Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems

This note is a collection of the quotations Richard W. Scott had used in beginning the various chapter in his book Organisations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems. (2003) The quotations are often concise and succintly summarizes the essence of each chapter, giving the reader a rough but good idea of what organizational studies is about.

---

The recurrent problem in sociology is to conceive of corporate organization, and to study it, in ways that do not anthropomorphize it and do not reduce it to the behavior of individuals or of human aggregates.

Chapter 1: The Subject is Organizations
Swanson, Guy E. (1976) “The Task of Sociology”, Science, 192: 665-667.

---

A well-designed machine is an instance of total organization, that is, a series of interrelated means contrived to achieve a single end. The machine consists always of particular parts that have no meaning and no function separate from the organized entity to which they contribute. A machine consists of a coherent bringing together of all parts toward the highest possible efficiency of the functioning whole, or interrelationships marshalled wholly toward a given result. In the ideal machine, there can be no extraneous part, no extraneous movement; all is set, part for part, motion for motion, toward the functioning of the whole. The machine is, then, a perfect instance of total rationalization of a field of action and of total organization. This is perhaps even more quickly evident in that larger machine, the assembly line.

Chapter 2: Organizations as Rational Systems
Ward, John W. (1964) “The Ideal of Individualism and the Reality of Organization,” in The Business Establishment, 37-76, ed. Earl F. Cheit.

Veil of Ignorance 无知之幕

过去，有个老人家迷路时，
带她去地铁站
她突然感叹说
现在，我在自己的国家都会迷路，
很多地方，我都不认识了，
也很难出门了。

Thoughts after reading Li Xie’s The Road to Nation Building in the Rain　读李邪《雨中的建国路》有感

---

The veil of ignorance is a powerful idea. Introduced by John Rawls in A Theory of Justice (1), the veil of ignorance is a method of determining the morality of a certain issue (e.g. slavery) based upon the following principle: imagine that societal roles were completely re-fashioned and redistributed, and that from behind the veil of ignorance, one does not know what role they will be reassigned. Only then can one truly consider the morality of an issue. (2)

Putting this in our current context, we need to consider beyond our immediate needs when we vote. Over the longer period, when we cannot be certain of our role in the society, what form of political leadership would bring about the best for every citizen on the island? A dominant and benevolent one-party system that will be nimble to ride the treacherous ways of tomorrow? Or a system of checks and balances to ensure economy, efficiency and equity in public administration? (3)

Notes:

(1) Rawls, John. (1971) A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts.

(2) Wikipedia. Veil of Ignorance. URL: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Original Position. URL: plato.stanford.edu/entries/original-position/

(3) Economy and efficiency has always been the two key pillars of public administration. It was only in 1968 that George Frederickson raised equity as the third pillar of public administration.

Inception

I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it.

– Voltaire

---

It is May Fourth. Beijing.

A light drizzle in the afternoon, I was sitting in Starbucks sipping cafe latte, trying hard to focus on my readings. It is elections time in Singapore now. Thanks to Facebook and Twitter, I am continually updated on the happenings back home.

The internet plays a critical role in this watershed election – it provides a viable option for the various stakeholders to voice their opinions and concerns. Many comments and opinions, including those by the candidates themselves, are not wrong but they are often simplistic and emotional. Though this is to be expected of during any election campaign, it bothers me. The ramifications of recalibrating or reforming any policies could be disastrous if not thought through carefully.

We cannot deny people the right to speak on their beliefs and conceptions, and I hope we can move into meaningful dialogue to talk things through after the elections. We need, as a nation, to decide how we want our country to move forward. More often than not, there is no absolute truth. For instance, how do we measure “fairness” in economic redistribution? A meal at the coffee shop, food court or restaurant?

It is a deliberate decision to set up this blog late into the elections. May Fourth seems to be the best time to do, it was the day that sparked off the New Culture Movement (新文化运动) to reexamine the classics, and to embrace democratic and egalitarian values.

I hope to discuss primarily issues on education and public administration, the former is an area I am familiar with and the latter is what I am currently learning. I shall not constrain myself to only these two subjects though. Besides my own thoughts, I would most likely do more of sharing quotations and readings.

This blog is tentatively named “Cogito, ergo sum”, a statement from Descartes that has been overused. Yet, I cannot find another title I want to use at this point of time, as thinking is the only thing I am confident of doing.