1PAGE MGMT 8035 Final ProjectStudent Althea Kancel, [ema.docx

1
PAGE
MGMT 8035 Final Project
Student: Althea Kancel, [email protected]
Student ID # A00588323
Program: Ph.D in Management
Specialization: Leadership and Organizational Change
Faculty: Dr. David Gould, [email protected]
Walden University
October 10, 2015
Abstract
[Text begins here. This abstract should not exceed 120 words.
Note that abstracts in APA format are not indented. Write the
abstract at the END of the project. See the section on abstracts
in Chapter 2 of the APA Manual for guidelines and details.
Note: An abstract is not an introduction to the paper.]
Table of Contents
1MGMT 8035 Final Project
Organizational Description (Week 2)
1
Organizational Diagram
2
Organizational Description
2
Systems Theory
2
Supporting Research

2
Systems Dynamics (Week 3)
3
Stocks and Flows
3
Feedback Loops
3
Recommendations
3
Supporting Research
3
Systems Disciplines (Week 4)
4
Disciplines
4
Inform Leadership
4
Recommendations
4
Supporting Research
4
Systems Archetypes (Week 5)
4
Archetypes
4
Recommendations
5
Supporting Research
5
Networks (Week 6)
5
Networks
5
Recommendations
6
Supporting Research

6
Adding Complexity (Week 8)
6
Organizational Diagram
6
6
Recommendations
7
Supporting Research
7
Resilience (Week 9)
7
Resilience Matrix
7
Supporting Research
8
Summary and Conclusions
8
References
9Organizational Diagram
Operations Group Organizational Diagram
Figure 1
The Army’s mission is to fight and win our Nation’s wars by
offering prompt, sustained land dominance across the entire
range of military operations and spectrum of conflict in support
of combatant commanders. OPS GRP accomplishes this task by
conducting tough, realistic, Unified Land Operations to prepare
Brigade Combat Teams for current and future combat (National
Training Center, homepage, 2015). The Operations Group, one
of the five NTC tenant organizations, is comprised of 14
training teams each task with various training specialties and

one training academy team who is a task with “providing
institutional knowledge training on techniques and procedures
designed for combat trainers at the National Training Center
(National Training Center homepage, 2015).”
OPS GRP trains a combination of 10 Infantry Division Brigade
Combat Teams (IBCT), Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (SBCT),
or Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCT) rotational training
units (RTU) per year with an approximated $25 million cost per
RTU trained (Ruths, 2014). An IBCT consists of seven
battalions with approximately 4,400 Soldiers. The SBCT
comprises of six battalions, a reconnaissance Squadron, and one
brigade headquarters and headquarters company made up of
approximately 300 Stryker vehicles and 4,500 Soldiers.
Likewise, an ABCT encompasses seven battalions comprising of
4,743 Soldiers (FM 3-21.20, 2006, FM 3-90.6, 2010, & FM 3-
90.61, 2007).
In addition to training, NTC is responsible for living
accommodations, feeding, and supplement all other training
platforms, equipment, and commodities such as fuel, water,
ammunition and explosives, transportation, and railhead
operations (for the transport of heavy wheel equipment).
Moreover, contractors engage in the movement of line haul and
commercial equipment and maintenance operations on NTC
owned equipment (Global Security.org, 2015).
Training rotations are 14 days in length and run 24/7 operations.
All training conducted by trainers is collaborating through
established doctrine, tactics, techniques, and procedures for
training, publications and carried out to standard (National
Training Center homepage, 2015). After Action Reviews (AAR)
are required at every layer of training and codified for future
lessons learned. To boot, each RTU commander is provided
with a written and digital take-home package covering all battle
periods to establish the correlation between successful
reconnaissance of enemy defensive positions and favorable

outcome of offensive missions (Global Security.org,
2015).Systems Theory
System theories advise management on how best to select and
use best practices for their organization’s success. The
successful consolidation of all its parts is vital to the success of
the United States Army’s goals which requires the
synchronization of all its systems components and operations.
Hence, leadership and management must understand and be able
to answer the myriad of functions necessary to assist the OPS
GRP in executing its current responsibilities while
simultaneously preparing for future challenges.
Furthermore, leaders and directors must understand the totality
of its components successfully carry out its mission by
seamlessly anticipating, allocating, and providing RTUs the
right resources and competencies to ensure their breeding aims.
Leaders must move “beyond their narrow perspective to
interpret “the big picture” and their part in it (Oshry, 2013, p.).”
Seeing and interpreting the large painting is necessary to the
attainment of sustainable organizational success.
Considering the myriad of interconnected systems and processes
is a critical component to the management team of OPS GRP.
Organizational structure and organizations set the leadership
style employed to reach desired synergy and operational goals.
Supporting Research
The value and importance of Bouldig (1956) work to my
organization lies in the premise that cognition does not subsist
in the abstract, but instead thrive in our human interaction with
one another and within our societal system. Furthermore,
Bouldig (1956) moves on to pronounce that if no one knows the
information, then knowledge is no longer knowledge. That
knowledge must be apportioned among all specialization instead
of being contained in specialized areas so the whole can gain

insight from one another. Thus, the main objective behind the
general systems theory is to proliferate knowledge among
specialists in harness relevant communication from one another.
Therefore, general systems theory provides management and
executives a framework to encourage the growth of their system
by utilizing the abundant of contribution and knowledge
available to them in widely different empirical studies.
Next, Oshry (2007), teaches and empowers management and
executives in seeing systems so they may avert catastrophic
decisions and not echo the same conclusions that contributed to
that tragedy. Seeing systems and or patterns within the
organization enables leadership to behave and manage what
needs done for the benefit of the organization and the team. The
courage to accept change and implementing said changes for the
success of the system.
This courage can lend management and executives the courage
to transform a top down hierarchy to a robust system, giving
Top, Middle, and Bottom systems within the organization a
unique role to determine the whole rather than it sitting
exclusively at the top (Oshry, 2007). With each system looking
to and working with one another, brainstorming, and
capitalizing on its shared wisdom, the organization can exploit
the collective shared vision, contributions and wisdoms to bring
some positive change.
Systems Dynamics (Week 3)
Systems Dynamics is an aspect of systems theory as a method
for understanding the dynamic behavior of complex systems.
System dynamics is a methodology technology used for
understanding and framing complex issues and problems.
System dynamics helps management understand and improve
their organization’s internal processes.
Stocks and Flows

The three stocks associated with National Training Center
(NTC) include buildings, land holdings, and cash on hand.
Buildings. NTC is a modern facility that consists of three story
buildings interconnected with plazas and desks. There is a
distinctive architectural feature of the headquarters building
that is in the form of a circular stairway at the center of the
three buildings providing access to the floors.
Land Holdings. Fort Irwin National Training Center (NTC) is
located 37 miles northeast of Barstow in Calico Mountains. It
has a total land area of 2,579.77 km² that is equivalent to
996.055 square miles. Part of this land, approximately 0.3277
km² is covered with water. The remaining area, 18.3 km² or 7.1
square miles of the CDP, covers all of the lands of Fort Irwin
National Training Center (NTC). Within the western side of
Fort Irwin NTC territory lies the Golden Deep Space
Communication Complex. With 2,579.77 km² land holdings,
Fort Irwin has an ideal site for ranges and maneuver, air space
restricted to the use of the military, an uncluttered
electromagnetic spectrum as well as excellent isolation from the
densely populated areas.
Cash in Hands. NTC has cash in hands that are an asset in the
form of money that is immediately available for businesses and
spent when needed in paying small amounts of
expenses/finances.
The associated flows include inflows, outflows, and feedback
loops.
Inflows: This includes money received from sales of services or
products. Land holding inflows can be money received from
selling land while building inflows can be money received from
selling part of the building or all of the building. On the other
hand, cash on hand inflows might be deposits made from a
customer or money received from a loan in cash such as Notes
Receivable.
Outflows: This is the amount made to purchase an asset such as
adding more land, purchasing a building or withdrawing money,

and paying cash to creditors.
Feedback Loops
Feedback Loops buffers or enhances changes that occur in a
system.
Positive feedback loops usually enhance or even amplify
changes that tend to make the system unstable or to move the
system away from its equilibrium state (Clemens, 2013). In a
positive feedback loop, a decrease or increase in the number of
people seeking training at NTC results in the same type of
change, which is either decrease or increase in the number of
professionally trained individuals. For example, when the
number of persons seeking training at NTC increases
exponentially, positive feedback will result in a virtuous cycle.
Positive feedback approach emphasizes the singling out of
positive behavior among the trainees/individuals at NTC and
hence provides key advantages to NTC and managers in
addressing trainee’s performance. It, therefore, encourages
wanted behaviors as it directly encourages behaviors that NTC
wants their trainees to repeat.
Recommendations
Understanding stocks flow, and feedback loops is essential in
improving decision making within the organization. Firstly, it
is important to have knowledge about the stock for a decision
maker to make an efficient and significant decision concerning
stocks (Sterman, 2000). For instance, to know when people in
the organization are well trained and need assimilation into the
job market. Secondly, inflows and outflows help decision
makers to understand the company’s current position and plan
for it (Sterman, 2000). Understanding concepts of inflows and
outflows assists in improving planning for the unforeseen
eventualities that the National Training Center might face hence
correct planning for the decision maker (Sterman, 2000).
Thirdly, feedback loops are paramount as they cause the output
from one node to influence eventually input in the same node

(Morecroft, 2007). It is, therefore, important especially in
decision making as understanding the behavior of difficult,
complex social systems problems will help decision makers to
hypothesize realistic solutions that will have a high possibility
of working for the first time. Feedback loops will, therefore,
help decision makers know how to act when a change in
something ultimately changes or results in further changes in
the same thing. In general, the organization should employ the
concept of stocks, flows, and feedback loops to boost their
overall productivity hence translating into a comparatively huge
financial gain through proper budgeting hence financial control
and hence better decision making.
Supporting Research
Morecroft (2007), informs leaders in my organization on how to
identify the patterns of behavior that are problematic and locate
the system structure that is causing the problem. Locating these
issues within their system structure provides leadership within
my organization an opportunity to eliminate the problem.
Likewise, Sterman (2000), teaches leaders and management in
my organization learn the value of feedback loops. Feedback
loops influence management to act and in doing so changes the
environment in which they operate. Their actions may have
unforeseen consequences and, therefore, changes their future
decision-making process. Additionally, Sterman (2000), teaches
leadership that their actions affect and shape their operating
environment, either positive negatively. Moreover, so the
challenge lies in understanding how to use feedback loops in a
manner that empowers rather than…by building systems capable
of achieving great success.Systems Disciplines (Week 4)
Von Bertalanffy (1972) outline systems model as a conceptual
framework in which otherwise unrelated events merge and the
various pieces fall into place. Understanding the systemic
organizational structure and its role in how the employee
behaves enlightens management on how they can alter their

incumbent structure for the better. There are five core
disciplines within learning organizations that help shape
individual actions and create the conditions in which they
operate. They are: personal mastery, mental models, shared
visions, team learning, and systems thinking.
The Five Disciplines
Personal mastery the term used to describe personal growth and
to learn (Senge 2006). It is a set of guiding ideologies and
practices that facilitate learning, produce personal vision, and
view the world objectively. Senge (2006) contends that personal
mastery is one of the five subject areas necessary for a learning
system and achieving organization's goal of corporate
excellence. A learning organization encourages and support
personal mastery of its members, for management believe that
personnel with higher degrees of mastery are more devoted to
the organization (Senge 2006). For example, leaders
demonstrate their personal mastery at Operations Group (Ops
Grp) by setting their personal vision and strategies based on the
training learning outcomes and objectives provided. The
learning environment at Ops Group encourages leaders to be
creative and employ personal vision in ways that will lead their
units to success on the battlefield. Leaders who have achieved
personal mastery in Ops Group are dedicated, have overcome
their mental models, and are continually expanding their power
to reach the outcomes they seek.
Mental models are conceptual frameworks consisting of
generalizations and assumptions from which we understand the
world and take action on it. Mental models represent some
significant obstacles to learning and innovation as they involve
the way in which we believe and behave (Senge, 2006). Thus,
managers must have a mastery of mental models to make an
effective learning system. For instance, one common occurrence
observed in Ops Group is how each unit interprets the same
training scenarios in multiple ways. Each Rotational Training

Unit (RTU) brings a different and unique view to the same
scenario provided for training evaluation. Mental models are
important because they bear on what we attend, how we
interpret our surroundings and the actions we take to resolve
matters. Furthermore, shared values in organizations are
precisely as necessary to the success of their missionary work.
A shared vision is a crucial part of a learning organization and
essential building blocks for an efficient learning organization.
A shared vision motivates organizational members to accept
risks, experiment and become dedicated to a long-term view of
the system and its environment so that the vision is
accomplished (Senge, 2006). For example, NTC Ops Grp shared
vision is to train today's Army successfully in “how to think,
not what to think” (NTC Homepage, 2015). When the shared
vision is in alignment, such as all Soldiers working hard to
achieve the commission, then team learning can occur (Senge,
2006). Thus, shared vision is an essential building block to the
training and team learning environment Of Ops Grp.
Team learning occurs when the alignment and development of a
team create results that the members long for (Senge 2006). It is
a necessary discipline for an organization and its members to
develop and to build an effective learning system. A learning
organization is one that encourages and facilitate learning so
that the governing body can adapt and easily transform itself to
accomplish its goals in today's active and competitive
environment (Senge, 2006). Also, effective team learning
requires that members of the team understand system thinking,
have a commitment to the truth, understand the organization's
shared vision, and be able to manage effectively mental models
(Senge, 2006). Rotational Units that train with Operations
Group OC/Ts are excellent examples of a learning team.
Members of the team must train and learn how to think
collectivity, be committed, understand their overarching
mission and objectives, and manage their mental models to

fulfill successfully training objectives.
Systems thinking is a discipline for seeing the whole rather than
just the parts; it allows managers to see the corresponding set of
elements rather than parts, for seeing patterns of the whole
rather than snapshots (Senge, 2006). If managers can read how
the organizations' systems work, then they can understand the
bigger designs and generate decisions to reinforce those rules
that are right for the system. Realizing that the organization’s
fundamental structure plays a role in how employees behave
will enlighten managers and leaders to the fact that they hold
the ability to modify the necessary social organization for the
better (Senge, 2006). Systems thinking assist managers in
taking in the bigger picture break the cycle of addressing
symptoms rather than root causes and make decisions that will
change the pattern with an effective result.
Inform Leadership
Each of the five disciplines allows leadership to work through
their premises, create shared understanding and make
organizational change a participative event. Senge (2006)
defines personal mastery as encouraging personal vision in
employees. Dhiman (2011) also links personal mastery to
effective leadership by maintaining that the best means to
encourage others in their quest for personal mastery are to be a
good example by devoting to your personal mastery.
Mental models can present some significant obstacles to
learning and innovation. Mental models often limit the ways in
which we think and act. If mental management models are
flawed, then they will invariably make wrong decisions. For
instance, a common mental model for a trainer may be that
trainees are lazy which is why training objectives do not get
fulfilled. This mental model consists of an untested assumption
and prompts the trainer to cut other possible causes for the
problem such as trainee not fully reading the training

instructions or objectives. Leaders can overcome erroneous
mental models by first identifying them and then managing
them appropriately.
Furthermore, a collective vision gives workers drive and focus.
Senge (2006) theorizes that managers and staff learn best when
they work together to accomplish things that matter to them. If
employees become a stakeholder in the shared vision, then they
will work hard to accomplish it. Therefore, it is incumbent upon
the organization’s leadership to invest in its employees
achieving a shared vision.
There is an important interrelationship between team learning
and the other four disciplines. For managers to engage in team
learning, they must develop a commitment to the truth through
personal mastery (Senge, 2006). Likewise, managers must be
able to check their mental models through vigilance and the
organization’s shared vision. Furthermore, directors and leaders
must understand and apply systematic thinking, which is the
ability to understand patterns and interrelationships - the big
picture.
Finally, System thinking is a method of analyzing the
interrelations between several components of an organization. It
is the key part of an effective learning system. By looking at the
relationships and interactions between various segments of the
organization, management and leadership can identify general
patterns that help explain events, enabling them to reach
decisions that alter their arrangements through an ongoing and
careful process.
Recommendations
Personal mastery can change employees and management’s
vision for their organization. Leaders in Ops Grp encourage all
Soldiers to learn, develop, and partake in their experiences from

training. As these leaders learn personal mastery, they can
supply valuable feedback to other units (Dhiman, 2011). The
best method for leaders of Ops Group to demonstrate their
committing to personal mastery is by leading by example.
Mental models are conceptual frameworks consisting of
generalities and traditions that bear on how we interpret our
surroundings and move on it (Senge 2006). Directors and
leaders of a learning system must manage mental models by
identifying them, testing their validity, and continually improve
upon them (Senge, 2006). Leaders must serve their team
members by highlighting those cases that are touched by mental
models as they manifest in their decision-making process and
then they may learn from it.
Shared Vision Leaders need to advocate a shared vision across
the masses. Having a team with a shared vision is a more
productive and innovative team thus creating a superior
organization. Leadership at all levels must encourage personal
mastery in all members of the team to optimize Ops Grp shared
a vision to achieve Ops Grp training objectives continually.
Team learning can increase the capacities of all team members
and the team as a whole. Sharing knowledge from top to bottom
and vice versa creates a sense of ownership within management
and employees (Senge, 2006). It is this sense of ownership that
enables the organization to grow and stay competitive in today’s
global environment. Therefore, it is imperative that knowledge
is accessible to all.
Systems thinking is interrelated with the other four disciplines,
especially in a shared vision and team learning (Senge, 2000). A
complete comprehension of systems thinking help leaders and
managers focus on the whole organizational systems, creating
an environment whereby all employees regardless of position
learn together as a team. As Senge (1990) argues that
organizational learning is a fitting process for establishments in
the face of the swift tempo of change. Management must invest

in its employees by creating a robust working environment that
encourages sharing vision and wisdom.
Supporting Research
Von Bertalanffy (1972) is recognized for his contribution to the
interdisciplinary practice that describe systems with interacting
components applied to biology and other fields. Karl Ludwig
von Bertalanffy is generally considered to be the founder of
general systems theory. His foundational premise of general
system theory is the sums of all parts form the whole.
Understanding this concept provide leadership with the tools to
see larger patterns emerge. The ability to see patterns, then
motivates leadership in Ops Group to arrive at conclusions that
are beneficial to the organization while simultaneously
reinforcing positive patters.
Peter Senge (2006) contribution to system theory is that there is
no such matter as a complete system and as such teaches
management and leadership how to look at a problem more
comprehensively. Senge (2006) uses system theory to teach
management and leadership on development processes to reach
safer conclusions. Over time, leaders will develop the skills to
simply look at the organizational structure and recognize which
systems area(s) that require additional examination. Systems
theory teaches executives to handle uncertainties since we work
in a dynamic and ever shifting work environment.
Systems Archetypes (Week 5)
Systems archetypes are observed in all types of systems,
including organizations. Understanding systems archetypes in
organizations are helpful in intervening or taking corrective
action. Archetypes are components of structures that explains
the different examples of patterns within a system. Archetypes
identify recurring problems and work towards steps for a
solution (Hubbard, 2012). Patterns in systems can help

organizations find solutions to problems by looking
systematically at recurring problems.
Systems archetype as a diagnostic tool help managers recognize
patterns of behavior that are present in their organizations so
they can gain insight into the underlying structures from which
the archetypal behavior emerges. Archetypes as a prospective
tool are useful for organizational planning and may be applied
to analyze policies and social systems. Systems archetypes
reveal the underlying complexity of management issues, lead to
leverage levels in managing difficult management challenges
and help in explaining the underlying opportunities (Senge,
2006).
System Archetypes include Balancing Process with Delay,
Limits to Growth, Shifting the Burden, Eroding Goals,
Escalation, Success to the Successful, Tragedy of the Commons,
Fixes that Fail, and finally, Growth and Underinvestment
(Senge, 2006). Each archetype has its features, thinking
processes, and potential responses. Understanding archetypes
answer the “why” a behavior exists, and adds a preventive tool
for management. For my system, I will analyze and evaluate
problems indicated by Limits to Growth, Shifting the burden,
and Escalation archetypes and propose potential solutions or
interventions for my customer. Archetypes
Limits to Growth
Description
Archetypes are designed to help with solutions and to problems
of dynamic complexities. Limits to growth or limits to success
are the first archetype observed in the Operations Group (OPS
GRP) Organization. Limits to growth is a collective resource
shared between two, but the third party has full mastery of
resources. Senge (2006) also proposed that the third governing

body has the highest interest in utility from the resources.
Limits to growth can create a spiral of success, but also create
unintentional secondary effects that eventually slow down the
success (Senge, 2006). The archetype limits to growth involve
pushing success, rather than fixing the problems that limit
success. For example, the system is striving to grow by
satisfying the demand of more personal for the War on Terror.
Then again, the organization decides to suspend temporarily
promotions while growing the ranks.
Analyze and evaluate problems indicated by archetype
The challenge to this system archetype has on the organization
is management, use of temporary fixes to correct resolutely
systemic shortfalls, which causes fundamental long-term
solutions to get utilized less and less. With limits to growth,
neither party sees the whole and identify it as a complex
arrangement. Alternatively, the delays in the system only allow
each side to understand their perspective only creating further
escalation. The goal of management is to deter the triggered
effect caused by alterations in the environment by reinforcing
limits; in turn, this will further growth or success.
For example, OPS GRP Corporation experience dramatic growth
in the past couple of years in response to the War on Terror
campaign, then stabilize or decrease due to the structure
strengths being limited. During the height of growth, personnel
experienced unprecedented promotion opportunities, bonuses,
and paid a morale leave. However, the War on Terror has
substantially cooled and now the system can no longer sustain
the growth of personnel in its ranks.
To come up with the challenges raised by the archetype, I would
recommend a prescriptive measure focusing on removing the
boundary rather than continuing to drive the reinforcing process
of evolution. Build up a methodology to identify potential

balancing processes before they begin to affect future
development. Moreover, identify links between the development
processes and limiting elements to determine ways to achieve
symmetry between the two.
Potential
Solution
s
Senge (2008) describes shifting the burden archetype, as a
problem with a costly or difficult solution; because of this, the
burden is shifted to a less difficult solution that does nothing to
determine the fundamental problem. Further complication
ensues when the underlying issue worsens, and managers lose
the chance to repair the trouble. These costly consequences
often present in the form of injury or demise for just about.
Shifting the Burden
Description
An actual case of changing the burden I observed from
my organization is the act of augmenting the force during times
of war/campaigns and to discard them once the crisis is averted.
The organization is at this very moment downsizing its military

unit from the last surge. Utilizing temporary fixes does not
rectify the behavior but simply help to proliferate the situation.
It just delays the inevitable reappearance of the trouble. Senge
(2006) wrote that quick fixes result in the procrastination of
identifying a long-term answer.
A major problem with switching the burden is the long-term
reliance on relieving the solution through masking the problem
(Senge, 2006). During the surge, the War on Terror the
organization recruited some sub-par applicants to fill shortfalls.
This reliance on temporary symptomatic relief (reliance on less
qualified applicants to occupy the ranks) further complicates a
situation that is fraught with pitfalls and direst situations (i.e.
Potential increased unethical behavior among members).
One other significant issue that stems from ‘shifting the
burden’ is the idea of eroding goals, where the pressures of the
archetype force the system to choose less qualified candidates
as a plausible solution (Senge, 2008). Meadows, (2008) wrote
that intervening produces a temporary solution, but with
drawbacks. The difficult decision facing managers is whether to
continue the intervention while working on a long-term solution
or install corrections to the system (cost reduction, change in

management) and withdraw intervention (Braun, 2002,
Meadows, 2008).
Potential solution / interventions to clients
The institution failure to develop a strategic contingency plan to
fill its ranks in time of great need is the root cause of this
archetype in this organization. One possible answer to dealing
effectively with the shifting the burdens archetype requires “a
combination of toning up the fundamental response and
weakening the symptomatic response (Senge, 2008, p. 109).”
As a consultant, my intervention would not comprise of solely
of getting rid of the symptomatic solution as this method only
offer short-term benefits. Rather, I will concentrate on
identifying the symptom, (i.e. Budget constraint and personnel
management), distinguish different types of solution (i.e. Poor
inventory management personnel), and strengthening atrophied
fundamental solution. Once solution(s) are identified, test
assumptions with small actions ensuring that sufficient time is
allocated conclusions to come to fruition. The management
principle of shifting the burden is not to solve the symptoms,
but to solve the trouble.
Escalation

Description
Escalation is recognized as a vicious cycle because each side
keeps intensifying its response to the other side’s
aggressiveness. Escalation occurs when individuals or firms
view their survival or well-being dependent on possessing an
advantage over the other party. The cooperation that is required
to bring down the escalation could be interpreted as anti-
competitive. Despite the danger of breaching antitrust laws, it is
to the advantage of both parties to ascertain the event that is
causing the competition and explore how strategies can be
changed to neutralize the escalating or ways the parties can
differentiate them in the market.
More specifically, Braun (2002) tells us that the escalation
system archetype is “an appropriate [reaction to] the actions of
competitors (a) to sustain one’s competitive advantage, (b) to
maintain momentum toward realizing a competitive advantage,
and/or (c) because that’s what managers are supposed to do (p.
8).” When one system or institution wellbeing is dependent on
possessing an advantage over the other, the escalation has a
debilitating effect as each arrangement is caught in a brutal
cycle of one-up-man-ship of the other.
For the Army, the War on Terror is an example of Senge (2006)

escalation systems archetype. The United States is responding
to perceived threats by Al Qaeda with increased military
activities and augmentation of forces to support the perceived
aggression. This cycle of aggression has both parties locked in a
perpetual cycle of Al Qaeda increasing the number of terrorist
recruits, which leads to more terrorist activities, thus increasing
the threat to the United States, who in turn deploy their military
assets and so on. From each factions’ perspective, they are
focused on their short-term goals rather than seeing the whole
further creating escalation for both countries. They are so
focused on the trees in front of them that they do not see the
forest burning (Senge, 2006).
In the war on terror, each side perceives itself as gaining
advantage from expanding its natural processes because of the
inherent delays in the other side’s response. Because of this
delay, escalation is permitted to go unchecked due to the side’s
perceived advantage over the other.
The primary challenge of the escalation archetype is that
in the spirit of protecting the well-being of an organization,
management resorts to escalate to the stage where they damage
their firm and diminish its value to consumers, constituents, and

stockholders (Braun, 2002). Through the escalation process, two
balancing loops form a single reinforcing loop of heightened
action against the other party, thereby proving the conditions
worse (Bellinger, 2012). So, as escalation increases the
utilization of more resources such as money, time, and people
are utilized by each initiative in an exertion to subdue the other
competition. Escalation carried to the extreme can result in
bankruptcy or the destruction of one or both parties.
Limits to Growth
Description
Archetypes are designed to help with solutions and to problems
of dynamic complexities. Limits to growth or limits to success
are the first archetype observed in the Operations Group (OPS
GRP) Organization. Limits to growth is a collective resource
shared between two, but the third party has full mastery of
resources. Senge (2006) also proposed that the third governing
body has the highest interest in utility from the resources.
Limits to growth can create a spiral of success, but also create
unintentional secondary effects that eventually slow down the
success (Senge, 2006). The archetype limits to growth involve
pushing success, rather than fixing the problems that limit

success. For example, the system is striving to grow by
satisfying the demand of more personal for the War on Terror.
Then again, the organization decides to suspend temporarily
promotions while growing the ranks.
The challenge to this system archetype has on the organization
is management, use of temporary fixes to correct resolutely
systemic shortfalls, which causes fundamental long-term
solutions to get utilized less and less. With limits to growth,
neither party sees the whole and identify it as a complex
arrangement. Alternatively, the delays in the system only allow
each side to understand their perspective only creating further
escalation. The goal of management is to deter the triggered
effect caused by alterations in the environment by reinforcing
limits; in turn, this will further growth or success.
For example, OPS GRP Corporation experience dramatic growth
in the past couple of years in response to the War on Terror
campaign, then stabilize or decrease due to the structure
strengths being limited. During the height of growth, personnel
experienced unprecedented promotion opportunities, bonuses,
and paid a morale leave. However, the War on Terror has
substantially cooled and now the system can no longer sustain

the growth of personnel in its ranks.
To come up with the challenges raised by the archetype, I would
recommend a prescriptive measure focusing on removing the
boundary rather than continuing to drive the reinforcing process
of evolution. Build up a methodology to identify potential
balancing processes before they begin to affect future
development. Moreover, identify links between the development
processes and limiting elements to determine ways to achieve
symmetry between the two.
Potential

1PAGE MGMT 8035 Final ProjectStudent Althea Kancel, [ema.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 1PAGE MGMT 8035 Final ProjectStudent Althea Kancel, [ema.docx

Similar to 1PAGE MGMT 8035 Final ProjectStudent Althea Kancel, [ema.docx (19)

More from eugeniadean34240

More from eugeniadean34240 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

1PAGE MGMT 8035 Final ProjectStudent Althea Kancel, [ema.docx