Search results

There is a field needing both cybernetics and systems theory: business as one way to viability – “business cybernetics” might have to emerge. The purpose of this paper is to address this issue.

A first draft of business cybernetics (BC) notion is presented. Discusses the definition of business systems (BSs) and their need for requisite holism, our understanding of cybernetics, our understanding of the (general) systems theory and systems thinking, differences between some versions of systems theories and cybernetics, and add our draft cybernetics of BSs, finishing with BC as a case of interdependence between business practice, systems theories and cybernetics and resulting conclusions.

It was not found, although quite some literature was studied and quite some practical experience in business, both as employees and as consulting instructors was collected. It is clear that cybernetics and (general) systems theory were created at about the same time by two different groups of scientists. They both dealt with complex rather than complicated entities/features/processes and they both tried to stress relations between parts of reality, which used to be considered separately and one‐sidedly rather than (requisitely) holistically.

Later on, their “war against a too narrow specialisation” did not end in their general victory, but rather in application of their fruitful findings inside many specialised disciplines of science and practice. This is good, but not good enough, uncovered topics remain. Business is one of them.

Links both cybernetics and systems to an emerging “business cybernetics” in an innovative approach.

The purpose of this paper is to suggest a more holistic definition and basic guidelines for implementation of specific cybernetics dealing with business systems (BSs) from the viewpoint of managing them. The paper aims to consider three problems: how to develop a general methodology of requisitely holistic thinking for business cybernetics (BC) and its application; how to consider the attributes of BC (e.g. all attributes of BC and their generalization in BSs); and how to recognize and define relations between attributes of BC and their synergies.

In this paper, qualitative analysis on the basis of the cybernetics (e.g. especially general cybernetics), BC (different) systems theories, and dialectical systems theory is applied.

BC is shown to be a specific cybernetic dealing with BSs from viewpoint of managing/impacting on them. Thus, BC is trying to complete previous cognitions about possible approaches for managing/impacting on BSs. It covers the basic, information, and managerial processes, their interdependences, the resulting interaction and synergies. In addition, BC is also trying to make room for consideration of the general, group‐specific, and individual parts of attributes of BSs. BC itself is based on the concept of the Dialectical Systems Theory that the law of requisite holism is met by dialectical system which creates synergetic networks of all essential kinds of cybernetics.

Research is limited to three hypotheses and qualitative analysis in desk research. Practical experience is considered implicitly.

Authors falsifying the practice of prevailing general approach to researching and understanding of management in BSs (as an area of human activity with specific characteristics) from cybernetics viewpoint. This paper suggests a more specifically created and target‐oriented approach for cybernetic understanding and researching of BSs.

The available literature does not provide for a similar concept and/or model of specific cybernetics dealing with BSs from the viewpoint of managing BSs or their impact.

The purpose of this paper is to offer a new requisitely holistic definition of business ethics (BE) as a crucial component of business cybernetics and practice. The present contribution considers a basic problem: how humans use BE to influence their business processes. Therefore, business is/should be investigated from the viewpoint of ethics. Requisite holism of understanding and consideration of BE in business reality is unavoidable; it can (and must) result from findings and considerations of the interdependence between business practice, ethics, and BE.

In this paper, qualitative analysis is applied on the basis of the cybernetics (e.g. especially business cybernetics), dialectical systems theory, and ethics theory.

Ethics is a crucial emotional part of human attributes. They can be viewed as the subjective part of the starting points of any human acting/behavior process, including business. Thus, ethics (may) have/has a crucial role in business cybernetics and practice as BE. To clarify and beneficially use BE, one must understand relations between business cybernetics and BE, between business practice and BE, and understand the diversity of content of BE in literature, etc. On this base offered here is an understanding of BE, a definition of the content of BE as a specific type/part of ethics, and a view at source of BE content.

Content of BE. Research is limited to hypothesis and qualitative analysis in desk research. Practical experience is considered implicitly.

This is a step toward development of business cybernetics with a requisitely holistic approach founded on requisite wholeness of insight. A more specifically created and target‐oriented approach to cybernetic understanding and research of BE of business systems is encouraged.

This paper presents a very new approach, rarely found in main‐stream literature; a new perception and definition of content of BE.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate and clarify possible distinctions between the terms “cyberneticist” and “cybernetician” with the intention of helping the growth of the cybernetics discipline in new directions.

After the American Society for Cybernetics ALU 2013 conference in Bolton, a small group of conference participants continued the conversations they had begun during the event, focusing on the comparison of the terms “cyberneticist” vs “cybernetician”. The group felt the need for clearer distinctions drawn (or designed) between the terms, in order to sustain the discipline of cybernetics and to support its growth. The aim of providing these distinctions is that theory should feed into practice and practice should feed into theory, forming a cybernetic loop, so that the discipline of cybernetics is sustained while growing. The conference participants had conversations between themselves, and came up with multiple perspectives on the distinction between “cyberneticist” vs “cybernetician”. The distinctions drawn mirror the distinctions between Science and Design: the science of cybernetics contrasted with the design of cybernetics.

The findings of this paper consist of recommendations to understand and act differently in the field of the discipline of cybernetics. In particular, a clear distinction is suggested between the terms “cyberneticist” and “cybernetician”. It is also suggested that in order for cybernetics to grow and be sustained, there should be a constant flow of developments in theory of cybernetics into the practice of cybernetics and vice-versa.

The authors believe that some people (called “cyberneticists”) should work on the science side of cybernetics, making strong contributions to the understanding and development of cybernetics theory. Others, (called “cyberneticians”) should work on the design side of cybernetics, to contribute through their actions and through the development of cybernetics practice. The result of this will be a self-organization that evolves naturally between theory and practice of cybernetics, leading to better learning of cybernetics, and in the process, sustaining it through continued growth. In this direction, the paper proposes several radical suggestions that may not be to the liking of traditionalists, but may be better received by the scientists and designers of cybernetics who can make a difference to the growth of the discipline of cybernetics.

Recent seminars in Munich, London and Rome, which were sponsored by the International Defense Electronics Association (IDEA), comprehensively cover the state of the art in Expert Systems and gave the cybernetician in particular, an insight into this fascinating area.

This paper aims to review current research with particular reference to new research and development initiatives and examines some of the changes since 1971.

A general review and survey of selected research and development topics is given and some new challenges and applications of future technologies are considered with particular reference to their impact and potential.

The paper illustrates the multi‐ and trans‐disciplinary nature of studies in cybernetics, systems and management sciences, with a view to further research and development activity. It comments on some of the changes that have occurred in the late twentieth and early twenty‐first century.

The choice of review provides an awareness of current trends in these areas of endeavour.

The reviews are selected from a global database and give a studied assessment of current research and development initiatives. With notes on the contribution of Kybernetes to communicating changes in technology.

Life cycle stages may see, result from, and/or cause, changes in culture and climate as the right‐brain attributes of both managers and their co‐workers. A four‐stage model is used to perceive these possible changes. Findings are tested in Slovenian enterprises. Differences per stages may be crucial and should therefore be known to managers/owners. Based on the case study research, this paper aims to suggest that enterprise awareness of importance of ethical climate can be of essential meaning for its long‐term success. The purpose of this paper is to discover differences in enterprise ethical climate in different enterprise life cycle stages and to identify their importance for active ethical climate care by the enterprises.

In this paper, the qualitative research is applied. The research cognitions on ethical climate are discussed in application of the dialectical systems theory.

The paper finds that there are some differences in enterprise ethical climate for enterprise life cycle stages and indicates a significant presence of the “rule”, “law and code” and “instrumental” ethical climates. Movement towards a more bureaucratic method of enterprise functioning, as an enterprise moves from the pioneer stage towards the stage of turn‐over, was also found.

This paper gives us some insights in the state of ethical climate in Slovenian enterprises. In a frame of practical implications, a further research should be done to show which measures of such ethical climate implementation should be used to stimulate the enterprises' innovative behaviour in accordance with the state of enterprise's life cycle stage.

The available literature does not provide for a similar research of linkage between the ethical climate and enterprises' life cycle.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate key implications of globalisation for business schools, and to put structural alignment of academic structures with the Bologna Declaration in a broader strategic alignment with the needs of a knowledge‐driven society and a socially sustainable development.

The analysis uses systems theory for analysing dynamic change in society and a synthesis of its influences on business education, as we see the Bologna Process is neither conceived nor implemented with sufficient care for holism in the European effort to become an innovative society.

Business schools should extend their transformation effort beyond the Bologna Process and align their strategic model of operation with societal needs by integrating social requirements into their strategic framework.

Research focuses on key external developments in business education at a transnational level. Future research should focus on the exploration of the business school response to social change in a local context.

A requisitely holistic picture of contextual change offers business school leaders deeper understanding of external implications for aligning schools with societal needs.

Emerging social challenges in Europe are taken as the starting point for realigning a strategic model of business school operation with societal needs and the business world with the aim to improve schools' accountability and their evolvement into socially engaged actors with innovative approaches.

The paper presents a systemic and requisitely holistic view of social change for aligning the business school model of operation with the broader needs of a knowledge‐driven society that stretches beyond the formal academic structures unification in the Bologna Process.

CYBERNETICS is the science of management; and also in some senses the science of science. It contains the fundamental ingredients of what is needed for all of organization and planning. The word cybernetics applies to any sort of closed‐loop system, which is adaptive. Because some such systems are serious and important, while others are light‐hearted and trivial, cybernetics is misunderstood in many quarters. All this has created a sad state of affairs because cybernetics as applied to serious systems is the most important science of our times.

This paper aims to suggest a new way toward reliability of contents of business information, on which quality of business critically depends. Contribution considers two problems: how to innovate information support for business with non‐technological innovations? And how can enterprises improve reliability of information for their work?

In this paper, qualitative analysis on the basis of the dialectical systems theory and business cybernetics is applied.

Modern markets require innovated business concepts. They include creation and implementation of requisitely holistic information support. Hence, enterprises need information management innovation. The use of requisite holism (as non‐technical innovation) to increase content‐reliability of business information is discussed. Matching information requirements by business cybernetics based on dialectical systems thinking can diminish errors by providing requisite holism.

Research is limited to three hypotheses and qualitative analysis in desk research. Practical experience is considered indirectly.

The habit of limiting business information to financial information or marketing information separately as well as the habit of discussing mostly or even only, information reliability from technical support viewpoints, is attacked. An alternative is suggested.

The available literature does not provide for a similar model of how to provide information that is reliable in terms of its contents by matching Mulej/Kajzer's law of requisite holism.