Organisational Diagnosis

1. Organisational Diagnosis

2. Quality Problems

3. Quality Problems - Lean Six Sigma A statistical measure of variation using standard deviations from a centerline. In manufacturing, six sigma quality equals 3.4 defects per million parts (in other words, not much variation). Focus on variation to learn and improve . Standard 6 Sigma 3 Sigma Process Variability

4. Quality Problems – Examples Airplane Journey You arriving safely at location Luggage Journey Suitcase arriving with you at location Versus 6s below 0.5 defect per million opportunities 3s ~67,000 defects per million opportunities

5. Quality Problems in Business Products are produced in business processes. Quality of produced products are constantly monitored. This is done by certain product properties to be considered as quality variables and to measure their values periodically. Variation in the values of quality variables is considered as indicator for control. (high variation = lesscontrol) So, variation of the values of quality variables is the phenomenonto explain (explanandum) in organizational diagnosis < Intermezzo M&M variation >

6. Current practice of causal analysis in business

7. Goals of causal analysis in business Knowledge-oriented Action-oriented Predict, intervene on, control a phenomenon of interest Designa business process (system) Understand and explain variations of a quality variable Diagnosethe designed business process (system)

8. Causal analysis in business Decide what’s the cause of defects in services and products Decide who is (legally) responsible for some state of affairs Decide what are the causes of a given phenomenon Decide what causes dysfunction in an organisation

9. You can plan ahead … If you know a mechanism causing a quality problem in business You may changes policies and business rules Anticipate on influential forces on your business Detect (hidden) social structures threatening business Redesign the organisation Split or join business’ … hopefully, of course

10. Something is missing

11. Mechanisms, a `new’ causal stance

12. Explanation, our stance for OD The ‘thing’ in a business process that causes variation is a causal mechanism (explanan) Definitions A causes B if there is mechanism linking A to B A mechanism is an arrangements of entities and activities that produce a behaviour Main contemporary supporters: Machamer et al, Bechtel et al, Glennan, … Remote supporters: Decartes, Newton, …

13. A causes B, what is A ? A causes variation, then: What is A in business ? Changes in the values ​​of quality variables are by definition the result of changes in the business process in which the products are produced. The current practice in OD is to try to find (statistical) relationships between quality variables and selected process variables (e.g. the availability of machines or people, which can change in the course of time) The only thing we know about A in business is that it is a mechanism and statistics may point us or hints us about associations between variables in business.

14. StatisticsandMechanisms • Known in LSS anexternalCausal Indicator: associationsbetween variables • Unknownin LSS aninternalCausal Indicator: entitities, activities, organisation andresponsibility in business - Tax Rate [high, low] Economy [high, low] + + Tax Revenue [high, low] Tax Base [high, low] +

15. An Approach to causation CASE “Zwitserleven”

16. Layer 1: Strategic focal points Operational Costs Benefits and Costs Linkage 1: Action Planning Layer 2: Project objectives Reduction Personnel Costs Increase Customer Satisfaction Linkage 2: Decomposition into dimensions Error Free Perceived Response Layer 3: One-dimensional variables (CTQs) Waiting Time CTQ3: Rework CTQ1: Workload CTQ2: Throughput Linkage 3: Decomposition into additive constituents Amount of request Time between request and answer Repeating requests for information Internal routing of request Layer 4: Additive constituents TELEOLOGY Linkage 4: Operational Definitions Layer 5: Measurements

17. TELEOLOGY

18. Associations Nr. v1 v1.1 v1.2 v1.3 v2 v2.1 v2.2 v3 v3.1 v3.2 Variable workload channel_type file_type category throughput digital_format clarity rework correct_policy correct_IR Changes effect ctq1 change 1 .. 5 change 1 .. 6 change 1 .. 3 effect ctq2 change 1 .. 7 change 1 .. 4 effect ctq3 change 1 .. 4 change 1 .. 7 Modelling Concept [Customer Request] [Customer Request] [Customer File, Policy] [Information request] [IRH Business Process] [Receipt and Registration] [Formal Letter] [Completing Request] [Policy] [Information Request] Value Range (high..low) (post/fax/email/tel) (paper/digital) (1..13) (high..low) (yes/no) (yes/no) (high..low) (yes/no) (yes/no) TELEOLOGY

19. a1.3 a1.2 a3.2 a2.2 a3.1 a1.1 a2.1 TELEOLOGY

20. Reflection • ArchiMate’s meta model consists of non-observable concepts and creates a discrepancy with causal reality • Relationships from a teleological perspective (e.g. triggers, realizes, assigned to) are not explicit about their cause and effect. • A decomposition on the basis of mapping reality to a meta-model consists of the pre-assumptions of the meta model not necessarily correct for causality. • a business process is a “happy”-flow. • employees are assigned to each task in the flow

21. Conclusion • A decomposition of the business system is necessary, not only functional but also constructional to identify the components that implement the functions. • A mechanism is the result of an alternating process – driven by hypothesis’ on mechanisms – in which external and internal causal indications tested on their consistency to each other.

22. An Approach to causation CASE “MERCK”