The Web of Life: a New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems - Essay Example

? Alternative Assignment Paper Outline Introduction Techniques Selected Technique I. Background II. Process III. Example IV. Strengths & Weaknesses Technique 2 I. Background II. Process III. Example IV. Strengths & Weaknesses Technique 3 I. Background II. Process III. Example IV. Strengths & Weaknesses Comparison of Techniques Conclusion Introduction This project is a review of the processes that operate in Maple Ridge Engineering. From the Business analyst perspective, the management of MRE is in need to implement a change process, which in this case involves the processes of strategic planning. It uses specific tools for implementing the process. MRE focused on the integration of the GEMS system to facilitate the planning and implementation of the strategic plans. Presently, the GEMS system provides a link between the MRE employees, clients and the management. Using the GEMS, MRE is able to monitor resource allocation and information sharing between the three entities in a way that it promotes the rest of the processes in the entire organization. However, Snowden Evans addressed certain issues that need to undergo process reengineering. According to Wilson (1990), The strategic planning process is about decision-making and therefore needs to identify the tasks, which the GEMS system is managing in MRE Company and the decision-making stages (Seddon, 2008). The objective Business analysis for the GEMS system is for improving the communication between the company and all its stakeholders. The company business analyst has to explore a wide spectrum of techniques in order to develop and implement the decision-based strategic plans. Techniques Selected The company identifies several techniques to apply in the business reengineering and strategic planning of MRE. One of the techniques is the six Hats model. This is a model, which uses six different colors to represent different ways of thinking, where many people think of different things at the same time. The technique uses red, black, yellow, green, blue and white hats. Each of the colors represents a unique set of thinking. In the business analyst perspective, the model of six hats represents different decision ideas generated by the members of the executive board in MRE, from which decisions are made. The next technique is the use of Interaction between humans and Computers (Meadows, 2008). This involves the application of interactive systems such as an Intelligent System or an Executive System, Expert System, or Group Decision Support System. Knowledgebase is developed in whichever the system that MRE selects. The system analyses the decision situation and uses the knowledge stored in the knowledgebase to provide supportive information to the management. The third technique is the Business Modeling System (Checkland and Holwell, 1998). This involves system developers as well as designers. Technique 1: The Six Hat Model I. Background The model uses different colors to demonstrate the thinking of the members of the decision-making committee. It will therefore consider all the ideas from one individual as a single color. The executive board develops strategic plan by combining the colors as shown in the graphical model below: Figure 1: Six-Hat Model The letters from M1 to M6 is a typical representation of the Executive Board members. Maple Ridge engineering has different departments as represented by the rich picture in Figure 2: Figure 2: GEMS Organization Structure The model can be used to represent the GEMS structure as illustrated below: M1 - Engineering and Systems Division M2 - Project Management Department M3 - Systems and Training Division M4 - Biomedical Department and Medical Department M5 - Outsourcing Department M6 - Web Design Group II. Process The process of developing the model articulates and identifies the available data, which the organization intends to use for implementation of the decision-making channels. According to Checkland and Poulter (2006), it also eliminates any possible gaps in the information and data before using them. The next phase is to associate the colors to various factors that influence the department represented in the model. For example: Red: Emotions or intuitions Black: seriousness, carefulness and risk conscious Yellow: Optimism, constructive Thinking and hopefulness Green: Innovation, Problem Solving and Creative Thinking Blue: Having Control over the Processes in the Company White: Being focused on neutral objectives The third step of the process is to assign each departmental representative who forms part of the decision-making committee, with the oversight over certain areas of decisions. The fourth step is to use the predefined sequence of timing, discipline and guiding principles. The fifth step is to develop projected outcomes of the six-hat model of thinking, such as clearer informed decision-making, less time spent on decision making, elimination of personal prejudices in decision making and group involvement in the decisions (Weinberg, 2001). The final stage is the actual construction and development of an automated platform for the implementation of the six-hat model in the executive decision-making. III. Example As illustrated in the GEMS organization structure in figure 3, the rich picture is a good example of the design of the six-hat model. Each department and division is represented by a uniquely identifying color in the design of the model. For example, Blue represents the Engineering and Systems Division Black represents the Project Management Department Yellow represents the Systems and Training Division White represents the Biomedical Department and Medical Department Green Represents the Outsourcing Department Red represents the Web Design Group The business analysis in this Model is a collection of functions, information and methods of identifying the needs of the business solve the problems of MRE. The model allows the company to link with all sources of solutions and to include the components of system development (Von Bertalanffy, 1969). Apart from the internal interlink between the organization departments, the GEMS system also creates a link between the MRE Company and the external entities like the government and the Federal government in the process of improving the organization through changes. IV. Strengths & Weaknesses a. Strength The model is a good illustration of the business analysis model, which provides a platform for consultation and discussion, so that all issues in various departments are represented in the solution. It is a holistic problem-solving model, in which all factors are put into consideration, and all entities to the core system. The second strength is the ease of understanding of the model. This is because it relates the colors to the departments and the divisions represented. The third strength is the sequential order of processes involved. It is therefore easy to understand and follow. The applications of colors are very symbolic in demonstrating the incorporation of every existing department and division of Maple Ridge Company in dissemination of the annual strategic plans. b. Weaknesses The model six hats model has a limitation in the implementation of the proposed solutions since it can only apply to the contemporary structure of MRE. It does not consider the possibility of expansion of the organization structure. Of course, as MRE organization increases in size, many departments emerge, prompting the need to expand the capacity of the management for decision-making. The current model may not apply to the expanded capacity unless more colors are introduced, with newer unique implications (Gall, 2003). Secondly, the model in its present state, introduces certain limitations of the strategic planning, because of the bureaucratic conditions it creates. This is because of the number of decision makers involved in MRE and the number of departments to which the GEMS system integrate. It therefore slows down the implementation of the strategic plans in MRE. Technique 2: Group Decision Modeling The second technique that applies in the formulation and implementation of the strategic plans in MRE include the Interactive environment between human’s beings (staff, clients and other stakeholders) and Intelligent Computers Systems. I. Background From this study, intelligent systems exist in many forma such as decision support system, artificial system, Expert \Systems and executive systems (Senge, 1990). From the many options of intelligent systems, this study makes proposes a comprehensive system for supporting Executive Group Decisions. This requires the development of knowledgebase from to which the MRE integrates the GEMS system (Hutchins, 1996). The system has to be able to receive information from various users and use a special model that combines the various parameters of the knowledge base to analyze the information. What the executive team receives is a set of reports with leading information towards the directions of decision options. The basis of the discussion of the strategic plans is entirely based on the recommendations derived from the intelligent system. II. Process The process of developing the intelligent system involves a complete System Development Life Cycle. This cycle involves processes such as: Requirement Specification Preliminary Studies System Planning Functional Specification System Prototyping System Coding System Testing Documentation Installation / Deployment Maintenance and Support The knowledge base has to contain leading information to the nature of decisions, which MRE intends to make, and hence, the strategic plans. System developers have to keep the documentation of the system including the source code so that system improvement can take place, to incorporate any change that may occur. In the interaction, the system reads human actions and data inputs as stored in a common knowledge base. The system analyzes the information and gives report the decision making for strategic planning purposes. The major source of information is the GEMS system, through which data input takes place. III. Example The Group Decision system is illustrated in the example in figure 3. Figure 3: Integration of the Intelligent System The Executive, the staff members and the external users link directly to the GEMS system. At the same time, executives link to the newly proposed Executive Group Decisions system. The decision system gives data analysis reports for intelligent decision-making. IV. Strengths & Weaknesses a. Strengths The system undergoes the full process of System Development Life Cycle, in which every step is covered holistically. The integration between the users and different departments is creates an effective platform for organization communication and supports the strategic planning. The communication is reliable and relevant to the functions and processes within MRE. The graphical illustration of the communication links between the two systems shows a reliable data input and output channels. Essentially, it is an optimization of the previous version of the GEMS subsystem into a more sophisticated and more powerful integrated system. The second strength is that the Group Decision support enables the executive board to make quicker decisions than it could prior to its development. The third strength is that the information system (Group Decision Support system) is reusable as suggested by Churchman (1984) and Keeney (2002). It uses the same knowledgebase iteratively; hence, it remembers the previous problems and applies the same solutions in the future problems. The third strength is that the system is customized to fit into the needs of the organizations. The executive board is able to incorporate all the needs in the system during the development and testing. The developers are able to modify and adjust the system for the future, since the documentation is available. b. Weaknesses The Group Decision System is limited to the knowledgebase of MRE and the input data that comes in through the GEMS system. As Vester (2007) argues, the database may not be able to support every strategic plan that the executive prepares. This is because of the possibility of uncertainties. The other weakness if this method is the possibility of erroneous information in the knowledge base. If any user enters erroneous data in the system, then the system proceeds to generate faulty information. The result is that the executive decision makers are exposed to the risk of making wrong decisions. The final weakness that this study finds from this technique is that when the system network happens to fail, there is no link between the users and the GEMS system and between the GEMS system and the proposed group Support system for MRE. Technique 3: Business Modeling System The final method which the MRE company can us to develop a strategic plan for the organization is the application of Business Modeling System. Maple Ridge engineering Company can engage its system developers and their designers to assess the organization’s products, processes and systems in order to identify the weak areas that require business changes in the phase of the global market (Capra, 1996). The model can assist MRE in the identification of the critical activities and parameters that ought to receive maximum attention. The Business modeling system incorporates the cost and benefit analysis or MRE and the contribution of the GEMS system to the fulfillment of its strategic plans. I. Background The Business modeling system works with the background information that the performance of MRE Company and the success of its strategic plans are measured by the cost and the benefits parameters. The model therefore combines the costs and the benefits in order to determine the direction of the organization in terms of its performance. The modeling system therefore uses a mathematical model with the combination of the cost parameters (C) and Benefits or incomes (B). The result or the subject of the combination is the performance (P). The system model is represented as shown below: P (performance) = B (Benefit) – C (Cost). The system consolidates all variables of profits and revenues into one variable (B) and the variables of cost or expenses (C). The objective of the Business modeling system is to increase the benefits and minimize the costs in order to maximize the performance parameter P. The decisions of the MRE executive board is governed by the prioritization of actions that controls the variables in that order. Business modeling system is an automation of the performance objectives by controlling the inputs. II. Process The development of the model begins from the identification of the required performance of the organization. The same executive board of directors, who are the decision makers, determines this model. The next phase is the identification of the variables or the factors that promote or reduce the performance of the organization. The third step is to develop the model in form of an arithmetic function P = B - C. The final phase is to automate the model in a computer-aided application. This continuous and iterative cycle runs in the organization’s decision-making and strategy planning. III. Example A good example of the application of the model is in the MRE. Each department presents its budget and the projected return on investment. The periodic dashboard of MRE shows each department and division with their respective costs and benefits parameters. The same dashboard gives consolidated costs and benefits of the whole organization (Skyttner, 2006). The combination can then be made into a single model that represents every departmental costs and corresponding benefits. From the results of the benefits and cost analysis, the developers and the designers of automated platform in Maple Ridge Company can proceed to develop an automated system model for the management of the performance of MRE. IV. Strengths & Weaknesses a. Strengths One of the strengths of the business modeling system is that it is a practical and realistic model in that it creates a practical measurement of the expected outcome of the arithmetic model. The model is able to support the strategic planning of the organization by estimating the parameters to combine in the arithmetic model. The second strength is the method is that it has a higher degree of accuracy because its decisions are performance based. It has a stronger model than the group decision support system since its input parameters are easier to control from the inherent point of computations. The third strength is that it has a strong base of information integrity because the model does not allow chances for data manipulation except from the entry of the point of inputting the parameters. The fourth strength is the ability to enhance the performance of the model through an automated platform (Gharajedaghi, 2005). The model can be improved by introducing automation through system coding. This can further include many functionalities and performance aspects such as system security and control of user access (Francois, 1997). Users only access information and system functions up to a certain limit that is necessary for their departments. b. Weaknesses The major weakness with this method is that it cannot operate outside the model that has been defined, and the parameters described in the variables definition. The model in reality cannot exhaust every condition of the performance (Wilson, 2001). The second limitation is the model is the use of quantitative approach to the solution of the system. Some parameters are strictly qualitative and may therefore not apply in the model computation (Checkland & Poulter, 2006). Comparison of Techniques The MRE has got the three optional techniques summarized as the Six Hat Model, the user – Computer Interaction (Group Decision Support) and the Business Modeling System. Each of the systems model are applicable to the situation at MRE and can enhance the performance of the present GEMS system version. However, the best model out of the three is the group automation. The outstanding feature of the model is the levels of automation, the security features and the movement or the flow of data and processes between the entities of the organization network (Checkland & Poulter, 2006). Conclusion The business analysis that is relevant for Maple Ridge engineering is supposed to improve the performance of the GEMS system and its application in the performance of the organization. The three models designed and proposed as the options seek to develop automation and intelligence in the GEMS system. The models are intended to meet the ultimate objectives of converting the information system into an intelligent “Thinking” system. Even though the three systems are logically feasible and realistic, the group decision support system appears to meet the immediate needs of the executive committee in planning the strategies of the organization. This study proposes that the organization to adopt the group decision support technique for enhancing human and computer interactions. References Capra, F. (1996). The web of life: a new scientific understanding of living systems. New York: Anchor Books. Checkland, P., & Holwell, J. S. (1998). Information, Systems and Information Systems. New York: Wiley. Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2006). Learning for Action. New York: Wiley. Churchman, C. W. (1984). The Systems Approach. New York: Delacorte Press. Francois, C. (1997). International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics. Munchen: K. G. Saur. Gall, J. (2003). The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small. London: General Systemantics Pr/Liberty. Gharajedaghi, J. (2005). Systems Thinking: Managing Chaos and Complexity - A Platform for Designing Business Architecture. London: Butterworth-Heinemann. Hutchins, C. L. (1996). Systemic Thinking: Solving Complex Problems. CO: PDS. Keeney, B. (2002). Aesthetics of Change. London: Guilford Press. Meadows, D. (2008). Thinking in Systems - A primer. London: Earthscan. Seddon, J. (2008). Systems Thinking in the Public Sector. London: Triarchy Press. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline - The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization. London: Currency Doubleday. Skyttner, L. (2006). General Systems Theory: Problems, Perspective, Practice. London: World Scientific Publishing Company. Vester, F. (2007). The Art of interconnected Thinking. Ideas and Tools for tackling with Complexity (MCB). New York: Wiley. Von Bertalanffy, L. (1969). General System Theory. New York: George Braziller. Weinberg, G. M. (2001). An Introduction to General Systems Thinking. London: Dorset House. Wilson, B. (1990). Systems: Concepts, Methodologies and Applications. New York: Wiley. Wilson, B. (2001). Soft Systems Methodology: Conceptual Model Building and its Contribution. New York: Wiley. Read More