The General Systems Theory - Essay Example

? The General System’s Theory The General System’s Theory By Kenneth E. Boulding (1956, p 197) General Systems Theory is ‘a name which has come into use to describe a level of theoretical modeling which lies somewhere between the highly generalized constructions of pure mathematics and the specific theories specialized discipline.’ General Systems Theory is not established as a theory of everything, which could replace all the other theories, but it has been established to give content to the generality of the theories and develop a relationship among them wherever it might exist (Boulding, 1956). Here in this paper we will be comparing and contrasting three theories that are related to information systems. The three theories that we will be focusing on includes: Jordan and the System’s Taxonomy. Beer and the Viable System’s Model. Klir and the General System’s Problem solver. Jordan and the System Taxonomy: Nehemiah Jordan presented three basic organizing principles which enable one to define a system in the context of information flow outside the organization and how it can be organized inside the organization. His three basic principles were rate of change, purpose and connectivity. Each principle provides a pair of properties. The principles determined if the system has the ability to change with its environment (dynamic/functional) or not (static/structural) and if it is purposive or not. These principles also defined how the parts of a system are connected with each other, and if the connectivity is affected by removing a part (organismic) or the system as a whole shows no concern (mechanistic). An analysis and combination of these principles will provide a variety of alternatives to organize the information. For example, if a resource is functional and is purposive along with being mechanistic in nature, it can help an organization to use that resource to establish a production line, where if one machine breaks down, it does not affect the whole chain of operation. The main purpose of Jordan’s taxonomy was to simplify the concept that defines a system. To him, concepts like feedback systems and self organizing systems create more problems than solutions, thus they are not part of his system theory. But in reality complexities exist, thus Jordan’s taxonomy had many implied drawbacks (Skyttner, 2005). Beer and the Viable System’s Model: The viable system’s Model provides us with a more complex model of a system as compared to the one provided by Jordan. In this theory the author Stafford Beer related the performance of an organizational system with that of a human brain, in his book ‘Brain of the Firm’. According to him, a viable business has the abilities to self-repair, of self-awareness, recursion and the ability to maintain identity. Beer designed principles which must be followed by the organizations in order to be viable. These principles provided guidelines for the information flow in the organization through various channels, their cost effectiveness and their capacity to convert data relating to the need of every level of organization that suits their needs and how these activities should be coordinated without any loss or trouble. The five sub managerial systems that were described by Beer translated the flow of information through the organization and how they interrelate. Through these systems he showed how each level is dependent on the other level for the flow of information and as the levels increase, so does the responsibility and the sensitivity of the information. Thus, in his model System One is the lowest level of the organization and is the one that needs to be controlled, it includes the operational departments or subsidiaries with lowest level of information that is provided by higher levels, whereas System Five completes the system by monitoring the balance between the systems, it mainly constitutes of the shareholders and board of directors of the organization. Beer also devised a measure of the performance of the organization by comparing how the organization achieves its results through utilization of its resources and how it can improve its capability to earn higher returns through either improving its functions or developing new resources (Skyttner, 2005). Klir and the General System’s Problem Solver: This theory was provided to address the issue of the problems faced by a system and how these problems can be solved. Klir’s General System’s problem Solver (GSPS) is a computer based expert system. It was presented for the first time in his book, Architecture of Systems Problem Solving in 1985. According to him, every system has some basic traits, when the traits change so does the system. Klir also defined his system model with five basic levels that define the relationship between the investigator, an investigated object, and their corresponding environments and with each other as well. The computer designed on the basis of the concepts of Klir’s GSPS has the ability to solve issues for the user. His theory was based on various mathematical algorithms which correspond with engineering techniques to solve an issue. It has four functional units: control unit, metamethodological support unit, a knowledge base and a set of methodological tools. Methodological tools solve admissible problems. The algorithms used are specified in order for problems dealt through these tools. Metamethodological support unit arranges the problems on the basis of their generality. Knowledge base unit stores the information related issues which can not be solved through the system. User interface will work either through conceptual framework (for the formulation of problems) or through a direct connection to the main unit (for consultations from the database). Klir’s problem solving approach and system design can be sufficient for well structured situations (Skyttner, 2005). Through history teams of experts in both technological and non technological aspects of the problem assembled and processed the necessary data and came up with alternative approaches which defined the benefits and shortcomings of every aspect. These researches defined the relations between the theories where it was possible by producing quantitative analyses and predictions, where they were appropriate to give content to the most general aspects of the environment. Through these procedures a gap was tried to be filled between the technical/mathematical and non-technical/general theorists, so that a form could be given to every general theory wherever possible. And through these efforts the solutions to many present day issues have been provided (Ramo et al, 1998). And this was the main purpose of the General System’s theory as well. Bibliography Boulding, K. E. (April 01, 1956). General Systems Theory-The Skeleton of Science. Management Science, 2, 3, 197-208. Skyttner, L. (2005). General systems theory: Problems, perspectives, practice. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Ramo, S., & St, C. R. K. (1998). The systems approach: Fresh solutions to complex civil problems through combining science and practical common sense. Anaheim, Ca: KNI . Read More