IMS3230 - Information Systems Development Practices

IMS3230 - Information Systems Development Practices ETHICS - Effective Technical and Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems Semester 2, 2005

References • Prescribed text: Avison, D.E. & Fitzgerald, G. (2003). Information Systems Development: Methodologies, Techniques and Tools. (3rd ed), McGraw-Hill, London. Chapters 7.1, 23.1 • Mumford, E. (1985). Defining System Requirements to Meet Business Needs: a Case Study Example. The Computer Journal, 28 (2), 97-104. • Mumford, E. (1983). Designing Human Systems. Manchester Business School, Manchester See the class readings at the unit web page and prescribed text for additional references

ETHICS Effective Technical and Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems Enid Mumford, Manchester Business School, 1979, 1983, 1985 “ a structured design approach that covers organisational, administrative and quality-of-working-life factors and “a participative problem solving methodology” Mumford (1985)

ETHICS • developed through action research • the socio-technical design view: - technically efficient - social characteristics leading to high job satisfaction and improved quality of working life i.e. effective computer systems require the technology to fit closely with the social and organisational factors • means of achieving this is the participation of users at all levels in the design of computer systems • ETHICS embodies an ethical position and it has an explicitly stated philosophy

ETHICS good systems design: opportunities and constraints Technology People Tasks job satisfaction organisation of work Organisation objectives and mission • new technology provides the opportunity for change and improvement • distinguish between easy and difficult to implement changes • job redesign needs to be part of the design task

ETHICS: socio-technical design the socio-technical design approach acknowledges that: • different individuals and groups have specific needs, interests and values • these must be met for the successful implementation of change job satisfaction: a good “fit” between the employee's job needs, expectations and aspirations and the job requirements as defined by the organisation

ETHICS a framework of factors for the description and measurement of job satisfaction: • individual’s personality, background, education: the knowledge fit the psychological fit • competence, control and efficiency: the efficiency fit the task structure fit • employee values: the ethical fit

Job satisfaction • a “good” knowledge fit: the employee believes their personal skills and knowledge are being well used and developed • a “good” psychological fit: the employee believes their personal interests are being catered for (responsibility, recognition, sense of achievement, status, advancement) • a “good” efficiency fit: the employee believes their financial rewards are fair, supervisory systems are acceptable, adequate support services

Job satisfaction • a “good” task structure fit: the employee believes their set of tasks and duties meets their task differentiation needs • a “good” ethical fit: the employee believes the philosophy and values of their employer do not contravene their personal values if there is a “bad” fit on any variable(s): • psychological, efficiency, and ethical fit can be inproved through changed personnel policies and organisational design • knowledge and task/structure fit can be improved through work redesign

ETHICS and participation participation: structure, content and process • structure of participation the mechanisms enabling participation to take place e.g. representatives, voting, pressure groups, spontaneous, direct or indirect (through intermediaries) • content of participation the nature of the issues about which decisions are taken e.g. management’s jurisdiction, executive decisions • process of participation the acquisition of knowledge for informed decision making e.g. learning/training, working relationships, goal setting, solutions etc.

ETHICS and participation structure of participation three levels are identified by Mumford: • consultative all users are consulted about/contribute ideas to the design process but the design task is carried out by systems analysts • representative design groups formed from elected or selected representatives take design decisions • consensus design group members constantly discuss ideas and solutions with all users

ETHICS and participation Recommended structure of participation for ETHICS: a two tier structure of a Steering Committee and a Design Group for each department involved, and a facilitator • Steering Committee (sets design group guidelines): senior managers from departments, management services and personnel, union representatives • Design Group: 8-10 members, all interests represented e.g. all functions, sections, ages, grades (constituents), and systems analysts (their role is teacher, adviser and learner) • Facilitator: an external or internal consultant who is “neutral” and has training in ETHICS and human relations skills

Socio-technical systems design set social objectives set technical objectives specify social alternatives specify technical alternatives match as socio-technical alternatives rank according to ability to meet social and technical objectives consider costs / resources / constraints select best socio-technical solution

Step 1: Why change? Step 2: System boundaries Step 3: Description of existing system Step 4: Definition of key objectives Step 5: Definition of key tasks Step 6: Definition of key information needs Step 7: Diagnosis of efficiency needs Step 8: Diagnosis of job satisfaction needs Step 9: Future analysis Step 10: Specifying and weighting efficiency and job satisfaction needs and objectives Step 11: The organisational design of the new system Step 12: Technical options Step 13: Preparation of a detailed work design Step 14: Implementation Step 15: Evaluation fifteen step version described in Mumford (1983) & the prescribed text

ETHICS - 15 step version Step 1: Why change? • discuss existing problems, future demands, opportunities provided by improved organisation and new technology Step 2: System boundaries • business activities, existing technology, departments/sections, organisational environment Step 3: Description of existing system • a complete view of how the existing system works: • horizontal input/output analysis (inputs / activities / outputs) • vertical analysis of activities at five levels

ETHICS - 15 step version • vertical analysis of activities at five levels from lowest to highest: 1. operating activities: • what are the most important day-to-day tasks? 2. problem prevention/solution activities: • what are the key problems that must be prevented or quickly solved? 3. co-ordination activities: • what activities must be co-ordinated within the system or with other systems? 4. development activities: • what activities, products, services need to be developed and improved? 5. control activities: • how is the system controlled now/ (targets, progress monitored etc.) (see pp. 70-71 Mumford 1983 for an example)

ETHICS - 15 step version Step 4: Definition of key objectives • ignore existing system and focus on the design areas: - what is their primary role and purpose? - what should then be their responsibilities and functions? • produce a list of key objectives - how far do their present activities match what they should be doing? Step 5: Definition of key tasks • what are the key tasks that must be carried out to achieve the key objectives?

ETHICS - 15 step version Step 6: Definition of key information needs • what are the key information requirements associated with the key tasks? Step 7: Diagnosis of efficiency needs • efficiency needs can be identified by looking for variances: “a tendency for a system or part of a system to deviate from some expected or desired standard or norm”

Efficiency needs and variances key variances (systemic): • deep seated problems that cannot be eliminated as they arise from the nature of the key objectives and key tasks, • they often occur at system boundaries, e.g. sales and production departments have conflicting objectives in terms of quantity stock on hand operating variances: • not as deeply embedded, designed into the system through the way procedures, machines and activities have been organised, can be eliminated • all staff identify and document variances they encounter (informal discussions and opportunity for all constituents to participate)

Step 8: Diagnosis of job satisfaction needs ETHICS gives efficiency and job satisfaction equal weight job satisfaction needs to be defined and measured ETHICS standard questionnaire is the basis for job satisfaction diagnosis the facilitator administers and analyses the questionnaire all potential users complete the questionnaire and are given a copy of the results for discussion with their Design Group small group discussions to explore reasons for results (each member of the Design Group meets with their constituents) the Design Group completes an Analysis of Social Needs form to document satisfactory and unsatisfactory aspects of jobs and identify preliminary suggestions for improvement Design Group must not “rush” into design though

Step 9: Future analysis • a new system must have enough built-in flexibility to cope with future change • identify and analyse future changes likely to affect the system within the next five years kinds of changes: • technological, legal, economic (e.g. product and labour markets), employee or customer attitudes, company organisation (e.g. merging of departments) potential impacts on the system of these changes • e.g. Design Groups may need to consult both external and internal experts

Step 10: Specifying and weighting efficiency and job satisfaction needs and objectives the key step in ETHICS: • objectives are derived from careful diagnosis by the Design Group of efficiency, job satisfaction and future needs identified by the Group • these objectives are the basis of the new system design • interests of Design Group members, their constituents, the Design Group as a whole and other groups within the organisation need to be reconciled • external groups (e.g. customers, suppliers) need to be considered • each Design group member ranks the objectives • meet with Steering Committee, constituents etc.: discussion and evaluation - facilitator has a key role

Step 11: organisational design of the new system (this step should occur with Step 12: Technical Options) • identify organisational options: ways of organising departments to achieve job satisfaction and efficiency objectives • 3 to 6 options should be identified • the key objectives and key tasks of Steps 4 and 5 guide this process: - use vertical analysis to identify activities for the key tasks as well as key skills and roles and relationships necessary - oganisational options are different ways of arranging the five types of activities, the skills and roles taking into account technologies as part of Step 12

Step 11: organisational design of the new system each organisational option specifies: • organisation of design area as work groups, sections, and responsibilities • detailed description of sub-groups and responsibilities and tasks • description of how these are distributed amongst individuals and teams • each option is evaluated against the objectives identified in Step 10

Job design different ways in which work can be organised • job enlargement: one person does a number of tasks • job enrichment: one person does a number of tasks and uses different skills • task variety, job rotation, developmental aspects of tasks • Mumford suggests multi-skilled, self-managing work groups as the ideal: all members carry out multiple tasks, diverse skills, groups organise and control themselves, including setting performance and quality objectives, scope for multi-skilled work must exist, responsible, well-trained employees are necessary, there are implications for salary levels and grading schemes

Step 12: Technical options hardware, software and the human/computer interface • technical options are evaluated against the efficiency, job satisfaction and future change objectives of Step 10 • can create experimental examples (e.g. prototypes) of different options • a shortlist of technical options and organisational options • check compatibility of each with the others • the combined option that best meets the objectives is selected after discussions between the Steering Committee, the Design Group(s) and their constituents • the final choice reflects the careful diagnosis, objective setting, and evaluation of options by the Design Group, the broad company view via the Steering Committee, and the views of the users

Step 13: Preparation of a detailed work design detailed design of information flows, tasks, work groups, and procedures: check for good job design principles: 1. clear work group/unit boundaries (identity) 2. each group’s set of tasks is a good mix of simple, intermediate and complex activities 3. the work group can solve the majority of its problems itself 4. the group is responsible for its work organisation and co-ordination 5. the work group is responsible for developing improved methods and practices for its area of activities 6. the work group can set many of its targets and monitor its performance 7. the work group can easily identify targets it has to achieve

ETHICS: steps 14 and 15 Step 14: Implementation • the Design group has the role of implementation group: • selection of implementation strategy, e.g. total change or phased change • planning for the change process: activities, problems, training • discussions with Steering Committee and constituents Step 15: Evaluation • this occurs when the system has been fully operational for a time • evaluate its ability to meet the objectives: use variance analysis and job satisfaction analysis tools

ETHICS: good systems design Mumford (1985): “the aim of good systems design is to introduce a mix of technical and organisational change that will assist the department, and the individuals working there, to achieve group and personal missions” • provide the information to carry out key tasks and assist better control of key variances • key tasks and key variances are stable • improvement in efficiency, effectiveness and job satisfaction requires elimination or reinforcement of factors that are more easily changed • the involvement of users in the design process is the most effective way of achieving a clear and comprehensive knowledge of the needs and behaviour of the user department

Characteristics of ETHICS • flexible • socio-technical design is an iterative process • consensus problem solving approach • importance of subjective, qualitative knowledge • is it practical? • lack of tools, techniques for technical analysis and design: emphasis on examination of values and ethical concerns • useful for individual systems level only • does high QWL mean “automatic” technical quality and efficiency? • solves implementation problems but less emphasis on problem exploration?

Use of ETHICS • impractical: - unskilled users can’t do the design - management won’t accept it • Mumford has used a version for requirements definition (QUICKETHICS) • ETHICS is flexible and has evolved over time as experience in its use in different situations has developed (action research) • Mumford has published many case studies of its successful use in practice

IMS3230 - Information Systems Development Practices