DOĞA BİLİMLERİNDEN SOSYAL BİLİMLERE: ÖRGÜTSEL ENTROPİ

Year 2023, , 556 - 583, 20.10.2023

Hatice Gökçe Demirel

https://doi.org/10.33723/rs.1358922

Abstract

Termodinamik yasaları doğa bilimlerinin en temel ve sarsılmaz yasalarıdır. Sosyal sistemler de doğa sistemleri gibi termodinamiğin ikinci yasası olan entropiye maruz kalmaktadır. Entropi, doğa bilimlerinde kendiliğinden gerçekleşen şeylerin evrendeki düzensizliği artırdığını ifade etmektedir. Sosyal bilimlerde ise genellikle bir amaç etrafında, bilinçli oluşturulmuş yapılar ve bu yapılar arasında enerji ve bilgi akışını kolaylaştıran süreçlerle entropiye karşı koyabilen mekanizmalar oluşturabilirler.
Örgütler insanlara amaçla bir yön vererek, enerjilerini ve zamanlarını üretime dönüştürerek, ön görülebilir davranış örüntüleriyle belirsizliği azaltarak bir düzen oluştururlar. Ancak örgütler de tüm sistemler gibi entropiden kaçamazlar.
Araştırmanın amacı örgütlerde düzeni oluşturan unsurlar (amaç, yapı, iletişim-etkileşim-bilgi) üzerinden entropiyi artıran ve azaltan durumları örgütsel düzeyde tespit etmektir. Kavramsal düzeyde yapılmış bu araştırmada, örgütlerin entropisini artıran ve azaltan unsurlara ilişkin tümevarımsal hipotezler ileri sürülmüştür. Örgüt amaçlarının parçası olduğu üst sistemin amaçları ve alt sistemi olan çalışanların kişisel amaçlarının örtüşmemesi, resmileştirme, merkezileşme derecesi, hiyerarşik rol basamakların artması entropiyi artırmaktadır. Uzmanlaşma, standardizasyon, sistem içinde birbiriyle ilişkili yapıların etkileşiminden ve çevreyle etkileşiminden sağlıklı bilgi üretebilen ve bu bilgiyi yayabilen örgütlerin entropisi azalmaktadır. Örgütlerin entropisine ilişkin bu hipotezlerin makro analiz düzeyinde öngörülebilir sonuçlar üretme kapasitesi yüksektir. Ancak analiz düzeyi küçüldükçe örgütlerin karmaşıklık düzeyi arttığından deterministik kaos kuramları çerçevesinde sonuçlar farklılık gösterebilir.

Keywords

Entropi, Örgütsel Entropi, Örgüt Teorisi

From Natural Scıences to Social Sciences: Organizational Entropy

Abstract

The laws of thermodynamics are the most fundamental and unshakable laws of natural sciences. Social systems, like natural systems, are subject to entropy, the second law of thermodynamics. Entropy, in natural sciences, means that spontaneous things increase the disorder in the universe. In social sciences, people can create mechanisms that can resist entropy through consciously created structures, usually around a purpose, and processes that facilitate the flow of energy and information between these structures.
Organizations create order by giving people a purpose, turning their energy and time into production, and reducing uncertainty with predictable behavioural patterns. However, organizations, like all systems, cannot escape entropy.
The aim of the research is to identify at the organizational level the situations that increase and decrease entropy through the elements that create order in organizations (purpose, structure, communication-interaction-information). In this research conducted at the conceptual level, inductive hypotheses were put forward regarding the factors that increase and decrease the entropy of organizations. The lack of overlap between the goals of the upper system of which the organizational goals are a part and the personal goals of the employees who are the subsystem, the degree of formalization, centralization, and the increase in hierarchical role levels increase entropy. The entropy of organizations that can produce and disseminate healthy information from specialization, standardization, interaction of interrelated structures within the system and interaction with the environment is decreasing. These hypotheses regarding the entropy of organizations have a high capacity to produce predictable results at the macro level of analysis. However, as the level of analysis decreases and the complexity of organizations increases, the results may differ within the framework of deterministic chaos theories.

Keywords

Entropy, Organizational Entropy, Organization Theory

References

• Aras, M. (2021). Leadership and Leadership Qualities in Chaos Management. Yönetim-Strateji-Organizasyon: Teori ve Uygulama. Editör:Şahin Karabulut. Gazi Kitabevi:Ankara. ISBN: 978-625-7530-12-5
• Brillouın, L. (1950). Thermodynamıcs And Informatıon Theory. American Scientist, 38(4), 594–599. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27826339 Connelly, C. E., Zweıg, D., Webster, J., & Trougakos, J. P. (2012). Knowledge hiding in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(1), 64–88. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41415737
• Crockett, C. (2014). Entropy. In C. Crockett, B. K. Putt, & J. W. Robbins (Eds.), The Future of Continental Philosophy of Religion (pp. 272–282). Indiana University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gh8cm.23
• Edmonds,G.S., Push,R. (2002). Creating Shared Knowledge: Instructional Knowledge Management Systems. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 5(1), 100–104. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.5.1.100
• Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1986). The Entropy Law and the Economic Process in Retrospect. Eastern Economic Journal, 12(1), 3–25. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40357380
• Gini, A. (2000). What Happens If Work Goes Away? Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(1), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.2307/3857704
• Greenbaum, H. H. (1974). The Audit of Organizational Communication. The Academy of Management Journal, 17(4), 739–754. https://doi.org/10.2307/255650
• Gross, E. (1969). The Definition of Organizational Goals. The British Journal of Sociology, 20(3), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/588953
• Hawking, S. (1988). A Brief History of Time: From The Big Bang to Black Holes. London: Bantam Press.
• Hoonsopon, D., & Ruenrom, G. (2012). The Impact of Organizational Capabilities on the Development of Radical and Incremental Product Innovation and Product Innovation Performance. Journal of Managerial Issues, 24(3), 250–276. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43488811
• https://www.nisanyansozluk.com/kelime/entropi# (Erişim Tarihi:22.07.2023)
• Khalil, E. L. (2004). The Three Laws of Thermodynamics and the Theory of Production. Journal of Economic Issues, 38(1), 201–226. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4227995
• Labelle, S., & Waldeck, J. H. (2020). An Introduction to Strategic Communication. In Strategic Communication for Organizations (1st ed., pp. 7–36). University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvw1d664.5
• Lewis, G.N. & Randall, M. (1961). Thermodynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Lovelock, J.E. (1979). Gaia: A New Look At Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford Universtiy Press.
• Martinez-Beruman, H.A., Lopez-Torres, G.C., Romo-Rojas, L. (2014). Developing a Method to Evaluate Entropy in Organizational Systems. Conference on Systems Engineering Research (CSER,2014). Procedia Computer Science 28 (2014) 389-397. Doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2014.03.048
• Meisel, M. (2016). Entropy. In Chaos Imagined: Literature, Art, Science (pp. 379–474). Columbia University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/meis16632.12
• Miller, J.G. (1978). Living Systems. McGraw-Hill, New York.
• Mintzberg, H. (1979).The Structuring of Organizations. Prentice Hill. New Jersey
• Norgaard, R. B. (1984). Coevolutionary Development Potential. Land Economics, 60(2), 160–173. https://doi.org/10.2307/3145970
• Odonnell, W. F. (1982). [Review of Entropy, A New World View, by J. Rifkin & T. Howard]. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 9(2), 234–237. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23261964 Petrucci. R.H. & Harwood, W.S. (1993). General Chemistry: Principles and Modern Applications. New York: Macmillan.
• Porterfield, G. D. (1976). Organizational Communication. The Academy of Management Review, 1(2), 132–133. Https://Doi.Org/10.2307/257497
• Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R., & Turner, C. (1968). Dimensions of Organization Structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13(1), 65–105. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391262
• Raymond, R. C. (1950). Communication, Entropy, And Life. American Scientist, 38(2), 273–278. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27826313
• Rıfkın, J., Howard, T. (1980). Entropy: A New World View. The Viking Press. New York. https://www.scribd.com/document/563615752/Dunyaya-Yeni-Bir-Bakış-Jeremy-Rifkin-Ted-Howard-Entropi
• Rosen, C. M. (2005). The Business-Environment Connection. Environmental History, 10(1), 77–79. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3985850
• Schooler, J. W., & Dougal, S. (1999). Why Creativity Is Not like the Proverbial Typing Monkey. Psychological Inquiry, 10(4), 351–356. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449463
• Shankar, R. (2014). Thermodynamics II. In Fundamentals of Physics: Mechanics, Relativity, and Thermodynamics(pp. 394–410). Yale University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vm4b6.26
• Shoemaker, S. (1969). Time Without Change. The Journal of Philosophy, 66(12), 363–381. https://doi.org/10.2307/2023892
• Smith, C. E., & Smith, J. W. (1996). Economics, Ecology and Entropy: The Second Law of Thermodynamics and the Limits to Growth. Population and Environment, 17(4), 309–321. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27503473
• Swaney, J. A. (1985). Economics, Ecology, and Entropy. Journal of Economic Issues, 19(4), 853–865. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4225647
• Swanson, G.A., Bailey, K.D., Miller,J.G. (1997). Entropy, Social Entropy and Money: A Living Systems Theory Perspective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 14(1), 45-65 doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-1743(199701/02)14:1<45:: aid-sres151>3.0.co;2-y
• Triulzi, P.E. (2018). The Entropy Effect: An Exploration Into Systems and Entropy -The Final Frontier of Science. IUniverse, Bloomington. ISBN: 978-1-5323-4311-6(sc)
• Yıldırım, M. (2012). Termodinamik Yasaları. Bilim ve Teknik. https://e-dergi.tubitak.gov.tr/edergi/yazi.pdf?dergiKodu=4&cilt=46&sayi=791&sayfa=58&yaziid=33985 (Erişim Tarihi: 30.07.2023)