Open Systems theory and Social Equity

Open Systems theory and Social Equity

Traditional theories considered organizations as closed structures that were independent and segregated from the outside universe. By 1960s, there were more humanistic and universal beliefs that developed. Identifying the traditional model did not succeed due to the numerous environmental effects that influenced the competence of organizations. As a result, many researchers and theorists welcomed the open-systems perception of organizations. Open systems model is a way of thinking regarding vigorous structures, or rather configurations that interact with the surroundings (Daft, 2015). Every business includes vibrant structures, changing and evolving in reaction to feedback. Open systems model is essential for companies because it offers a structure for focusing on procedures like change which are regarded as a consistent part of operating a business. Social equity theory is an idea that uses concerns of fairness and justice to social rule. Since the 1960s, the model of social equity has been applied in different institutional perspectives, which include public administration and education. Social equity theory illustrates common procedures that lead to racial-ethnic attainment differences. The theory of social equity demonstrates the mean variances in attainment by individuals of diverse ethnic-racial groups. Social equity theory does not focus on the reasons of personal inconsistency in achievement. Instead, it illustrates the aspects that together form variances between groups in achievement and readiness.

Open systems model in the criminal justice system is connected to the wedding cake theory. Criminal legislation is systems of social control where states label specific behavior as dissimilar to the safety, health and ethical wellbeing of the community (Caruso, 2017). The criminal justice structure includes corrections, law courts, and law enforcement. Open systems theory is used in the field of criminal justice whereby offenses that are shocking and atrocious have resulted in significant alterations in policing and legislation procedures. Public traditionalism has amounted to more stringent sentences thus causing jails and prisons to overcrowd consequently increasing violence among prisoners. One of the illustrations of open systems theory in criminal justice is the Texas Department of Criminal Justice whose aim is to offer public safety, facilitate positive change in the conduct of offenders and reintroduce criminals into the community. To provide these tasks and oversee the offenders after leaving prison, the department is supposed to cooperate with other diverse capacities and ensure that the exchange of information takes place between them. The Texas Department of Corrections shares data with ordinary individuals who were involved in hard criminal circumstances. Social justice field is enormous and incorporates equal social, political and economic welfare opportunities for every individual. Social justice is connected to the criminal justice system from equal opportunities and equality in the community. Criminal justice is regarded as a set of social justice which uses the process of criminal justice when the attitudes of wrong and right, as well as fair or unfair according to criminal legislation. Fundamentally, social justice makes sure that every member of the community is given equal privileges, protections, and opportunities. Some of the examples of how open systems theory can be applied in the criminal justice system include the provision of free public education, employment, welfare opportunities and the global right to vote during elections.







Marble Cake, Layer Cake, and Picket Fence Governance

Every level of government is central to its domain. The domestic public program is developed not just by government, but by different governments. In public administration, governmental relations are considered as an array of legal, financial, administrative and political connections that are recognized among the various units of the government. These connections are further regarded as “federalism” since we are concerned with the segregation of power and relations of power between the different levels of government in the US. Marble Cake Federalism is an allegory that was borrowed from the bakery to illustrate the theory of cooperative federalism. The Marble Cake Federalism affirms that the national, state and local governments do not operate in distinct spheres, but instead have policies objectives and administrative responsibilities which are interrelated (Leon & Orriols, 2016). The American system of government is usually, but mistakenly, represented by a three-level cake. A far more precise representation is the multi-faceted system where the different functions are incorporated in the American federal structure. Even though believed that the dual federalism system does not exist in the US, other theorists posit that the marble cake system was inaugurated during the era of the New Deal in the 1930s. From the perception of public administration, the marble cake federalism theory results in the development of more efficient government programs. Since every type of government has its constituency, diverse perceptions and interests are included in the policy procedure. Additionally, when the benefits of local and state government are illustrated in congressional trials, their concerns and needs are considered when laws are implemented, and the recommendations for grants-in-aid are approved.

The duties of the federal government in the United States were distinct, separate and functioned within their scope. The strategy was now as dual federalism and was equivalent to every state having its authority or sovereignty in the more significant structure and is represented by a cake. Based on this correspondence, the idea was regarded as the layer cake federalism and was founded on the suggestion that state and federal governments have distinct tasks. The source for the layer cake system was the Constitution of the United States, which created a proper separation of authority. Both federal and state governments acquire their power from the dictates of the American Constitution, which distinguished the governing responsibilities and skills. With every government bearing its accountabilities, federalism was comprehended in the form of these distinct levels. Picket fence Federalism is an aspect of intergovernmental relations where program authorities create connections with each other thus exceeding state prerogatives (Hanson, 2018). The model uses a vertical separation of power in the federal structure where the federal government is found on the top, followed by states and localities at the end. In this situation, program specialists including highway engineers have much more in common and share many perceptions and frequent interactions with federal and state engineers as compared to other local experts. This type of vertical functionalism ensured that local and state bureaucracies became more specialized, implemented civil service structures and increased payments.








Warren Bennis predictions about bureaucratic organizations

When working with leaders, no other individual has possessed more insightful inspiration than Warren Bennis. The depth and breadth of his heritage are too big to illustrate, although his essential teachings are foundational and evident. Warren’s vision of what might be probable by developing human perspective through an incorporated method to the development of leaders led to the breaking of new ground (Zweetsloot et al. 2017).  At a moment when survived lives that are divided, perceiving that they were supposed to form a persona that was professional for the boardroom and office at the expense of being real, Bennis asserted that the procedure of being a leader is the same if not the same to be a human being that is entirely integrated. To be transformative and productive, people are supposed to be authentic and whole. The experience has been the foundation of developing the entire individual to advance the complete leader.

Bennis was the first individual to connect self-awareness, the essential authenticity tool for leadership effectiveness. Since Bennis made this claim sometimes back, there have been adequate scientific studies that are aimed at validating what has been experienced in the channels. Indeed, some of the proof including that of Dana Landis and Korn Ferry that links senior self-awareness to the success of organizations still forges and develops other breakthroughs. The assertions indicate that there have been loops outside and inside the awareness of important meta-competency that differentiates organizational, team and leader success. Bennis further affirms that the prototype of progress cannot be regarded as linear but rather a way of completing the full circle of an individual.

To be complete, authentic and integrated approaches require a good level of self-realization, and that includes taking a better look at one’s values. Bennis was regarded as one of the primary advocates of value-based management – the conscious understanding and personification of standards that control the capacity of a leader to connect to perception, strategy, and mission. Bennis predicted that leaders should remind individuals about the essential things. Provided the ambiguity, uncertainty, and volatility around us, we require individuals to repeatedly tell people the vital concerns and why they are crucial. Whenever performance is the intention, the standards of a leader become majorly unexpressed.

Nevertheless, when the intention motivates performance, the standards of a leader are entirely expressed. Bureaucratic organizations have gone through theoretical development to include the creation of public value and renaissance (Weller, 2018). The predictions should be perceived as correcting and perfecting some of the dangers of bureaucracies even though they cannot be entirely replaced. Owing to the extensive nature of the public sector connected to the complicated objectives, mandates and agencies indicate a synergetic harmonization and relationship. Essentially, the predictions that were made by Bennis have increasingly become less effective because of the emergence of modern realities. In the coming years, the world will most probably witness an end to bureaucratic structures of governance and formation of new systems that are better suited to the human relations demand in the twentieth century.






Caruso, G. (2017). Public health and safety: The social determinants of health and criminal behavior. Gregg D. Caruso.

Daniel, P. (1990). The Civil Rights Era (1960s-1970s): Development of open systems and social equity themes. Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC.

Daft, R. L. (2015). Organization theory and design. Cengage Learning.

Hanson, R. L. (2018). The interaction of state and local governments. In Governing Partners (pp. 1-16). Routledge.

Leon, S., & Orriols, L. (2016). Asymmetric federalism and economic voting. European Journal of Political Research55(4), 847-865.

Weller, R. P. (2018). Alternate Civilities: Democracy and culture in China and Taiwan. Routledge.

Zwetsloot, G. I., Kines, P., Wybo, J. L., Ruotsala, R., Drupsteen, L., & Bezemer, R. A. (2017). Zero Accident Vision based strategies in organizations: Innovative perspectives. Safety science91, 260-268.