Overdose On Citalopram

Chaos Organization and End of Organizational

The organization viewed as SYSTEM

A system is a network of interdependent components that work together for a purpose (literal translation W. Edwards Deming)
System
So, in a defined area, consists of:
- components, or subsystems members
- Common Purpose

- Interrelationships among its members, departments, people ....
- Frontier system with its environment (subjective depending on the limit of our study)

A living being is a good example of the system. Components organs, cells. Their common purpose: to survive.

An orchestra is another great example of a system. Its members are musicians and their director, the purpose is the piece that has to please his audience. If all musicians want to be actors lack the proper harmony that is achieved with the cooperation of all coordinated by its director.

A business organization is a system must have a clear purpose and clear, known by all its members . As the orchestra common purpose should prevail over individual virtuosity.

Unlike a flow chart only shows the hierarchy of an organization, the assessment of an organization as a real system the interrelationship among all its parts and its border. The effect of some components in the other.

A system should be directed, managed, left unaddressed, real in the Western world, members of an enterprise system become selfish, independent, competitive. Managed the system itself is aimed at the destruction.

direct, manage organizational system involves:

- knowledge to understand the interplay between all components.
- promote cooperation to achieve the purpose of system, ensuring that all individual efforts are aligned with the purpose of the system.
- Clarify the purpose all components and specific contribution to it.

If the address of the organizational system could not ensure that the efforts of all members of the system is directed to achieving the common purpose, if it fails to prevent domestic competitiveness members depart to common purpose, will have planted the seeds of destruction of the system.

The scope of the system should include all parties affected by its existence depending on the design, management, departments, employees, unions, shareholders, partners, customers, suppliers ,....

Management should be prepared to redefine and expand the area, including collaborations with industry associations, research centers, government and more.

The common purpose of the system:

- The purpose is a single decision be delegated to senior management . In fact, the business purpose precedes the organization. How could if employees choose not suitable?
- The purpose should include the future of . Do not leave the fate of the system at random. This involves training components and leaders but also keep under review the changing environment.
- Only the best results are achieved if the purpose of ensuring that its achievement everyone wins.
- A system must create something of value, results.

Systems Thinking (PS)

"A system is an entity that owes its existence to the mutual interaction of its parts" - General Systems Theory "by Ludwig von Bertalanffy

Thinking in terms of system," Systems Thinking "or" PS: Systemic thinking allows us to better understand the world around us through the interrelations of its components and therefore have better control of it. PS

A model of reality in these terms will give us an approximation of it to help determine the effect on all of our actions in some or some of its parts. But a model is always different from reality, only an approximation.

With PS any decision to change can be analyzed as a whole and consider the possible side effects . Although the experiments only allow us to confirm the degree of success, reduce uncertainty, reduce risk.

generation system

A system is a living entity: it is born, grows and evolves. You can also die. A company was born with an idea, a purpose.

Idea (Purpose) ==> System Plan ==> Members ==> Results ==> Repeat
permanent improvement of the circuit.

Percent Of People That Speak English In Shanghai

The paradigm of measurable things

Do our leaders what they want?

In business organizations, value things only be translated into numbers, the other not. If we assume that many of the most important things are not measurable, then companies have a serious appreciation of reality and value of things. I would add that it is measurable only the past, the future is unknown, but perhaps predictable. It

gives value only to what is measurable, when the most important, often by unknown, is where there is more scope for optimization and performance.

Thus the quality of life is not measurable, even if what we all want. Instead it is measurable economic level in terms of income or possessions. We just forward the economic level, because it is measurable. The quality of life ceases to be a value and is usually sacrificed in favor of measurable level.

Similarly, managers who do not know how to measure what they want for their organizations, they end up wanting what they can measure . We do not value what we want, but what we can measure. Sometimes because other do too. Move the real priorities of other important secondary because they are not translatable into numbers. If they are not translatable into numbers can not appear in a presentation to the next level. If they are not translatable to understand numbers, go into the details and have the knowledge to do so.

An example is training. Many companies measure training hours, the amount of people going to classes, etc.. To be measured becomes the desirable goal. But what he initially wanted was something else. Really important is not the hours nor the percentage of employees who have attended, it really is important is to train people for jobs that have or have to do. Is it measurable?: Not easily, but is much more important to know the individual challenges and solutions to the large statistics that say nothing. Unless the company will invest in training, little or nothing these numbers tell us whether the training is useful.

not value, because it is not measurable, effective learning that people obtain through other means such as cooperation and help received from colleagues and superiors or self-study. However encouraging this cooperation must come from management. Similarly

often wrongly immeasurable value quality products and services for the price. A high price high quality. This is sometimes simply wrong. The price is simply proportional to the cost of production and added benefit. The producer price has included the cost of organizational inefficiency. Do we make mistakes sometimes when you buy the more expensive product? Yes

Nowadays a professional who does his work without errors can go unnoticed. The non-errors are not measured. At contrary, if you leave you see a fire and extinguishes it, will be assessed by measuring the salved. "We encourage bad practices?. I think so.

Similarly, some economists are rated as important to the cost of labor that destroys value, because can be measured. We have the paradox that while the GDP of a country increases with the war, poor life quality.

We must change the model, we must change the method of valuation of things, we must ensure that the purpose of organizations is not lost on topics measurable.

Once again, we must refocus our management style and know what is really important. Our managers must provide leadership by sharing and knowing the detail of things to help improve them, and not focus exclusively on what can be shown on a powerpoint.

Bushnell Sportsman 4 X12 40 Reviews

New policy perspective to overcome the crisis

transformer Knowledge


Neither hard work nor the best efforts, nor give himself the best of each will, by themselves, sufficient to overcome the crisis and improve the situation of a company. On the contrary, can deepen the hole in which we live. To see the hole in which we need external knowledge to enlighten us, since the hole does not know where we are. But out of the situation in which we need to develop self-knowledge.

emphasize that the magnitude of the main losses caused by erroneous decisions of the leadership, or lack of correct decisions are unknown and unknowable . It is estimated, however, that represent 94 % Of total losses, compared to 6% of losses caused by employee errors. However managers and middle managers are generally convinced that is the best of themselves and do well.

How can know the magnitude of the losses a hotel, restaurant, losing customers because of poor management decisions have been left unfulfilled? How do you know a simple bar to save a few cents for coffee, regular customers stop going to reduce revenue by 1 € / díax300 days per year = 300 € per client, whose number is immeasurable, compared to a saving of 0.05 € for coffee? However, this error is usual and far from helping out of the hole, we delve deeper into it.

But the myth that it is not measurable can not manage is false. It was the most costly and damaging myth of recent business history "only what is measurable can be improved." False. Yes we can manage it, though we can not measure the income statement.

Some things to consider to optimize the management function: 1 .-

think and lead in terms of system: the organization must be seen by their line management as a system, or network element, all interacting with each other (employees, departments, suppliers, customers, shareholders, managers, competitors, etc..). Any decision on a part affects the other parts and so must think when making decisions.

We must consider the purpose of the system (the organization) for the benefit of all its components. Only then will the system should benefit from all contributions.

A system benefits from the individual contributions of each element and the interplay between these contributions: Let Xi

individual contribution of an element (employee, customer, proveedors ,...)

• individual contributions:

X1 + X2 + ... + Xn

• Contributions interrelated :

X1 + X2 + X3 X1 X1 X2 X4 + ...
X4 + X3 + X2 ...


X1 X2 X1 X2 X3 + X4 + X5 + X1 X2 ... => If not, system
CHAOS X1 X3 X3 X1 X4 + X5 + ...

X4 X3 X2 X1 + X2 X1 X3 X5 + ... ...



interacting contributions can have a positive value, zero or negative . In this case the system to some extent overrides individual contributions. The interaction, therefore, can and should strengthen the efforts, but can also be dropped. This depends on the "System" and is the responsibility of management.

The direction of the company should focus its attention to the system, if employees do not by themselves can not improve the quality or sales or system stability. The Management should have sufficient knowledge of the system to understand how different forces interact and how the system affects people. There are the direct causes of inefficiency in an organization.

An example: X1 represents purchases, X2, X3 represents production and sales, and may represent specific individuals.
If purchases (X1) we put annual targets to reduce costs of purchased components, the output (X2) to reach quotas manufacturing and sales (X3) to achieve a minimum turnover. Can the three get their dues and are detrimental to the company?. Answer Yes:

X1 ==> Shopping achieves its goal by buying cheaper components from suppliers less reliable and more expensive production costs, stock and quality.
X2 ==> Production gets larger share of production costs, the worst available supplies, and reducing the final quality. X3
==> Sales achieved revenue share, with false promises and rising warranty costs, but undermining the credibility of the company in future.

X1 + X2 + X3 X2 X1 X3
positive negative


2 .- Understanding Variability : reality is always changing. No two are absolutely identical products and a process always yields the same results. It is simply impossible. Neither the market seems constant, the client also learns to compare.

The manager must be able to distinguish between changes that are intrinsic and common to the "System" (their responsibility) and those who are motivated by special or occasional causes.

The cost of responding to a common variation as if it were a special case is enormous. The same otherwise.

It is therefore important to have statistical controls the process that allow us to predict whether a process is stable or not and whether the results obtained are predictable. If the process is capable of producing within the levels of quality "acceptable."

The improved system should lead to reduced variability engendered the system and improve it. Any variation is a cost. For this, the manager and his staff will test different ideas to improve the results should be studied with a great deal of knowledge about the variability, not to be confused with performance improvement within the scope of permissible variability in the system.

This requires uniting the variability criteria as does the generation of ideas.
3 .-

Knowledge transformer Descartes input that knowledge is not information or data. No matter how easy and quick it is today with the new information technologies.

knowledge generation is to have a prediction or hypothesis idea (true or false). We will call a theory . The process of knowledge creation comes from a systematic review of my theory with observation and experience . Neither the experience nor the knowledge given observation in itself. Only when this observation is positive or negative contrasts a previous theory. No previous theory to experience no knowledge.

My theory is that the sun rises because I get up every morning. One day I stay in bed and yet the sun also comes out. I learned that I should check my theory. Theory

==> Experience ==> KNOWLEDGE

(confirms, qualifies or denies the theory)

The work of the executive and middle management has a high degree of "prediction." To test these predictions (theory) generate knowledge for the organization.

practical formula to test the theories is as follows:

THEORY ==> Planning the launch of an experience ==> analyze and learn from the experience ==> Confirm, revise, and improve or negate the theory ==> repeat the cycle many times as necessary until you reach the desired improvement.

The result is continuous improvement and innovation.


4 .- Study of the behavior (psychology): The manager must understand how the "system" affects the behavior of each of the individuals and groups.

objectives by objectives (MBO), by results (MBR) or quota rise to a lack of cooperation between groups.

Results de un informe estarán influenciados por el estilo de dirección. Nadie quiere ser portador de aquellos resultados que la alta dirección no quiere escuchar.

La mejora debe considerar, pues, como afectará el nuevo sistema a los individuos y grupos.

Conclusiones

El directivo debe lograr que la competitividad se transforme en cooperación, y para ello debe ver la organización como la interacción de todas sus partes. Como un sistema con una finalidad común.

Debe saber interpretar la información a la luz de la variabilidad o ruido que el propio sistema induce y saber que una mejora aparente, al igual que un deterioro, puede ser simplemente fruto de la variabilidad natural system itself that directs. Finally

must use formulas to create internal knowledge. But first, you should receive external light that allows you to identify where your organization lives hole.