The Role of The Soft System Methodology in Companies and Solution to The Problems - Case Study Example

 Systems in Organizations Table of Contents Topic Page Executive Summary 4 Introduction 5 The company The Focus Bounded Aspect of the Problem 6 Unbounded Aspects 7 Roles and Traps 9 Organizational Culture 11 Organizational Politics 12 Conclusion Executive Summary The Soft System Methodology (SSM) refers to the process of identifying and defining problems in an organization for the purposes of finding solutions to them (Nielsen, S1 2009). The SSM operates on the theoretical basis that problem solving is a process leading to lessening and eventual management of the problem. A problem in this case is any situation or circumstance that makes it difficult or impossible for normal operations of an organization or social system to run smoothly without undue interruption. The SSM focus on the process of reducing and ultimately containing the problem is referred to as action research. Action research involves the participant observation of the researcher through involvement, reflection and ultimately gaining insights leading to theoretical frameworks of resolving the situation (Maier, 2007, p7). This is a report on a case analysis of the problems in the implementation of Knowledge Management Systems at QES P/L. This case study was carried out in relation to version control and change management in our virtual team. The main objective of this study is to enable the company implement changes to attain higher speed and efficiency in the manner of completion of projects and introduction of innovations. The first step towards achieving this objective was obviously an understanding of the current situation of the company. Then the problems would be identified before possible interventions could be suggested. Introduction The Company Established in Brisbane Australia in 1986 the QES P/L is a company founded to provide engineering services to mining companies. The company then diversified to oilrig and sewerage construction. It has thus grown to have 600 employees spread over 5 countries namely Australia, USA, Egypt, Hong Kong and Norway. The countries reflect the original homes of the directors. Currently the company aims at expanding to offer services through electrical sub-stations. The Knowledge management system is expected to support these services. The Focus The problems at the company are numerous as identified by the SSM approach carried out by our organization Knowledge Management Systems Analysis Inc. There were many teams formed to concentrate on the various aspects of the problems. So, though there were many diverse problems identified, this paper limits itself to the problems to do with Quality Assurance, the specialty in which our team concentrated. Bounded Aspects of the Problem Unbounded aspects of a problem are those that are not clearly understandable or controllable while bounded aspects are difficulties that are easily identified and defined, with well known solutions (Nielsen, S2, 2009). The bounded problems that were identified at QES P/L in relation to KM; which were not however the main focus of the SSM as they are already well known and thus easily resoluble; were as follows. First, there was the problem of the use of old and outdated equipment. Some of the computer hardware components used in the Oslo and Brisbane branches of the company are as old as the company itself. Given that the Brisbane branch is the headquarters not only of the company, but also of the Information Technology (IT) section, this state of affairs is most unfortunate. Being old, the equipment is not compatible with modern software programs such as Windows XP and Vista (Maier, 2007, p7). Such programs are designed to run on fast processing and higher capacity machines. Though new ultra-modern computers have been bought over the years, the management has insisted that they be interfaced with the older versions, which slow down the whole sequence of processing information, especially when electronic data has to move back and forth between different departments. This is typical of the biblical adage of storing new wine in old wineskins. The staff has already identified this problem and recommendations for upgrading of the old machines are well documented in the minutes of the IT department and to management meetings. Secondly, there is the problem of focus on administrative and current project data storage instead of the much-needed storage of re-usable technical knowledge. This, it has been noted in meetings in the two branches, leads to the undesirable situation of familiar old methods being sought afresh whenever problems similar to those previously solved arise. In other words, the staff is forced to reinvent the wheel on several occasions. This has compounded the process of overcoming obstacles even in circumstances where there should actually be no problem at all. Then there is the problem that arose out of changes in the office organization. The Intentions were undoubtedly noble. The former way of doing things was that the senior and mid=level staff had their own offices, while the juniors operated from large multi-utility halls. This made it difficult for the juniors to carry out personal and confidential work without interference or undue prying by colleagues. So reorganization was implemented that saw the junior staff members share the offices of the mid-level staff when necessary and everyone also had easy access to the conference halls. But the Oslo and Brisbane branches soon recorded lots of complaints about the new arrangement. Currently Unauthorized modifications have been made by staff who have the old arrangement more or less back in place. This revolt made it impossible to implement the new arrangements in branches it had not reached yet. The Unbounded Aspects The unbounded problems identified were more complex though no one seemed to have identified them. The most manifest problem was that of rapid expansion that affected the quality of services offered and highly compromised the products the company was offering. Within a period of just seven years, the company had expanded from a 50 employee engineering firm based in Brisbane, to a multinational conglomerate offering all the diverse services mentioned above. This kind of expansion usually compromises quality directly. At QES this compromise has occurred and led to the reduction of profit margins. The first manifestation of the quality reduction is the numerous employees without adequate and convenient space to work from. The office reorganization attempts are an inadvertent admission by the management that they do not know what to do to make they workforce adequately accommodated to work in comfort. This has created subsequent problems like failure to meet schedules by workers who have the convenient excuse that they did not have anywhere to work from due to the confusion in the workplace. It is no wonder that other branches have rejected the proposal to reorganize offices. A survey carried out by our team in the Brisbane and Oslo branches uncovered the harsh reality of the situation above. 60% of the respondents felt that the new office reorganization was an attempt by management to cover up the problem of lack of adequate space rather than any serious solution oft the problem. Many of the mid-level staff also feel that their personal space was raided by their juniors thus compromising respect and the established chain of command. On the question of IT equipment, workers and other observers feel that there has not been adequate planning thus leading to the use of old and new equipment. Most of the equipment that had been used for the old engineering business was spread thin in the new concerns that emerged with additions not coming in fast enough. In the end the IT department became part museum and part modern. Many of the workers interviewed feel that if nothing were done to upgrade the equipment pretty soon then the problem will just continue to get worse. Another problem identified is the lack of clear standards in the company operations. The Oslo branch appears to operate quite differently from the Brisbane one. In fact visiting the two branches we had a feeling that we were in two different companies. Some level of variation is always expected especially when there are braches in two different countries with their own peculiar environment and culture (Benbya, 2008, pp 10); the level of difference in the QES branches is amazing. Being transferred from the Oslo to the Brisbane branch in the same capacity appears like a promotion while the other way round id generally regarded as a demotion. The employees interviewed pointed out the surprising fact that the Brisbane staff is paid more and offered higher incentives than their colleagues holding similar positions in Oslo. Moreover, The former generally enjoy the use of newer and better equipment; with the latter begin to regard their branch as some second hand dumping ground of unwanted stuff. The underlying tension between members of the IT departments in the two branches is palpable and naturally cooperation is minimal and relations strained. Rather than facilitate a smooth and swift sharing of information as required, there is a serious slowdown of communication especially the type originating from Oslo to Brisbane. Roles and Traps The QES was founded by five different personalities from five different countries. They jointly form a board of directors with the top leadership of CEO rotating between them every three years. My role was to observe a number of problems relating to their roles, and the effect this has on the overall quality of management and production in the firm. The first is that each director has ensured that a branch of the company is in their home country. This drive has resulted in haphazard expansion that has made it difficult to provide adequate resources to support the process. The result is organizational slack with some branches ending up with the short end of the stick while others stick with the lion’s share of resources (Nielsen 3, 2009). Whereas it may not be feasible to close down the branches now, further uncontrolled expansion will only damage the company’s productivity and viability (Benbya, 2008, pp 11). The group processes, especially meetings between representatives of the different branches only take place at board level with little interaction and sharing of ideas between the lower cadres of staff. This has brought about a disconnect in terms of information sharing and exchange. The initial success of the firm from the time of its installation has also played a role in inspiring a false sense of confidence especially among the managing board of invincibility and guarantee of future success. The board therefore appears to be caught in a time warp that is slow to take into consideration changing times and challenges that come with it. For example, competition has now emerged from other firms that are also interested in the engineering business. Such competition was simply not there before (Langton & Robbins 2006 p 6). Role Metaphor Assign roles Organizational Culture Culture refers to a group’s social behavior. Its elements include artifacts such as language and clothes; behavior patterns including routines and customs; values including persistence, creativity and custom; norms including rules and expectations; and, roles, which are positions and responsibilities, assigned by society (Nielsen 4, 2009). The study of culture proceeds on the assumption that problems are socially constructed and are inseparable from situations. It is classified into occupational, social and national cultures. Of chief concern here is the occupational culture that goes with the individual’s job description. The most noticeable culture that contributes to the operational and subsequently financial difficulties of QES is that of rapid innovation that seems to leave the staff behind. So instead of maximizing cooperation between them, the various branches prefer to work at cross-purposes with each other (Bontis & Chun, 2002, pp 16-17). Part of the reason why the new office structuring was rejected in several branches was that it was viewed as a Brisbane idea. This results in the slowing down of important work especially when it has to be shared between the branches. Unfortunately, the directors seem to be covertly encouraging this competition since they have been known to refer to certain branches as “we” and others as “them” when giving speeches in those branches. Organizational Politics Politics refers to the use of power to get things done in an organization, (Nielsen 5, 2009). At QES the assumption is that the political relations are bureaucratic in nature. This means that there is a hierarchy and strict rules guiding interaction between staff. However, we observed that, promotions are generally perceived to take place not on the basis of merit but on grounds of favoritism. Though the employees themselves admit that there has been promotion on merit basis, there focus seems to be on the fact that relations, acquaintances and friends of the directors tend to move up the ladder faster, especially those closest to the sitting CEO at that time. This has resulted in suspicion and unnecessary tension among the employees. Conclusion Holding regular meetings that will address the above problems is a sure way of finding workable solutions to them. This is highly recommended since it is important from the foregoing for the staff to feel like part of the solution in order to avoid negative perceptions and encourage participation. Rich Picture References Benbya, H (2008), Knowledge Management Systems Implementation: Lessons from the Silicon Valley. Oxford, Chandos Publishing, pp 10-11. Bontis, N & Chun W C (2002), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, New York: Oxford University Press, pp 16-17 Langton, N & Robbins, S. (2006), Organizational Behaviour (Fourth Canadian Edition). Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Prentice Hall, p 4. Maier, R (2007), Knowledge Management Systems: Information And Communication Technologies for Knowledge Management 3rd edition, Berlin: Springer, p 7. Nielsen, S1 (2009), Introduction to SSM, Lecture Notes. Nielsen, S2 (2009), Revision of Analyses 1, 2 and 3 Examples of two cases, Lecture Notes. Nielsen, S3 (2009), Lecture 3 analysis 1, Lecture Notes. Nielsen, S4 (2009), Lecture 4 analysis 2: Culture, Lecture Notes. Nielsen, S5 (2009), Lecture 5 analysis 3: Power Politics, Lecture Notes. Read More