1

Business Systems AnalysisCMSCB3001

Hard Systems Thinking

2

Systems Thinking According to Peter Checkland, ‘Systems Thinking’ is composed of two

complementary processes:– Systems Analysis

– Systems Synthesis Checkland draws attention to these two alternative paradigms to

explain the nature and significance of Systems Thinking– Paradigm 1 - the world is considered to be systemic and is studied

systematically

– Paradigm 2 - the world is problematic (I.e. it admits to many different interpretations and we study it systemically

– Paradigm 1 - reflects the notion of Hard Systems Thinking

– Paradigm 2 - reflects the notion of Soft Systems Thinking Hard Systems Thinking - an objective or end to be achieved can be taken as

given and a system can be engineered to achieve the stated objective Soft Systems Thinking - known to be desirable ends cannot be taken as given

3

Developments in Systems Thinking

Cybernetics Contro l Theory

Inform ationTheory Hierarchy Theory

Theoretical developm entof system s thinking

W ork in 'hard ' systems

SE M ethodology

Computer SA and SE

W ork in 'soft systems'

'Soft' systemsmethodology

Aid to decision-making

RAND systems analysis

O R/M gte science

Natura l ScienceBio logy

Socia l ScienceEconomics

Philosophy

Engineering

4

Developments in Hard Systems Thinking

Largely developed in the 1950s

– Systems Engineering

– Systems Analysis

– Systems Dynamics

Systems Engineering

– rooted in a general engineering paradigm

– only recently methodologically codified

– as more complex systems attempted

5

Systems Engineering - The General Model

Problem Definition (Definition of a need)

Choice of Objectives (Definition of physical needs)

System Synthesis (Creation of possible alternatives)

System Analysis (Analysis of the alternatives in the light of objectives)

System Selection (Selection of the most promising alternative)

System Development (Up to prototype stage)

Current Engineering (System realisation)

Generally used for physical systems - later more social applications

6

Systems Analysis

Developed simultaneously with System Engineering Grew out of successful Operations Research implementation in WWII Early models based on Systems Engineering, later developed its own

flavour Largely concerned a broad economic appraisal of costs and

consequences of alternative means of meeting a defined END Plus - a requirements approach

– a requirement, the provision of which will solve a problem

– a requirement may be a task, some piece of equipment or a complete system

Feasibility and characteristics are checked to determine benefits - can the budget be obtained ??

Fundamentally the analyst asks ‘what are the costs and payoffs of alternative programmes’

7

Systems Analysis - The General Model

The formal outline is very similar to Systems Engineering An objective or objectives we wish to accomplish Alternative techniques/methods by which the objective can be met The costs/resources required by each model A model of the system to determine interdependencies A criterion, relating costs/objectives resources for choosing the best option

There is an obvious overlap between S.E. and S.A. S.E. - set of activities that lead to the creation of complex man-made

systems S.A. - the systematic appraisal of costs etc. of meeting requirements in

various ways S.E. is the totality of the engineering project S.A. is the type of appraisal relevant to the decision-making that

precedes setting up the project

8

The Flavour of RAND style Systems Analysis

Best described by the following quotation

“One strives to look at the entire problem, as a whole, in context, and to compare alternative choices in the light of their possible outcomes. Three sorts of enquiry are required, any of which can modify the others as the work proceeds. There is a need, first of all, for a systematic investigation of the decision-makers objectives. Next the alternatives need to be identified, examined for feasibility, and then compared in terms of their effectiveness and cost; taking time and risk into account. Finally an attempt must be made to design better alternatives and select other goals if those previously examined are found wanting.”

9

A Problem Spectrum

A broad classification of problem types can be derived by taking the extremes of a spectrum which extends from 'hard' to 'soft' and by considering the distinction between questions which are concerned with how an activity should be undertaken as opposed to what the activity is. In this context, the problem of a flat tire is a hard problem, whereas situations like Bosnia are extremely soft.

A 'hard' or structured, problem is one which is exclusively concerned with a 'how' type of question. This can be exemplified by considering the problem confronting Brunel when faced with the need to span the Avon Gorge. There was no doubt about the objective, the problem was how to do it.

A 'soft', or unstructured, problem is one that is typified by being mixtures of both 'what' and 'how' questions. In the area of production, for example, a particular manager may be faced with the problem that production performance could be better. This statement gives no guide to what he should investigate areas for potential improvement, or how he could then introduce change to realize that improvement.

10

The Link between S.E. and S.A. - ‘The Problem’

The single idea that links both of these approaches is that real-world problems can be formulated as follows There is a desired state

There is a present state

There exist alternative methods for getting between 1 & 2

This belief is the distinguishing feature of all ‘Hard’ Systems Thinking

11

Problem solving in the Hard Paradigm

De Bono defines a problem as:– “the difference between what one has, or is likely have, and what one

wants” Management is generally concerned with problem solving; producing

decisions and subsequent action to meet organizational needs better Experience shows that managers are generally not good problem-

solvers Surveys show that about 80% of new venture projects fail to achieve

their objectives One contributing reason for this is that often no attempt is made to

establish exactly what it is the organization wants

This also leads to a clearer definition of ‘a problem’

12

The minimum & necessary necessary conditions of a problem From this basis we could derive the minimum & necessary

conditions for a problem to be said to exist as:

– a person (or organization) that has a problem

– one or more ENDS desired but not yet attained

– at least two courses of action (MEANS) to achieve an END

– a statement of doubt about which course of action is best

– an environment of uncontrollable variables which can affect the ENDS

13

ENDS Analysis From this we can derive:

– ‘What one wants’ is an END

– Once the END is determined all that is left to do is to work out the MEANS to achieve that END

This reasoning forms the basis of Hard Systems Analysis techniques such as MEANS-ENDS Analysis

Three types of ENDS– Goals - expected to be achieved within a specified time

– Objectives - ENDS that may not be achieved within the planning period

– Ideals - ENDS that may not be achievable but progress towards them can be made

14

Means Analysis

Four types of MEANS– Acts that take little time - phone call, writing a letter

etc.

– Courses of action a sequence of acts - negotiating new contractsinstalling a new computer etc.

– Projects systems of courses of action - erecting a building, moving house etc.

– Programs systems of projects - expanding into new markets, building a new factory etc.

15

Effectiveness & Efficiency

It is important to distinguish between these two notions

Effectiveness - “doing the right thing” [ENDS - What’s - Effectiveness]

Efficiency - “doing the thing right” [MEANS - How’s - Efficiency]

16

Hidden Agendas & Constraints

One should always assume that innocently or otherwise, certain Ends might not be volunteered by clients during interviews. Ends about personal career objectives will rarely be mentioned yet these will occasionally be a vital influence on the problem situation. Uncovering these Ends can call for astute skills.

Constraints– Invariably, courses of action or Means will be constrained within some range, due

to resource availability, design, technological limits etc.– In analysis of Business Systems the term 'courses of action' is often used to

cover all Means and they are said to be controllable variables, subject to influence or control.

– Unfortunately, Ends are also affected by uncontrollable variables, those not subject to our control. These variables may be 'acts of nature' or be controlled by others. They are said to make up the ENVIRONMENT to the problem.

The evaluation of the courses of action, with regard to achieving the Ends, then becomes a matter for research.

17

Errors of the Third Kind

“Solving the wrong problem” Two important practical points should be remembered

– User dabbles in researching their own problem and then calls in specialist to resolve the problem the user identified, if the original analysis was faulty and the resulting solution ineffective, the specialist will usually still carry the can

– Don’t be tempted to jump straight into solving technical problems without first researching and formulating the problem area.

18

As Beer says

'The problems that arise can be handed to experts to solve. But this ministerial posture assumes that the problems correctly identify themselves, whereas the whole lesson uncovered in this book is that they rarely do so. The result is that much brain-power is wasted in attempting to provide answers to problems which either do not exist, or

are virtually meaningless. Lord Mountbatten has told a wartime story which convinced him of the truth of this argument.

One of his advisors, Geoffrey Pyke, had transmitted an immense report to Lord Mountbatten. He found on the first page a quotation by G.K. Chesterton, extracted from a detective novel. "Father Brown laid down his cigar and said carefully: 'It isn't

that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem.'Mountbatten drew the correct lesson. He comments:

"Yet the habit in those days was for military planners to put problems to scientists for them to produce the solution. From now on, I said, scientists were to be associated

with the planners in deciding what the problem was before they were asked to solve it.

It is no good getting the right answer to the wrong questions: you've got to get the right question before the right answer can be of any use."

The point seems simple, but the lesson has by no means been learned."

19

Problem Formulation

High QualitySolution

Low Q ualitySolution

Low Q ualitySolution

High Q uality ProblemForm ulation

Low QualityResearch

High QualitySolution

Low Q ualitySolution

Low Q ualitySolution

Low Quality ProblemForm ulation

High Q ualityResearch

High Q ualityResearch

20

Problem Analysis

The procedure suggested here is:– Explore the Ends

– Explore the Means

Means and Ends are relative concepts; every End can be considered as a Means to an End, and so on. For example, buying a car can be considered as a Means for obtaining personal transport (End). Personal transport could be a means for getting to the University and so on.

21

Ends Exploration Express End as Action Verb + Object Phrase + Qualifying

Phrase (Optional) Try to redefine by answering the question:

What is one trying to achieve? By completing:

e.g. One wants (latest Ends-Definition)In order to (Redefinition)

For example, an investigation into congestion of people in a building is being carried out. A suggestion has been made 'to get two extra lifts installed'. One could start to check the relevance of this as follows:

e.g. (Install) + (2 extra lifts) + (within 3 months)We want to (install 2 extra lifts within 3 months)In order to (improve the lift service in the building)

We want to (improve the lift service in the building)In order to (...)Etc.

22

Means Exploration

Having explored Ends and Objectives, it can become apparent that an End can be achieved in more than one way; One has a CHOICE. In fact, in dealing with an 'unusual' problem, it is unlikely that one will have found the best way of achieving the End.

One should always spend some time trying to generate alternative Courses of Action.

This may be helped by thinking about the BROAD APPROACH that is being used. Four possible categories for consideration are:

23

Broad Approach

Approach

Existing Development

DoNothing

ImproveExistingAction

NewAction

InventNewAction