Systems thinking is a management discipline that concerns the understanding of a system by examining the connections and interactions between the components that make up the whole of that defined system. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Whole system is a systemic view of the entire organization in relation to its environment. It provides a means to understand, analyze, and talk about organization design and construction as an integrated and complex composition of many interconnected systems (human and non-human) that must work together for the whole to function successfully. Whole systems are composed of systems, the basic unit, which include different entities (e.g. policies, processes, practices and people) and can be divided into further subsystems. Systems can be thought of as having clear external boundaries (closed) or having connections to their environment (open). An open systems perspective is the most common and realistic. The boundaries of an entire system can be chosen and defined to a level suitable for the particular purpose under consideration; for example the education system or a comprehensive school system. Likewise, systems can be chosen and defined at different levels and can operate both side by side and hierarchically; for example the financial system, the decision-making system, the accountability system. An organization as an entity can experience systemic failure. This occurs in the whole system or high level system where failure occurs between and within the elements of the system that must work together for overall success. Factors of systemic failure may include confusing goals, weak system-level understanding, faulty design, incentives that encourage loyalty to subordinate (rather than superordinate) goals, inadequate feedback, poor cooperation, lack of accountability, etc. The success of the entire system requires a performance management system that is positioned above the level of individual systems and their functional leadership. Features may include group or team-level goal setting, development, incentives, communication, reviews, rewards and accountability. The goal is to focus on what unites individuals and what unites systems rather than the performance of functional silos. Systemwide failure can coexist alongside functional success. Silo leadership can be successful individually but not sufficiently integrated into the entire system due to a lack of systems design, management, or understanding. An entire system can only be successful through the collaboration of managers within and across a number of functional systems. The whole system can only fail when system-wide leadership fails and when multiple senior leaders are involved. Therefore, such failure can be labeled as a systemic failure of leadership. In the event of systemic failure, individual managers operating at a lower subsystem level may be exempt from responsibility and blame. They might argue (correctly) that it was the larger system that failed. They may say that particular systems that integrate with their own work disappoint them. However, the responsibility for the successful design and operation of the “whole” (integrated) system should lie somewhere. Understanding and anticipating how the entire system should work, actually works, and how it might fail under pressure can practically slip by. And’.