Trends in the Theory of Public Administration, Essay Example

Systems theory stipulates that a system is an accumulation of components united to finish some final objective or goal (Chirot, 1982). Taking a closer look at it from that point of view, if one piece of the system falls flat or is taken out, the system itself will not function properly. Consider a system to get prepared for work in the morning and one part of that system is to bathe. In the event that the hot water is not working for whatever reason (or more awful yet, no water whatsoever), the system breaks down and it is changed. A system still exists, simply not the one this person are accustomed to. This system would have to change so that this person would still have the ability to leave his or her house and arrive at work on time. That idea is truly the establishment of the system theory. In this theory, everything is a piece or component of an overall system. Everything goes together, although the system can still work if a piece of it is removed, albeit differently and will possibly function impaired, due to the fact that the system itself is no longer the same (Chirot, 1982).

Taking a deeper look into the actual process of systems theory, it is evident that we can start to perceive how it assists with a worldwide representation. In other words, whether we have systems, and they work, we can duplicate all of them as far and wide as possible, perhaps with very slight changes. Take any fast food restaurant, for instance. While the meal options in different nations may not be the same (for instance, McDonald’s does not have hamburgers on their menu in India), the system to get the meal is no different: go to the counter or drive-thru, see the different options on the menu, and request your meal.

In this manner, the system is copied around the globe, and it meets expectations. Once more, a few alterations here and there are necessary, so it is important to note that one exact system does not necessarily live up to expectations the same all over the place. However, with adjustments, the system makes it much less demanding for any entity to deliver a comparable experience worldwide. Although McDonald’s was briefly used as an example earlier, the systems theory is not limited to any specific organization or entity. It can work the same for any restaurant, airport, and so on.

While systems are copied and go worldwide, there are parts of different systems that help outline the sort of system being utilized. In systems theory, there are three different types of systems. The first, being an open system, is a system that persistently communicates with the world around it without discrimination. The second, a closed system, is the exact opposite. It is a system autonomous of the earth around it. Normally when looking at closed systems, it involves high prices or high tech products with a small selection of resources. Third, a subsystem is a framework that is a piece of a bigger system. An example of this would be the shuttles found at an airport that can get you to your terminal. The terminal takes you to your plane, which takes you to your ultimate destination.

The success of a system is contingent upon a well functioning management that is placed over the level of the leadership of individual systems. Features may incorporate group level goals, improvement, incentives, correspondence, surveys, rewards, and responsibility. The point is to concentrate on what ties people together and what ties systems together instead of silo performance. The failure of a system might exist despite functional success. The authority of silos may separately be fruitful yet not be sufficiently incorporated into the entire system owing to a deficiency of systems plan, management or comprehension (Gaus, 1950). An entire framework can succeed just through managers and administrators working together in and over various practical systems. The entire system can fall flat just if management at the level of the entire system fizzles, and where a few senior administrators are involved. Consequently, such disappointment may be marked a systemic failure of management.

References

Chirot, Daniel and Thomas D. Hall. 1982. “World-System Theory.” Annual Review of Sociology. Vol. 8 pp. 81-106.

Gaus, J.M. 1950. “Trends in the theory of Publicadministration.” Public Administration Review, 10.