Understanding System Case Study Of Zoo4U

Identifying the subsystems

Discuss about the Understanding System Case Study of Zoo4U.

A system can be defined as the collection of parts (or say subsystems). The system is developed to achieve some specific goal. The system includes various parts and processes like the input, output, and at the end the total outcome of all the processes in the system. All the elements of a system have to work together so that desired goal can be achieved. The elements of a system are boundary, environment, subsystems, control mechanisms, observable interactions. Also  there are different  kind of  systems are in existence like the  natural system, abstract system, symbol system, designed system, information systems, control systems etc.  The natural systems include ecosystems. The information systems and the control systems are the specially designed systems that according to the need of the clients or the customers. In this report focuses on developing a system for the Zoo4U in which   there are several subsystem that are performing some specific tasks in the total system to  run the whole system properly (Adetunji and Adesope 2015). The system also identifies the key stake holders of the different subsystems of the systems. As the zoo system can have a different kind of partners and resources therefore the zoo requires a systematic approach to manage the resources. As an example it can be said that the task of collecting the animal from different locations, their conservation, observation of their nutrition and breeding must be managed by some specialized and skillful staffs (Cong et al. 2014). On the other hand the management of the corporate entertainment and team building events should be managed by some other subsystem so that the total task can be completed in an efficient way. The report also describes the roles of the staffs, animals, and the visitors of the zoo.

For the given case study of zoo4U there are several tasks that are to be completed by different sub systems so that they can be completed successfully and help the zoo to achieve a specific goal.  A zoo is an organization that requires dynamic operations according to different situations. As  Zoo’s consolidate different sorts of creatures, drinking water supplies, wastewater, water recycling centers, turf, blooms, trees, strong squanders, restaurants, sanitation offices, and veterinary centers (Emikpe et al. 2016). At present a zoo is managed by with some primary objectives like animal training, care, their conservation etc. therefore the following are the identified sub systems that are related to the organizational system of Zoo4U.

Components of the subsystems

1. Enrollment system.

2. Human resource management system.

3. Animal care management system.

4. Administrative system.

5. Finance management system.

Enrollment system- As it takes a lot of money for the conservation of any endangered species thus a zoo requires a constant flow of funds, so that they can carry on the different animal related projects like the conservation and the breeding programs of the animals. Therefore, for this the zoo must think about the different donor adoption programs that can help the in financing the different project at the zoo. Therefore to adopt or participate in the donor ship program the client or the visitor has to enroll in the programs.  By introducing the donor ship and adoption program the zoo can help the people to get closer to the nature on the other hand the zoo can raise funds for the animal health care, conservation and the breeding program.       

Human resource management system- Since a zoo is a multi-dimensional organization that requires a combination of different skillful employees to run it. Like the veterinarians to take care of the animals at the zoo, security guards for the security of the animals of the zoo and the visitors.  The operation staffs are responsible for the cleaning, serving food to the animals checking tickets and different other day to day operations. At the end the administrative staffs that are mainly responsible for the running of the zoo.

Animal care management system- A great number of plant and animal species have reached to the edge of extinction because of human malpractices. Zoos highlight leader species – appealing creatures that speak to an environment, the protection of which would secure the fate of less alluring species that offer the living space. In today’s world the zoo became a business oriented organization therefore the for the sake of the interest of the stake holders it’s important to manage the collection of the endangered collection of the plants and the animals at the zoo (Fa et al. 2014). In this subsystem, first of all the records of the animals and the plants are maintained. This component of the zoo determines the diet plans for the animals, also the breeding plans for the animals so that the number of animals can be increased for the endangered species (Okwori et al. 2014). Under this subsystems there are some other sub modules or departments that act together to efficiently manage the animals and the plants in the zoo.

Administrative system- This subsystem is responsible for taking care of other facilities of the zoo. The following are the responsibilities for this subsystem.

1. Communication between the different departments.

2. Preparing and planning for the emergency situations.

3. Taking care of the environmental sustainability.

4. Maintaining the whole system and its different operations.

This decisions made by the administrators are helpful in managing the different complex situations that can occur due to issues in the different other departments.

Finanance management – This subsystem is responsible for the allocation and distribution of funds periodically for different operations in the zoo and producing finance related reports. Being a multi-dimensional organization it requires some concise management of the processes and operations in the zoo (King and BraÄÂko 2014). By using the information’s the zoo can incorporate different activities and factors that can help in achieving the different objectives.

The selected subsystems

The following subsystems are chosen for the discussion in this report,

 “Enrollment system”, and the “Animal care system.”

In this section the components of both the subsystems are discussed.

For the animal and plant care system,

Objective of the system- According to a survey it is found that almost 700 million people visit a zoo in their region every year. Hence it can be said that a zoo is an important factor that affects the public relationships in a society (Jara et al. 2016). Thus to save any animal species, that is endangered and providing conservation to those animals is the primary goal of this subsystem.

For the enrollment system, the objective of this subsystem is to help in fund raising for the different programs of the zoo.

Stakeholders of the subsystem- The following are the departments that act together to manage the animals at the zoo. The departments are animal programs department, animal health department and the pathology department, different governmental departments, universities, nongovernmental research organizations etc. (Seidl et al. 2015). These are the departments which are responsible for the exhibitions of the animals, and there day to day care.  Also these stake holders are responsible for different kind of research works for the better understanding of the animals and their behavior.

On the other hand in donor management system the primary stakeholders are the donors and the zoo officials who communicate with each other. 

Input and output of the subsystem- in the animal care system the inputs will be providing proper diet, water and nutrition to the animals (Jiménezâ€ÂMena et al. 2016). Providing habitat or environment similar to their natural habitat helps the animal to feel comfortable in the zoo. Also they must be kept in environment where they can express or behave in their natural way and does not feel stressed.

All this input can help the animals in the zoo, to behave in the natural way. Therefore the animals can grow and breed inside the zoo like they do in their natural habitat.

For the donor management subsystem the input are the efforts done by the zoo staffs and the resultant output is the adoption or the animals by the clients or the visitors. Consequently it helps in the flow of funds in the different zoo programs.

Feedback- As the animals in the zoo live in a fearless environment therefore it will help them to live freely and naturally breed in the zoo. This becomes helpful in their conservation.

Transformation involved- From the bringing in the animal in to the zoo there are different steps in which the total system becomes operational (Gusset et al. 2014). Like the making of the habitat, feeding of the animals, introducing their breeding program in the zoo.

The boundary of the system- the boundary of the system is the administrators and the staffs only who can change or modify the programs related to any animal.

Environment of the system- for a system the environment can be defined as the surroundings that are remaining part of the universe outside the boundary of the system. In this case the environment is the resource management, controlling of the pests and pollution, translocation of the animals, ecological principles and the habitat diversity.

Hierarchy in the subsystem-As the zoo is an organization that has numerous kind of different operations thus it should incorporate a chain of importance of control and counteractive action methodologies that starts with the identification of the problems and the realization of danger connected with those risks (Wilson et al. 2015). Managing the problems and risks includes the following strides: starts with, determining the design, operations of departments   and utilization of suitable security gear (building controls); second, the advancement of procedures and standard working systems; lastly, the procurement of proper individual defensive equipments for the staffs. Specialized security equipments needs to be utilized as a part of mix with suitable administration and safety practices.

Fig1: Detailed diagram

(Source: created by Author)

CATWOE – The CATWOE is the abbreviation of the following

C (client)

Clients or customers are the stakeholders who are the end-user of the system or procedure. These are the general people who’ll either suffer or is benefitted due to the changes occurred in the existing system. In this case study the clients are the visitors of the zoo

A (Actors)

These are the people who are reason and supporter of the change in the system. Here the actors are the different staffs of the subsystems 

T (transformation)                                         

These are the changes or the events that determines the nature of the change from the input to output. Like when an animal of endangered species is brought in the zoo, the way it is conserved, the approaches to increase the number of the species are taken, is included in the transformation process.

W (Weltanschauung)

Weltanschauung or say “Worldview” is the comprehensive view and the more extensive effect of the changed system. The system is broke down to think of the positive and negative effect on the general business processes (Singh and Sharma 2014). This is the most essential stride in CATWOE analysis as various partners have different point of view on the same issue.

O (Owner) –

In the processes of change in the system these are the people who have the authority of decision making. Therefore they can stop the project of change, can decide the point of time from where the change can take place.  In this scenario the administrators are the owner of the system who can decide whether or not to bring a change in to the existing system.

E (Environmental constraints)-

These are the outside constraints, influencing the accomplishment of the arrangement of the change. These can be ethical points of confinement, controls, budgetary requirements, asset impediments, constraints of task extension, limits set by terms of reference and others.

Rich Pictures- A Rich Picture is an approach to investigate, recognize and characterize a circumstance and express it through outlines to make a preparatory mental model (Walker et al. 2014). A rich picture also helps in to get an expansive, shared understanding of a circumstance.

Fig2: The Rich picture for the Zoo4U

(Source: created by Author)

System Maps- System mapping is a helpful technique for both planning and evaluating the plan. Endeavors that intend to change systems–that is, the manner by which individuals and associations relate (Stead and Stead 2013). Frameworks endeavors may, for instance, attempt to change or enhance the way in which an organization operates, make shared connections or systems, or change the setting or environment in which social change happens.

Fig3: System Map for Zoo4U

(Source: created by Author)

Activity sequence diagram

Fig4: Activity sequence diagram

(Source: created by Author)

Mind maps- Mind map is a graphical way to present data, concepts and structure information. It helps an organization to understand, synthesize, recall, or in generating new ideas (Hung et al. 2014).

Fig5: Mind map for the Zoo4U

(Source: created by Author)

The soft and the hard systems are the approaches to model the different organizational processes. These approaches are used in solving general problems as well in the management of the change in the organization.

Soft system- In this approach at first the problem situation is understood and expressed. After this some root definitions of the relevant systems related to the problem is developed (Holland and Garfield 2016). Then the conceptual models to solve the problem are made depending upon the root definitions. In the next step the developed models are compared with the real life situations. At the last step the actions are taken using possible changes are suggested that are possible to the existing system and feasible too.  In the given case study the soft system methodology needs to be applied (Moore et al. 2016). Since the zoo relates with the animals and may require extensive care to know how the circumstances can be made to suit the animal. It’s important because as a conservatory the zoo needs to fulfill all the requirements of the animals so that they can breed in the zoo and prosper within the security of the zoo.

Hard systems- This kind of problem solving approach assumes the following,

1. The problems are well defined.

2. The problems can be solved in only one way and that is the optimum solution.

3. It is a scientific approach that works well in solving a problem

4. In this problem solving approach the technical factors dominate the situations.

Conclusion

The zoo ought to proceed with endeavors to encourage correspondence among and inside offices and to enhance correspondence between various hierarchical levels. There are numerous potential approaches to accomplish change: formalize normal interdepartmental gatherings, grow the utilization of cross-utilitarian assignments and broadly educating, and formalize the utilization of accessible innovative assets for upgrading interchanges inside and over the different units of the zoo. Also the zoo should develop a plan that will monitor the effeteness of the different strategies applied to the whole management system.

References

Adetunji, V. and Adesope, A., 2015. Some causes of mortalities in captive wild animals in Ibadan, Nigeria: a retrospective study. Nigerian Veterinary Journal, 35(2).

Bell, S. and Morse, S., 2013. How people use rich pictures to help them think and act. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 26(4), pp.331-348.

Cong, L., Wu, B., Morrison, A.M., Shu, H. and Wang, M., 2014. Analysis of wildlife tourism experiences with endangered species: An exploratory study of encounters with giant pandas in Chengdu, China. Tourism Management,40, pp.300-310.

Emikpe, B.O., Morenikeji, O.A. and Jarikre, T.A., 2016. Zoo animals’ disease pattern in a university zoological garden, Ibadan, Nigeria. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Disease, 6(2), pp.85-89.

Fa, J.E., Gusset, M., Flesness, N. and Conde, D.A., 2014. Zoos have yet to unveil their full conservation potential. Animal Conservation, 17(2), pp.97-100.

Friese, C., 2013. Cloning wild life: zoos, captivity, and the future of endangered animals. NYU Press.

Gusset, M., Fa, J.E. and Sutherland, W.J., 2014. A horizon scan for species conservation by zoos and aquariums. Zoo biology, 33(5), pp.375-380.

Holland, L. and Garfield, J., 2016. Linking Research and Teaching: an Applied Soft Systems Methodology Case Study. International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach, 9(2).

Hosseinie, S.S., Shirazi, A.M., Ashloghi, A.T. and Mehran, M.H., 2012. The Combination of Soft System and Quality Function Deployment Methodologies in the Design and Development of the Comprehensive Model for World Class Manufacturing Processes. Management Science and Engineering, 6(2), pp.22-34.

Hung, C.M., Hwang, G.J. and Wang, S.Y., 2014. Effects of an integrated mind–mapping and problem–posing approach on students’ in–field mobile learning performance in a natural science course. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 8(3-4), pp.187-200.

Jara, S.F., Abelló, M.A., Oliva, F. and Teijeiro, J.D.R., 2016. Intensive demographic and genetic management through European Endangered Species Programmes (EEPs) can make a difference: Cherryâ€Âcrowned mangabey Cercocebus torquatus European studbook and Whiteâ€Ânaped mangabey Cercocebus atys lunulatus EEP results. International Zoo Yearbook.

Jiménezâ€ÂMena, B., Schad, K., Hanna, N. and Lacy, R.C., 2016. Pedigree analysis for the genetic management of groupâ€Âliving species. Ecology and evolution, 6(10), pp.3067-3078.

King, C.E. and BraÄÂko, A., 2014. Nineteen years of management for Phoenicopteriformes in European Association of Zoos and Aquaria institutions: the Fabulous Flamingo Surveys and strategies to increase reproduction in captivity. International Zoo Yearbook, 48(1), pp.184-198.

Moore, B., Calvo-Amodio, J. and Junker, J.F., 2016, January. Synthesizing Systemic Intervention Approaches: Combining Viable System Model, Knowledge Management, and Toyota Production System for a Sustainable Holistic Management Model. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the ISSS-2015 Berlin, Germany (Vol. 1, No. 1).

Novani, S., Putro, U.S. and Hermawan, P., 2014. An Application of Soft System Methodology in Batik Industrial Cluster Solo by Using Service System Science Perspective. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,115, pp.324-331.

Okwori, A.E.J., Nwankiti, O., Onaji, A.I., Aguoru, C.U., Ogbonna, B.I.O., Attah, A., Makut, M.D. and Adikwu, T.I., 2014. Bacterial Profiles Associated With Captive Non-Human Primates in Jos Zoo, Nigeria.

Schmidt, F., Franke, F.A., Shirley, M.H., Vliet, K.A. and Villanova, V.L., 2015. The importance of genetic research in zoo breeding programmes for threatened species: the African dwarf crocodiles (genus Osteolaemus) as a case study. International Zoo Yearbook, 49(1), pp.125-136.

Schulteâ€ÂHostedde, A.I. and Mastromonaco, G.F., 2015. Integrating evolution in the management of captive zoo populations. Evolutionary applications,8(5), pp.413-422.

Seidl, M., Scholz, M., Huemer, C. and Kappel, G., 2015. The Activity Diagram. In [email protected] Classroom (pp. 141-166). Springer International Publishing.

Silber, S.J., Barbey, N., Lenahan, K. and Silber, D.Z., 2013. Applying clinically proven human techniques for contraception and fertility to endangered species and zoo animals: a review. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 44(4s), pp.S111-S122.

Singh, A. and Sharma, E.S., 2014. Functional Test Cases Generation Based on Automated Generated Use Case Diagram.

Stead, J.G. and Stead, W.E., 2013. Sustainable strategic management. ME Sharpe.

Walker, D., Steinfort, P. and Maqsood, T., 2014. Stakeholder voices through rich pictures. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 7(3), pp.342-361.

Wilson, M.L., Perdue, B.M., Bloomsmith, M.A. and Maple, T.L., 2015. Rates of reinforcement and measures of compliance in free and protected contact elephant management systems. Zoo biology, 34(5), pp.431-437.