A Metasystem Approach to Organizational Decision Making

  • John P. van Gigch

Abstract

In this chapter we apply the concept of metamodeling to organizational decision making. First, decision making is approached from a control point of view. Then the concept of metasystem is introduced as a framework of decision making about decision making, that is, the structuring of the decision-making process and the determination of organizational objectives from a metamodeling perspective. The metasystem framework is illustrated by examples drawn from a case study.

Keywords

Decision Making Object Level Organizational Decision Plenary Meeting Academic Council 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    W. J. M. Kickert, Organization of Decision Making (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1980).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    W. J. M. Kickert, “A Structural Theory of Organizational Decision Making,” presented at the Fourth International Congress of Cybernetics and Systems, Amsterdam (1978).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Beer, Decision and Control (Wiley, New York, 1966); Platform for Change (Wiley, New York, 1975).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Beer, Brain of the Firm, 2d ed. (Wiley, New York, 1981).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. W. Churchman, The Design of Inquiring Systems (Basic Books, New York, 1971).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. J. Klir, Int. J. Gen. Syst. 3, 89 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Special issue of “Reconstructability Analysis,” Int. J. Gen. Syst. 7, No. 1 (1981).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Rapoport, Gen. Syst. 11, 3 (1977).Google Scholar
  9. A. Rapoport, General Systems Theory (Abacus-Kent, Tunbridge Wells, England, 1986).Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    J. P. van Gigch, Int. J. Man-Machine Stud. 11, 651 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 10.
    J. P. van Gigch and L. L. Pipino, Kybernetes 9, 47 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 11.
    W. J. M. Kickert, Fuzzy Theories in Decision Making (Nijhoff, Boston and Leiden, 1978).Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    Y. Dror, Public Policy Making Re-Examined (Chandler, Scranton, PA, 1968).Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    Y. Dror, Design of Policy Sciences (Elsevier, New York, 1971).Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    A. Faludi, Planning Theory (Pergamon, Oxford, 1971).Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    J. R. Emshoff, Manage. Sci. 24, 1095 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 16.
    I. I. Mitroff and F. Betz, Manage. Sci. 19, 11 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 17.
    A. C. J. de Leeuw, Organization Science and System Theory (Stenfert Kroese, Leiden, 1974) (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    A. C. J. de Leeuw, “The Control Paradigm As an Aid for Understanding and Design Organizations,” Third European Meeting of Cybernetics and Systems Research, Vienna (1976).Google Scholar
  20. 19.
    C. E. Lindblom, Public Administration Rev. 19, 79 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 20.
    A. Etzioni, Public Administration Rev. 27, 385 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 21.
    P. C. Nutt, Academic Manage. Rev. 1, 84 (1976).Google Scholar
  23. 22.
    I. Heiskanen, Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 39 (1976).Google Scholar
  24. 23.
    P. Feyerabend, Against Method (Verso, London, 1975).Google Scholar
  25. 24.
    W. J. M. Kickert, “Substantive and Structural Decision Making: A Case Study About the Numerus Fixus Decision Making,” International Report, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven (1978) (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    J. P. van Gigch, Applied General Systems Theory, 2d ed. (Harper & Row, New York, 1978).Google Scholar
  27. 26.
    H. A. Simon, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 106, 467 (1962).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • John P. van Gigch
    • 1
  1. 1.California State UniversitySacramentoUSA

Personalised recommendations