemic of systems thinking.…”

Understanding performance measurement and management as a social system: towards a theoretical framework

“…The powers are mediated and work by way of social interaction and through pre-existing social and material structures such as organisational practices, documents and artefacts. This captures the interpretively flexible, idiosyncratic elements of PMM-related practices that can influence the outcome of interventions either intentionally from conscious behaviour, or unintentionally from unconscious behaviour, or from a combination of both (Buckle, 2003). We propose the ten social systems factors, identified from our empirical work, are indicators of the behaviour that influences the cognitive processes people make use of to navigate in volatile and uncertain environments.…”