An Analysis of Socio-Technical Systems Approach - Research Paper Example

An Analysis of Socio-Technical Systems Approach Introduction The implementation of information technologies (IT) in a firm has always been a matter of huge investment. In fact, a large number of studies and researches have been carried out to determine the impact of these investments and methodologies to make this investment a profitable act. In many cases, these researches and studies have been unsuccessful to create the guaranteed advantages, however many researchers demonstrated the lack of focus on socio-technical systems (process, people, tasks, technology and their relationships) of change as the major reason for failure (Thomas et al., 2008). Basically, the concept of socio-technical system was formed to take into consideration mutual interrelationship between machines and humans and to encourage the course of developing both social and technical environments of work. In this scenario, that humanity and effectiveness would not disagree with each other any longer. Hence, the concept of socio-technical systems was emerged to handle the practical and theoretical issues of working environment in the industry (Ropohl, 1999). This paper presents an analysis of socio-technical systems approach. This research will discuss some of the important aspects associated with socio-technical systems approach. This research also presents an analysis of soft systems methodology and how this methodology is used for modern information systems. The basic purpose of this research is to analyze the role of socio-technical systems approach in the development of modern information systems. Socio-Technical Systems Socio-technical systems are a very useful mechanism for designing and implementing an information system that reflect on social, human and organizational aspects and technical aspects in the implementation and design of organizational information systems. The basic purpose of socio-technical systems is to make sure that the organizational and technical components of an information system are maintained jointly. In this scenario, the result of putting into practice this development methodology is an improved analysis of how social, human and organizational aspects have an effect on the methods that are followed by business organizations to carry out business tasks and technical systems are utilized. Hence, this improved analysis and study of the system can play a significant role in the effective implementation of organizational structures, technical systems and business operations (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011; Bader et al., 1998; Berg, 1999). Historically, the concept of socio-technical can be traced back to the initial work at the Tavistock Institute. Since the emergence of this technique it was greatly influenced by action researches which demonstrated that social systems and technical systems are interconnected, at the same time as also putting into practice successful modifications to work environments (textile mills and coal mining). Hence, since that time a large number of researches and studies have been carried out to determine the impact of socio-technical thinking. The basic source of inspiration of these researches is the idea that behavior can differ under different environmental factors. In other words, we can simply understand and improve the performance and design of any organizational system if we consider both technical and social aspects of organizational systems together as mutually dependent components of a large system. In their paper (Worton, 2012) discuss a number of theories to model a wide variety of elements of a socio-technical system. In this scenario, they discuss an organizational change model, which was one of the initial efforts to graphically make obvious how a number of attributes inside a system can work together. Additionally, this model encompassed four communicating attributes (structure, task, people/actors and technology) to express the interconnected environment of systems with the purpose of increasing knowledge of the secondary aspects of organizational change (Worton, 2012). In addition, the socio-technical systems models for organizational development and interference have an extended history in European research and management processes and have had a less significant attraction in the US, where more attention was given to the technical side because of a technical and scientific management practice of perceiving organizational development. In this scenario, the researches and studies carried out on STS demonstrated noticeable development for easier worker evolutions, successful change and enhanced efficiency over whichever a social or a technical vision only, however it also forces practitioners and researchers with intimidating complexity. If we talk about the modern information systems as the technical area of socio-technical system it attempts to put into practice change by making use of group support systems, decision support systems (DSS) or other forms of IT leaves an unstable analysis. In its place, seeing information system as controlling a wide variety of attributes of socio-technical systems facilitates to clarify contradictory results as well as to some extent uncertain theoretical attempts in information system research on these areas at the same time as offering a label for more incorporation of technical and social dynamics in future research (Thomas et al., 2008). Additionally, the distinctive characteristics and the nature of each part (technical and social) must be appreciated otherwise their inconsistencies and differences will interfere and their complementarities will stay unidentified. In this scenario, a number of researches offer a rationalized explanation of socio-technical processes and analysis in the context of their implementation of modern information systems. In addition, socio-technical attempts to design, develop and improve information systems carry on from suppositions of minimum critical specifications, self-design and an open-ended design process (Palvia et al., 2001). In view of the fact that the socio-technical system design development has always been a basis of motivation for a large number of designers and students of modern information systems that exemplify human-computer interaction (HCI), the processes and ideas for socio-technical design have grown. Additionally, in the past traditional socio-technical design was regulated; however current researchers and students of HCI have focused on practical action research and expressive results, program, and therefore puts efforts in the direction of implementation of socio-technical design practice that are based on such concept. In addition, the typical recommendation for user participation in participatory information system design gives a little explanation about which users, customers or user representatives are selected in actual fact to contribute in a system analysis and design attempt. In the same way, if users are not well-trained and educated or already an expert in the design and implementation of modern information systems, then their contribution will not play a significant role in implementing towards a system design and implementation that allows them to expand their work or improves their fulfillment with their system-based tasks, or career selections and work-related expertise. As a replacement for, their inexperienced or inactive contribution in modern information system design and implementation may facilitate their unsuspecting disclosure of communication, social relationships, or communication models that make their system-based usage/work straightforwardly and easily observed, or the limitations and restrictions of their privacy a great deal more effortlessly negotiated by information system developers and designers whose job is to design system usage as well as communicational controlling methods. In addition, the entire concept of what should be and what should not be a component of an information system is a challenging task, as shown by empirical researches and studies. On the other hand, other descriptions recommends practices of considering an information system integrated in an organizational place of work as a “socio-technical interaction network” or “web of computing” are being utilized in their place (Scacchi, 2004; Truex et al., 1999). Hence, this situation refers to the reorganization, from user contributing socio-technical system design, to participatory design and analysis of the STINs that present one or more demonstration into the embedding scenario of the system-based work design and information system, corresponding (both modern and legacy) versions of information systems. Hence, it can be concluded that the system design and requirements of an organizationally integrated information system can never be acknowledged as completed or finalized, however in its place are regularly summarizing, assessing, and updating with the purpose of answering various questions such as how the system is modified or tailored in order to deal with current situation of use, as well as to government, the external market and organizational environment that intrude on system functionality, performance or use. Unluckily, socio-technical system analysis and design do not offer the significant insights, guiding principles further than “user involvement” or tools for how to better stay abreast, authorize and fit into place both system developers, users and maintainers of an information system in handling information system development project (Scacchi, 2004; Truex et al., 1999). In addition, in the past few years the trend of web based information systems has started catching the attention of the majority of business organizations. In this scenario, web based information systems consist of a wide variety of technical as well as non-technical elements for instance operating systems, networked hardware, database management systems, applications software, information structures, data structures, visual designs, navigational schemes, different types of content, protocols, work practices and processes and so on. The research has shown that the pattern of these elements can also communicate with social framework. For instance, web based information systems or client-server based systems are frequently scattered in different locations, sometimes inside a firm, and with a number of system elements installed in different social contexts and managed by different team members. In this scenario, the socio-technical system concept captures perspective in the scenario of multilevel “socio-technical” networks which consist of various entities and their relationships. In addition, within the socio-technical system scenario, many researchers and scholars have developed numerous mechanisms to help organizations examine and clarify the socio-technical systems (Eschenfelder & Chase, 2002). Though, a large number of business managers understand that socio-technical issues are significant, however socio-technical systems are hardly ever utilized by the business organizations. Some of the important reasons for their lack of use can be related to first and foremost, problems in making use of this approach and the detachment between both technical engineering problems and these methods, and various problems of individual communication with technical systems. In this scenario, the fundamental principle of socio-technical philosophy is that the implementation and design of information systems should be a standard practice that takes into consideration both technical and social aspects of an organization. In fact, these social and technical aspects can have an effect on the usage and functionality of information systems. In addition, the underlying principle for implementing socio-technical methods for design and implementation of information systems is that being unsuccessful to do this would ultimately augment the risks that systems will not be able to help the organization achieve its objectives. The research has shown that many information systems frequently fulfill technical requirements of organizations however are acknowledged as a failure for the reason that they fail to provide the desired support for the actual work in the organization. One of the major reasons that cause this issue is that information systems that are built using techno-centric mechanisms do not appropriately take into consideration the complex associations between various social entities like that the people enacting business activities, the organization itself and the system that carry out these activities. Hence, the efficiency and performance of information systems heavily depend on the combined execution and consideration of the social and technical subsystems. In this scenario, just paying attention to one of these systems ignoring the other is expected to bring about compromised system usage and performance (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011; Bader et al., 1998; Berg, 1999). In their paper, (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011) discuss that soft systems methodology is a socio-technical system development approach for the reason that soft system methodology (SSM) also takes into consideration socio-technical aspects (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011). The idea of Soft system methodology for offered by Peter Checkland in the 1960s. At the start it was considered as a method for system modeling but later on it was thought-out as knowledge and meaning development tools. Even though it builds up models, and those models are not considered to correspond to the “existential world”, however with the help of those rules and principles you can form or arrange your thoughts about the actual world. These models are not considered as descriptive or normative on the other hand they may comprise attributes of both. One of the most useful benefits of soft system methodology is that it imposes restrictions on your thinking in order to improve your thinking (Williams, 2005). The researchers consider that this approach can provide an excellent support for the development of socio-technical systems. Basically, the soft systems methodology is based on thoughts from action research, however its history goes back to systems engineering in place of the social sciences. In this scenario, SSM considers determined act as a system where sensibly related processes are linked with each other in an attempt to form a complete system, and the developing asset of the entire system is its determination. Additionally, one of the most important characteristics of SSM is that it focuses on building an effective analysis of the problem at hand (i.e. SSM makes use of more common term problematic situation) (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011; Bader et al., 1998; Berg, 1999). In addition, this analysis is based on identifying the roles, concerns and responsibilities of the stakeholders that connect with the information system. In this scenario, this analysis of the issue offers the foundation for the preparation of the solution, which further considers stakeholders’ conflicting point of view. Hence, this methodology clearly recognizes that the final solution would be foundational upon putting an effort to hold the stakeholders’ perspectives (and goals). Moreover, the researchers consider that without a doubt analysis of the problem is one of SSM’s main characteristics; however many organizations adopt it for building information models of the more technical elements of an information system. In addition, it has also been utilized by business organizations to evaluate existing information systems. On the other hand, the socio-technical system development approach spotlights on system design. In this scenario, it is aimed at identifying processes and tasks that have to be assigned to machines (and for this reason implemented through information technology) and also identifying those activities that have to be carried out by humans (both as teams and as individual). Hence, this approach is generally used in socio-technical work systems and task allocation (Baxter & Sommerville, 2011; Bader et al., 1998; Berg, 1999). In their paper, (Petkova & Petkov, 2012) discuss that the SSM has the capability of dealing with the complexities of the association between various entities associated with organizational, social and cultural environment and the information system. In this scenario, this methodology provides an excellent support for a learning practice that facilitates its users to build a wide-ranging analysis of the problem under study. In some cases, soft system methodology can be used in conjunction with other methodologies with the intention of gaining understanding of these complex situations. Additionally, the basic purpose of using this mixture of methodologies is to help organizations deal with practical and theoretical issues. In modern information system development processes, SSM methodology serves as a purposeful learning framework for minimizing the gap between technical and social features of information systems development integrating the cultural, technical and political examination. Though, only a few researches have been carried out to show the process of establishing an effective mutual analysis of the social and technical aspects of the problem condition in practical projects (Petkova & Petkov, 2012). Pros One of the most important advantages of soft systems methodology is that it allows system analyst to take deep understanding of a problem situation during the preliminary phases of system study and analysis. It also adds to the understanding of the system development team during succeeding phases of the development process whenever there is need for clarifications. Without a doubt, soft systems methodology offers clearness in possible aspects of flaws, and a deep analysis of the scenario and a method to determine link that could not at the start be obvious through other techniques of software development (Pham, 2012). Cons Without a doubt, a software systems methodology is a best approach to system analysis but it cannot be adopted in all the cases. Additionally, the selection of suitable methodologies is still a challenge, when we need to choose a methodology according to definite features of the systems development project even though it has now turned out to be a widespread standard of selecting methodologies. For instance, a project can at first be identified as formless as well as wandering off the point and for this reason; we can use a soft systems approach to clarify the system requirements. On the other hand, afterwards when the software development process moves forward, the project will also develop with the increasing requirements so we will need a more hard system development approach to deal with this situation. In fact, many researchers believe that definite software development techniques are corresponding towards each other. In this scenario, it is essential for the system development teams and firms that they select a software development methodology that is suitable to characteristics of system that is going to be built. In view of the fact that every system is unique in its nature and encompasses different characteristics hence in this scenario, the experience of software development firm can assist them. There is another con of employing this development methodology is that simply a short explanation of system analysis or problem is mentioned hence, it generates simply a few problem scenarios, and characteristics that can play a significant role in selection of development approach taken on are absent in the categorization. In spite of the advantages that the implementation of information systems and development approaches can create, issues and problems can cause due to the simplification of the categorization and distinctiveness of problem situations (Pham, 2012). Conclusion This paper has presented an analysis of socio-technical approach to system analysis and design. This paper has summarized the concepts of various researchers. The research clearly demonstrates that socio-technical approach considers both (technical and social) aspects of an information system. In this scenario, at technical side it considers technology, databases and processes while at the social level it takes into consideration people, stakeholders and business organization. This research has shown that this technique is really effective for the problem design within information systems development. This paper has shown that the lack of focus on socio-technical systems (process, people, tasks, technology and their relationships) of change as the major reason for failure. Basically, the concept of socio-technical system was formed to take into consideration mutual interrelationship between machines and humans and to encourage the course of developing both social and technical environments of work. This concept should be adopted for the development of modern information systems. References Bader, G., Nyce & M., J., 1998. When only the self is real: theory and practice in the development community. Journal of Computer Documentation, 22(1), pp.5-10. Baxter, G. & Sommerville, I., 2011. Socio-technical systems: From design methods to systems engineering. Interacting with Computers, 23(1), pp.4-17. Berg, M., 1999. Patient care information systems and health care work: a sociotechnical approach. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 55(2), pp.87-101. Eschenfelder, K.R. & Chase, L.C., 2002. Socio-technical networks of large, post-implementation Web information systems: tracing effects and influences. In Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences., 2002. IEEE. Palvia, S.C., Sharma, R.S. & Conrath, D.W., 2001. A socio-technical framework for quality assessment of computer information systems. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 101(5), pp.237-51. Petkova, O. & Petkov, D., 2012. The Work System Method And Soft Systems Methodology – Some Comparisons. In UK Academy for Information Systems Conference Proceedings 2012., 2012. Pham, K., 2012. How effective is Soft Systems Methodology as an alternative to the dominant and so-called ‘hard’ approaches to Information Systems design and development? When is this approach most useful? Discuss with examples. [Online] Available at: http://www.angelfire.com/ab7/conmciha/5AKimPham.pdf [Accessed 12 March 2013]. Ropohl, G., 1999. Society for Philosophy and Technology. DLA Ejournal, 4(3). Scacchi, W., 2004. Socio-Technical Design. [Online] Available at: http://www.ics.uci.edu/~wscacchi/Papers/SE-Encyc/Socio-Technical-Design.pdf [Accessed 10 February 2013]. Thomas, D.M., Gupta, S. & Bostrom, R.P., 2008. A Meta-theory for Understanding IS in Socio-technical Systems. In Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Waikoloa, HI, 2008. IEEE. Truex, D.P., Baskerville, R. & Klein, H., 1999. Growing systems in emergent organizations. Communications of the ACM, 42(8), pp.117-23. Williams, B., 2005. Soft Systems Methodology. [Online] Available at: http://users.actrix.co.nz/bobwill/ssm.pdf [Accessed 14 February 2013]. Worton, K.E., 2012. Using Socio-Technical and Resilience frameworks to anticipate threat. In 2012 Workshop on Socio-Technical Aspects in Security and Trust. Cambridge, MA, 2012. IEEE. Read More