Holism Versus Reductionism

Question: Describe the Holism versus Reductionism and explain how it is used as a tool for problem solving? Answer: Holism: In the holism, the entire system is considered rather than merely its parts or constituents. Holism basically refers to a system or approach, in which the focus is on the whole thing and is on more priority as compared to the parts, it is constituted of. When holism approach is adopted, the large entities or organizations are not broken down for the purpose of understanding it. Holism enables in the problem solving. In this system, it is believed that the complex problems of natural systems can be understood as a whole and cannot be solved in terms of its parts. For instance, whenever an individual gets ill, it is considered as his whole body is not healthy. It is not said that his individual parts of body are not healthy. Another common example of holism, which can be seen in daily lives is that the holistic brand. Holistic brand implies that the image or reputation of a company is always taken as image of whole company rather than the individual parts of the company. Similarly, in 'Ferranti Effect', the total voltage at the receiving end is more than the voltage at the sending end. In short, the overall total of voltage is more than the constituting parts. Reductionism: This approach implies that to solve a problem the bigger complex thing is broken down to its simplest constituting parts. While applying this approach, it is presumed that the larger parts of a system can be better understood if they are broken into smaller parts and then thoroughly studied. Thus, as opposed to holism, the whole here is studied as its parts. For instance, the system of the whole car is better understood by studying its different parts separately like its engine, wheels, accelerator etc. similar approach can be seen in the work and research of Baron- Cohen et al.. According to him, a small phenomenon (empathy) if understood first, can lead to a better understanding about the bigger area (autism). Various scientific methods can be used for this purpose because in case of some bigger systems, the smaller parts can be studied only under special environment and settings like standard methods, also known as reliability and greater control, also known as validity. Reduction ism is a kind of supplement to holism, according to which every entity or system is composed of small basic parts and if these basic smaller parts are understood, the entire system can be understood on the basis of that. An example of this approach is: A merged electrical circuit is made up of various separable and individual elements such as: capacitance, resistance and thus the flow of current can be considered as the total sum of these individual parts. In general, the two approaches: holism and reductionism are not as such contrary to each other, but differ only in terms of their focus. One concentrates on the relationship between various parts of a large entity and the other on the parts properties. In short, both supplement each other and are not conflicting with each other. System thinking The other name for system thinking is the systemic thinking, which means implies to think about the whole rather than its parts. It implies that the evolving properties can neither be observed nor be altered just by studying or understanding the individual components. In the systems thinking approach, emphasis is laid down on the relationships between the various parts, as compared to just viewing them in isolation. It also implies to take into account the environment, circumstances or context that is present around a specific system, which is under study, thus, it can be said that the systems thinking, in a way, is also contextual thinking, which gain implies to understand any system within the context or meaning of a bigger whole. It has also been termed as holistic thinking by some people. An illustration of this can be understood with the help of an example of a car. If certain improvements are being made to the say, accelerator or the steering wheel, can it guarantee for the increased speed of that car? The obvious answer to this would be no. the reason behind this will be that improvements were being made only in the individual parts and not in the car as a whole. The same theory holds true for many other complex systems as well as large organizations. For more clarity of the systems thinking, a situation can be analyzed. For instance, the employees engaged in the department of operations of a manufacturing company complain that they are facing many internet and mail related issues, which needs a lot of time and effort for resolution of these issues. This is because the lead time for resolving these issues by the help desk of the information technology (IT) is quite high. Usually, the first thought that will come into the mind of a practitioner to sort out this issue would be the launch of a Six Sigma project so that the lead time required for resolution of such IT issues can be reduced. But, however, the systems thinking, however, will give recommendation of first understanding why and where of this issue along with the interrelationships, already existing in the system. The receiver of such a large number of requests by the IT helpdesk is mainly due to the reason that employees lack such basic skills. With the application of the systems thinking, such an issue is solved by making provision of training for all the employees, with the purpose of improving and enhancing their basic skills related to computers. Problem solving as a tool: Systems thinking can be used as a means of efficient tool for understanding and solving the complex problems. However, thinking, which is required at the time of solving a problem is entirely different from the time of its creation. For appropriate solution, thinking should be in the right direction. In many situations, it happens that in spite of making all efforts in all directions, the problem is not solved. Here comes the role of systems thinking approach. Systems Thinking Meets Challenges offered by Change: Systems thinking helps in meeting the challenges posed by changes to a great extent, as the consequences faced in future due to the choices made by people today become real due to systems thinking. It can be understood as follows that system thinking: Explains the reason behind the usual thinking of people, when they do not want to accept change. Clarifies as to why change is required for greater success. Provides explanation as to how interaction between different thoughts and behavior of different people lead to experience; and Makes recommendations for the improvement of performance of different individuals and hence the organization as a whole. Systems Approach applied to Project Management The performance and improvement techniques for organizational systems are explained by the Systems Thinking (ST) Approaches as: Functional Systems Approach Interpretive Systems Approach Structural Systems Approach Project Management is a very important field of everything. A good project management can result only under the guidance of a good project manager, who has not only technical skills but also possesses communication and leadership qualities. Project Management involves the execution of complex systems and can be improved with the help of engineering tool like a system modeling for solving the problems of communication. Nowadays, with the help of the internet and the availability of standard softwares in the industries, it has become very convenient to access the modeling tools in a particular. Thus, learning of such tolls has become easier and hence the development of simple and real model. The vision of a project as visualized by a customer may be right or misleading. However, the visualization by a project team is more realistic because it focuses on the achievement of results and also provides guidelines to the team for the same. At this stage, the communication process is very crucial. It is the stage, when the goals of the project and the ways of its achievement explain to the team and is called project scope. Its very essential to formulate the outcomes of the project so as to understand if a balance is maintained between the vision of the customer about the project and the essentials required for its achievement. And a model of the system that will be developed in the project, whether it is a building, a machine, a software or a policy, can easily correspond to the prototype tool described in. Conclusion On the basis of the above discussion, it can be concluded that the major point of discussion is not as to what are the obstacles, which are to be crossed in various intra as well as interdisciplinary approach, but the main fact to be focused here is that under the scientific synthesis, the systems of holism and reductionism are not in conflict or in contradiction ideologically, philosophically or practically. Overall, it can be said in crux that the approach of reductionism has been just more scientific as compared to holism. With this approach, a more statistical analysis of the data is possible, thus opening gates of more research. While on the other hand, results of a holistic experiment lack empirical evidence and are not so reliable or scientific.