Review the chart at the link given below andthe description of the Getzels and Guba social systems model as outlined in the article by Bozkus then do the following:

1. Of the three types of governance models which seems to come closest to the social systems model. Explain your selection.
2. Explain how the internal influences of the faculty assembly and student power can affect decision-making in each governance type shown in the chart.

Kvan Bozku, (2014)

Getzels and Guba (1957) define the administrative process as strongly related to social beha-

vior of individuals within organizations.They propose a social system theory for settings with

a hierarchy of relationships. Two components of their theory are institutions and individuals.

Each of them has two sub-components. Institutional roles and role expectations constitute the

nomothetic, and individual personality and need-dispositions constitute the idiographic

dimension of social behavior.The authors articulate characteristics of institutions and indi-

viduals.Institutions have purposes to meet specific ends, have people to achieve purposes,

have organizational structure which assign roles to people and makes rules to achieve

purposes, have norms that are represented as roles that impose specific behavior on individ-

uals, are sanction-bearing which means applying positive and negative sanctions to make

sure that norms are conformed. Roles prescribe the behavior of individuals. They refer to posi-

tional authority, complement each other, and adhere to role expectations defined by the institution.

Personality isacombinationofneed dispositions that direct a person to accomplish a desired end.

In short, Getzels and Guba (1957) define social behavior as a result of the interaction between

role and personality.The amounts of contributions of these two factors vary according to

persons and actions, but never only one of them rules the behavior. One can act according

to the role more than personality while another individual's behavior is affected mostly by

personality. For the authors, the administration process in social systems is nothing but under-

standing why organizational behavior cannot be associated with only either role or personality.