For large systems, a full scale database design program is often undertaken. This can
be a major undertaking for corporations with the design of a corporate or enterprise-wide
database system. The total system consists of all elements for obtaining of data and
implementing actions. The system consists of automated and manual elements. The parts that
are of concern in systems design concentrate on the collection of data through the
dissemination of reports. The focus is naturally on the automated elements. However,
control and concern for the manual operations need to be included in the planning
activity.
The output of the planning process should be a document, outlining: (1)
the present situation, (2) the system related issues, (3) strategic alternatives, and (4)
the type of systems that are needed.
[Gause, D. C. & G. M. Weinberg, Exploring Requirements, Quality Before Design,
Dorset House Publishing (1989)]
1.1 Finding the Opportunity |
The process of identifying problems worth solving or
opportunities worth exploiting is not simple. The underlying problems are often supported
by the personality of the management. Most problems are systematic dealing with the
structure of the organization as well as the need for specific tasks. |
1.1.1 Problems and Symptoms |
Stated problems are often symptoms of underlying issues
that need to be explored. Satisfying the symptoms may or may not solve the problem or
serve the organization. Information, itself, has no value. Only the use of it does.
Solving symptoms often leads to providing information that goes nowhere. |
1.1.1.1 Root Causes |
We wish to solve the underlying problem or need, not
merely the symptom. A key tool for searching for the underlying or root cause of problems
is asking "Why". The Japanese Quality people have developed the concept of the
"Five Why's". This gives the analyst license to ask five sequential Why's. The
process often ends with the identification of underlying problems which are more
fundamental. |
1.1.2 Bottom Line Value |
Alternative one can try to exploit opportunities based on
value to the organization. A simple way of viewing value is in terms of its "bottom
line". Simply meant: "Getting more for less and keeping it". Realizable
Profits= Revenues - Costs - Losses Due to Poor Decisions
- Getting More: Revenues = Value Enhancement, "quality"
- For Less: Cost Reduction = Improved Productivity
- and Keeping It:
Improved Decisions = Decision Support |
1.2 Productivity |
Productivity is the ratio of results to the input of
resources. Improved productivity is a key objective for information process development.
It is hoped that increase automation and systems development will lead to increase
productivity or reduced costs. Many of the systems development projects are undertaken
with the purpose of increased productivity. There has been controversy regarding the
growth or lack of growth in productivity with the introduction of personal computers. A
lack of growth in service productivity has been noted recently:
"Organizational productivity ...... is the missing return on investment after more
than a decade of heavy spending on information technology. During the 1980's, companies
spent almost a trillion dollars on new information technology, but productivity in the
services sector actually declined." - Jim Manzi- CEO, Lotus Development Corp.
|
1.2.1 Measures of Productivity |
The growth productivity or its decrease depends on how it
is measured. Productivity can be measured in several ways depending on the output being
considered and the input of resources being used. The choice of measurement depends on the
objective of the evaluation. |
1.2.1.1 Functional Productivity |
Functional productivity measures the resources required to
produce support an activity in the organization. Management for example can be considered
a function; its functional productivity might be the number of managers required to run
manufacturing. The aggregate of functional productivity makes up the national productivity
statistics. It shows the collective resources required to produce collective output. In
some areas, such as in publishing, small computers have driven a huge improvement in
functional productivity. Most large improvement in productivity has been in area
recognized as production or manufacturing. Office and service activities have shown little
change in functional activity. However, the number, type and the nature of tasks being
required for these functions have also changed. |
1.2.1.1.1 Use of Economic
Resources |
Another problem in looking at productivity is the use of
the technology. Cheaper economic resources tend to be used greater that expensive ones.
Therefore, the more productive the resource the more it is used. For example, if it is
cheap to generate reports, more reports will be generated. Functionally, this would mean
that more reports would be generated that otherwise. The net effect would be that report
writing, though as a task is more productive, is less productive in terms of the total
function. If communications becomes easier to use, it will be used more frequently and
the overall cost of communications will increase. If we calculate the productivity of the
communications function, it may appear to be decrease with higher costs for the function. |
1.2.1.2 Task Productivity |
Task productivity focuses on the specific activities that
need to be performed. Since these tasks change with changes in capability it can be
measured either historically, comparing the present cost of doing the present work
compared to past costs, or based on projecting the present tasks into the future. |
1.2.1.2.1 Forward Calculations |
The forward calculations asks how much do we improve costs
of the known tasks using the new technology. This is generally the standard justification
for new technology. It assumes that the activities that are done will be done cheaper.
Unfortunately, this is possible only if the gains in productivity are allowed to be
captured. If the task change, then the net effect will be different. |
1.2.1.2.2 Backward Calculations |
The backward calculation is intended to document value of
utilizing new technology. It asks how much is being saved by using the present technology
to do the present task as compared with doing those tasks without that technology. For
example, what have we saved by doing artist quality charts today on personal computers
compared with producing them manually. This clearly would show a large improvement in
productivity. However, those tasks would likely not be performed if the technology did not
exist. Here the backward calculated task productivity would be very high while the forward
calculation would show no improvement. Simply, those charts would not have been produced
in artist quality without that technology. |
1.2.2 Sources of Productivity |
Productivity can improve only when it is allowed to.
Either the output is allowed to increase with given resources or the resources must be
allowed to decline. If both are frozen then there can not be any change in actual
productivity. It is useful to accept a production or manufacturing attitude toward
tasks in order to improve productivity. If the task is viewed as an art it is viewed as a
series of unique outputs. The idea of productivity is then useless, since it is
meaningless to compare output with resources. Only if we think of the output as an
economic "commodity" is the idea of productivity meaningful. |
1.2.2.1 Economies of Scale |
An major historical source of improved productivity is in
economies of scale. Increasing the quantity of an item produced generally decreased its
unit cost. Similarly, the more experience one has doing a task the less it generally costs
to do it. Both scale and experience requires the opportunity to do the tasks or producing
items a large number of times. |
1.2.2.1.1 Centralization |
Centralization of tasks is the principal means of
generating the scale. Because personal computers can disperse capabilities to do tasks,
they have tended to simulate decentralization. This has reduced, rather than increased the
opportunities for improved productivity. |
1.2.2.1.2 Specialization |
Along with centralization, specialization of skills also
generates opportunities for productivity improvement. Only with the devotion of the
required resources and the opportunity to practice can the skills of personnel gain the
experience to improve productivity. Unfortunately, the trend toward personal computers has
also tended away from specialization. |
1.2.2.2 Process Standardization |
Experience can be gain in a task if that task is repeated.
If each time task is different, experience will be minimal. Furthermore, we can not
improve a process unless it is maintained. Only standardized processes can be maintained. |
1.2.2.2.1 Process Description |
Formal standardization is often useful in developing and
assuring a productive process. The process is usually described by logic or flow diagrams
showing each task component and interrelationship to other components. |
1.2.2.2.2 Task Components |
Tasks can be divided into infinitely small sub-tasks and
components. Taylor and Gilberth in the early part of this century considered tasks down to
the worker movements. This level is usually far beyond the useful limit in information
systems. For systems development we usually consider task components as consisting of the
storage and processing of data. This would include data entry, checking, and the
generation of parts of reports. |
1.2.2.2.3 Simplification |
A major source of productivity improvement is through
process simplification. Processes often tend to be overly complicated. Grouping processes,
specialization, centralization, and streamlining often result in far simpler processes
that are more productive. |
1.2.2.3 Automation |
Automation has been, and still is the hope for improved
productivity. By having the computer do tasks that were manual, it is hoped that the
overall costs will decline. |
1.2.2.3.1 Value in Scale |
Automation generally decreases the incremental costs of
producing things whether they be machines or reports. However, setup costs are often more
expensive than producing one item manually (or in a non-automated fashion). Below is an
example of producing reports in a traditional and automated fashion. Note that the initial
automated report costs is greater than through manual production. The advantage comes from
producing multiple items. 
|
1.2.2.3.2 Tools |
To implement automation, the appropriate tools are needed.
In the office environment it means: advanced word processing, spreadsheets, data base
systems, and graphics packages. Unfortunately, the growth of these tools have been slow in
recent years. Most of the new facilities have been target to ease of use not automation. 
|
1.2.2.3.3 Skills |
It is insufficient to merely have the tools; they must be
used. In most organizations, the tools are far more available than personnel who know how
to use them. |
1.2.2.3.4 Increased Use |
With the decreased incremental cost of production, it
becomes economically attractive to produce reports for the marginal user. Below is the
same example of automated report writing with a "demand curve". This demand
curve represents the value to the organization of incremental reports. Note that for the
manual approach only a couple of reports should be generated while with automation a half
dozen are produced. In this case, the total cost for producing two reports manually or
producing six reports in an automated process are the same. No net cost saving would be
generated for the organization producing the reports. The organization should gain
"value" with more reports, however. The problem is that there may be no net
report generation bottom line cost reduction. 
|
1.2.3 Organizational Change |
As we have seen above, productivity improvements can take
place only when the organization allows it. Organizational change and productivity
improvement go hand in hand. Technology by itself can only gain limited improvement. |
1.2.3.1 "Politics" |
To implement organizational change, we first need to know
that the real situation, not merely the apparent or formal structure. The term
"office politics" is often used to describe the internal positioning of
organizations. Each component reasonably tries to gain some control of its destiny. This
is usually based on self-interest. Change generates loss of control and often fear. Simply
knowing what is best for the overall organization is no guarantee that it will come to
pass. |
1.2.3.2 Objectives |
Know where you want to go! Before proposing a change in an
organization, consider the implications and consequences. Often resistance to change comes
from reasonable concerns. |
1.2.3.3 Getting There |
Organizations are made of people. By changing the
organization, we need to change what people do, think, and behave. This involves a type of
broad based "conditioning". It should be noted that successful change comes with
the support of the people involved. |
1.2.3.3.1 Recognition |
To implement change, that change needs to be recognized.
Since the change involves behavior, appropriate behavior needs to be rewarded and
inappropriate behavior discouraged. The system of change needs to focus on the recognition
and rewards. |
1.2.3.3.2 Support |
In order for the change to stick, the organization must
buy in. This buy-in has to be throughout the organization and in particular with
management. Often top management must be brought on board to allow the change to take
root. Without upper level sponsorship the change is likely not to be recognized and will
soon disappear. |
1.3 Value |
Perceived value is obtained anytime that someone is
willing to exchange funds for more services or products. Improved graphics, faster
response, colored documents, prettier reports all are examples of value. However, the
bottom line value is usually associated with improving revenue. |
1.3.1 Delivering Value |
Value in this context focuses on that which can return
revenue, benefit or share. It is insufficient for prettier presentations to be desired by
the presenter, they must be able to return value in terms of sales or faster decisions. |
1.3.1.1 Quantifying Value |
The evaluation of perceived value is easiest to make at
the user level. The user either buys into the technology or he does not. We usually can
not evaluate the value to the organization as a whole and have to take the user as the
"best" approximation. Fortunately, for the computing industry, the users often
control sufficient funds to acquire the technology. The measure of real
"bottom-line" impact is usually elusive. |
1.3.2 Performance |
The performance is often used as a surrogate for value. We
often use the term "quality" to describe performance. Performance and technical
merit are discussed in the technology evaluation section of these notes. Unfortunately,
this is confusing since "Quality" has a somewhat different definition.
Performance is usually monotonic, more is almost always considered better than less. We
have seen a "cult of performance" within the MIS community. However, performance
is usually associated with the technology not with the application and almost never tied
to revenue enhancement. |
1.3.3 The Performance Paradigm |
As in the case of pursuing productivity, there is a
perception that pursuing, value requires organizational "imperatives." This is
the performance paradigm. These "imperatives" should not be viewed as inherently
true. In fact, they tend to conflict with those suggested by productivity and Total
Quality approaches. |
1.3.3.1 Decentralization |
Decentralization is assumed to allow the organization to
get closer to the customer and thereby provide superior value. This implies distributed
and networked computing. |
1.3.3.2 Empowerment |
Empowering people gives the authority to act for the
interest of the customers. MIS professionals should have the power to run their operation
as independently as possible. |
1.3.3.3 Utilizing Tools |
Our people should be trained to adequately utilize they
tools. |
1.3.3.4 Customize |
All systems should be customize to meet the needs of our
people and customers. |
1.3.3.5 Value Performance |
Performance and "quality" is of value in all
things. Prettier reports and better than less pretty reports. |
1.3.3.6 Competitive Position |
The driving force for performance is competition. If we do
not perform to the highest level possible, the competition will. Our measure of
performance is the competition. |
1.3.4 Value vs Productivity |
It should be noted that these imperatives are very
different than those for productivity where scale and process standardization is critical.
The performance paradigm drives against standardization and focuses only on Better. |
1.4 A Total Quality Paradigm |
Quality is defined as: Consistently meeting or exceeding
reasonable customers' expectations. By exceeding customers' expectations, the developer
raises those expectations to a level for which few potential competitors can match. This
gives competitive advantage. It should be the system developer's goal to exceed client
expectations, if only for self interest. [W. E. Deming, Out of the Crisis,
MIT, Center for Advanced Engineering, (1986)]
This discussion of Total Quality management is presented both as a source of value for
development MIS systems and as description of the development process. The methodology of
Total Quality management offers an useful path for developing systems. |
1.4.1 Quality vs Performance |
There are two important differences between pursuing
Quality and Performance:
- Quality focuses on consistency not merely excellence;
- Quality is driven by what the customer may expect rather than technology or competition.
These two differences make Quality a process oriented approach and one aligned to
continuous improvement. In this regard pursuing Quality is similar to pursuing
productivity. It too is a process driven goal. |
1.4.2 Customer Expectations |
To meet or exceed expectations, the developer must
understand them. While the developer may act as an expert on systems and even on the
specific application, the ultimate source of systems requirements is the client. It is his
satisfaction that is key both in terms of the final system and in the implementation of
the project. In most cases, a number of individuals will be involved in the project.
Since it is almost impossible to fully assess the involvement of each one, they should all
be considered customers. Each one's expectations should be sought and noted. |
1.4.3 Client Satisfaction |
Clients are often reluctant to identify issues that
represent low levels of dissatisfaction, particularly, if they involve interpersonal
relations. Unfortunately, these instances of dissatisfaction can accumulate, resulting in
an overall perception of dissatisfaction. It is vitally important that even small
instances of dissatisfaction be identified and corrected. Close liaison and trust is
necessary to facilitate this. |
1.4.3.1 Customer Expectations |
Quality focuses on customer expectations. However, these
expectations must have a future orientation. We need to design products and system and
conduct business in such a way as to exceed future customer expectations. We face a
"moving boundary problem". Good efforts today will lead to rising customer
expectations. Our plans must focus on not merely today's expectations but those that will
be met in the future. |
1.4.4 Problem Resolution |
While it is a goal of quality management to eliminate
sources of dissatisfaction, they will still occur. It is a further goal of quality
management to establish a mechanism resolving these problems when they do happen. Problems
need to be rapidly recognized, not denied, and resolved to the satisfaction of the client
where possible. When resolution is not feasible with the available resources, an impartial
written statement of the facts of the problem should be issued to the client. Often
seemingly unresolvable problems are merely misunderstandings. A clear written explanation
of the situation will often clear up the problem. |
1.4.5 Cost, Quality, and Timing |
The design of applications systems projects rest on the
specifications of the function, the quality, the timing, and the cost. Conventional wisdom
dictates that of the three elements of value: cost, quality and timing, at most, only two
are independent. If two are specified, which is usually, quality and timing, the costs are
set. Costs are usually measured by man-power. If costs are set, then either the quality,
as measured by expectations must be constrained or the timing changed, or both. |
1.4.6 Structuring the Process |
Customer satisfaction should be designed into the process
for developing the system as well as the system itself. Design implies a structured
process. The process that is described must be consistent with the process as it exists or
will exist. A fictitious process, no matter how well designed is useless. |
1.4.6.1 Standardized Processes |
Customer satisfaction is not a one shot deal. In order to
assure satisfaction the process has to be standardized. Flexible processes allow for
identified steps and activities to be undertaken in similar fashions. Only when these
steps are understood can we identify what causes customer dissatisfaction and correct it. |
1.4.6.2 Measuring Performance |
We need to track performance in order to improve. What
can not be measured can not be improved. Performance, however, must reflect what the
customers and clients want, rather than what is easy to measure. Customer satisfaction
should be the basis for selection of measurements. |
1.4.6.2.1 Measurement Precision |
Precision of a measure is the degree that differences can
be distinguished. The higher the precision of the measure the greater is the ability to
ascertain process variation, if the measure is accurate and reliable. High precision
costs. Choose the level of precision that will meet the needs for the process. |
1.4.6.2.2 Measurement Accuracy/
Validation |
A measurement may be precise but irrelevant to the issue
of interest. Measurements should reflect the process that we wish to measure. The validity
of the measure reflects the correspondence between the measure and the phenomena. For
example if we wish to measure roughness of a surface the measure increase with the nature
of the surface rather than any other artifact. |
1.4.6.2.3 Measurement Reliability |
Reliability is how well the measure can be repeated. If
widely different estimates are obtained for a measure under identical conditions and
samples that the measure will not reflect the real situation. |
1.4.6.2.4 Quality |
The quality of the measurement is the combination of the
precision, accuracy and reliability. We can think of the quality as an overall confidence
of the measure to show meaningful differences in the process. |
1.4.6.3 Processes under Control |
There is variability in all things. A process is under
control, when its variations are within "expected" levels. Alternatively, we can
view a process as being under control when process procedural inconsistencies do not
dominate the variability of the results. |
1.4.6.3.1 Statistical Control |
A process is in statistical control when the variability
remains within a statistically expected range of behavior. We assume that the variability
of an measure has a known distribution. From this distribution we can determine a range of
"expected" performance (Control Limits). A process is considered in statistical
control as long as the measure remain within these Control Limits.
[ Kume, Hitoshi, Statistical Methods for Quality Improvement, AOTS,
(1985)] |
1.4.6.3.2 Systems Orientation |
Control of a process is a systems concept. It refers to
the totality of the system rather than a single step. A process is either in control or
not. |
1.4.7 Continuous Improvement |
A Total Quality orientation rest on continuous
improvement. This means implementing procedures to identify sources for improvement and
taking appropriate action. |
1.4.7.1 Management by Policy |
Management by policy focuses on standardized processes and
policies. Management is to establish sets of processes and systems that are self
governing. Continuous improvement is obtained by modifying those policies rather than
solving the individual issue. |
1.4.7.2 Group Participation |
It is the aim of management by policy to require the
people who are involved in the process to improve it. It is a group participation process.
Management's function is to provide the means and encouragement of change rather than to
direct it. [Scholtes, Peter R., The Team Handbook, Joiner Associates Inc., Madison WI
(1989)] |
1.4.7.3 Root Causes |
The underlying principle for continuous improvement is the
existence of root causes for problems. It is critical to differentiate between activities
that strive to correct a single problem from that which address the root cause. Drs. Juran
and Demings have express concern over merely modifying a process to correct small
variations. Such activities tend to cause more problems that solutions. |
1.4.7.4 Plan-Do-Check-Act |
A simple Total Quality development procedure centers
around four steps [Discussed in The Team Handbook and in The
Memory Jogger Plus+]:
- Plan changes (Plan);
- Try them (Do)
- Measure the results (Check); and
- Institute the change (Act).
|
1.4.7.5 Quality Process Tools |
There are many additional management and planning tools
that have been integrated into the Total Quality management procedures. These are intended
to help in the structuring and creative issues required to identify root causes and select
appropriate corrections and improvements.
[Brassard, Michael, The Memory Jogger Plus+ tm;
GOAL/QPC 1989, Methuen, MA (1989)] |
1.5 Better Decisions |
Improved decisions is another justification for
Management Information Systems development. By improved or better decisions we mean:
- Better consistent results;
- Faster decision process; and
- Improved implementation.
These are obtained by presenting more and better information in a manner that the
decision process can utilize. |
1.5.1 Decision Making |
Information can impact decision making only through its
process. If a decision process can not utilize information, no information or systems
designed to deliver that information will help. The nature of the decision making process
determine what information and in what form will be useful. |
1.5.1.1 Needs/ Objectives |
Decision making process perform a number of functions. The
solution of the specific problem is only one. Most organizations have implicit decision
making objectives and needs. These are part of the organizational culture. |
1.5.1.1.1 Goal Orientation |
Some organizations are strongly goal oriented. The
decision process is tightly targeted to the solution of a specific problem. Other
organizations have a broader orientation. Decisions are viewed as part of a larger problem
resolution process. The Total Quality Management continuous improvement process
adopts the broader view approach. However, most organizations have a mix of goal
orientations. |
1.5.1.1.2 Risk Adversion |
Almost all organizations and management tend to avoid
risk. Because people in management tend to be highly risk adverse, most decision making
processes are design to reduce personal risk. Beyond personal risk, there is inherent
risk in any decision. The amount of acceptable risk and its nature is dictated by the
organizational culture. In some organizations poor results can be critical. These
organizations are very conservative in their action and in their decision processes. Other
organizations are greater risk takers and this too is reflected in their decision
processes. The non-risk aversion decision process is sometime referred to as "Ready
Fire Aim" organizations. |
1.5.1.2 Styles |
Styles of decision also differ among organizations. Style
characterizes both individuals and the group interactions. To some extent the objectives
set the styles of the decision process. |
1.5.1.2.1 Personal Decision Making |
Much of the field of consumer and industrial buyer
behavior has dealt with personal decision making . Individual style and approaches can be
critical to organizational decision making. In this discussion we will consider only the
preferences for the amount and type of information. [Engel, J. F., R. D. Blackwell, P.
W. Miniard, Consumer Behavior, 5th edition, Dryden Press (1986) -
Relatively non-scholarly reference.] |
1.5.1.2.2 Hierarchical |
The organization affects the nature of decision making.
Highly hierarchical and authoritarian organizations have distinctly different decision
processes than participative organizations. There is a full range of styles between these
extremes. Most organizations practice a number of such style depending on the nature of
the decision and where in the organization the decision is being made. It should be
noted that the informal rather than the formal organizational structure tends to dominate
the real decision process. Often the only way to understand the informal structure is to
track decision through the organization. |
1.5.1.2.3 Consensus Building |
Often a number of individuals and organizations are needed
to implement a decision. In these cases, a major function of the decision making process
is to build consensus in such a way to facilitate the implementation of the decision. In
many cases the decision will go through any number of iterations without noticable change
in order to get participation in the process. The search and use of information in these
cases is part of this consensus building process. |
1.5.1.2.4 Analytical Thinking |
Organizations differ in the amount and type of analyses
they can use in decision making. Some organizations are not comfortable with any analysis
while other are enamored with analysis that it can freeze up the decision process,
"Paralysis by Analysis". One could refer to these as low SAT organizations.
However, that reflects a strong analytical bias which may not be reflected in good
decision making. |
1.5.1.2.5 Personal Information
Processing |
Formal training of people dictate the types and amount of
information that they wish to handle in decision making. Accountants, for example, prefer
tables of numerical information, while engineers prefer graphs and sales people prefer
either text descriptions or pie and bar charts. The same information can be prepared in
any of these formats. However, some will be more acceptable than others depending of the
background of the decision makers. |
1.5.1.3 The Process |
The decision making process traditionally is divided in
steps more or less reflecting the results of cognitive research. These steps after the
problem is identified are (1) information gathering, (2) problem and acceptable solution
formulation and (3) testing and confirming the decision. |
1.5.1.3.1 Information Gathering |
After the problem is identified, information is gathered.
This includes opinions as well as "facts". |
1.5.1.3.2 Formulation |
Based on "available" information, feasible
solutions are formulated. In general, this consists of a preferred solution and a number
of possible solutions. The possible solution may be real or just for discussion purposes.
In any event, a preliminary decision is found. |
1.5.1.3.3 Confirming the Decision |
Subsequent to the formulation of a preferred solution, a
process to confirm that decision is undertaken. The purpose of the confirmation is often:
(1) risk reduction and (2) building consensus. At some point, the decision is implemented
either by direct action or by default. However, the confirmation process usually continues
in the form of tracking of the results. |
1.5.2 Information in Decisions |
There are three activity stages in most organizational
decisions: (1) concurrent with the decision, (2) confirmation, and (3) tracking.
Information enters the decision process in all three stages. In many cases these stages
are not clear delineated. |
1.5.2.1 Concurrent Information |
Information that is available at the time of initial
formation of the solution or decision is concurrent information. |
1.5.2.1.1 Triggering |
Some information existed that initiated the decision in
the first place. This is triggering information. It is critical to the decision process
and exists in same time and place as the decision. |
1.5.2.1.2 Wisdom |
General knowledge in the minds of decision makers is
referred to as "wisdom". It consists of the sum total of experiences and
information compiled by the decision makers. This information is also concurrent with the
decision. |
1.5.2.1.3 Available Information |
In addition, readily available information can be
retrieved for the decision making process. The amount of information available depends on
(1) the time-frame, (2) existence of information, and (3) the accessability of that
information. We make a distinction between existence and accessability in that information
may be generally available in an organization, but access may be so difficult that for all
pretense and purpose is can not be obtained within the desired time frame. |
1.5.2.2 Confirming |
These three types of information: (1) triggering, (2)
wisdom, and (3) concurrently available information, makes up the basis for the initial
decision and should be viewed as most important in the decision making process. After the
initial decision, significantly more information will be needed to change the decision
than that required to formulate it. Confirming information supports, clarifies and in
most cases modifies decisions. Most information that is brought to bear onto problems is
confirmational rather than concurrent. |
1.5.2.3 Tracking |
At some point, the decision can not be readily changed.
The solution is implemented. Information obtained after this point is used to track the
results. It should be noted that confirmational and tracking information can become
either triggering or concurrent information of another decision. Information may serve
multiple functions. Our definition here reflects only a single decision process. |
1.5.2.4 Gaining Wisdom |
Wisdom is among the strongest information influencers in
decision making. It is derived from experience and past information. It is useful to trace
the evolution of data to wisdom as a transformation and assimulation process. |
1.5.2.4.1 Data to Information |
Data is usually defined as raw information. Conversely,
information is processed data. The process is done in such a way that it becomes
potentially useful. Data is transformed to information is using external tools, such as
statistics, graphs, pictures, diagrams. |
1.5.2.4.2 Information to Knowledge |
Knowledge is interrelated information. When we can
categorize and correlate information so it allows us to predict or "understand"
phenomena we establish a knowledge about it. Knowledge is partially external in that it
can be taught rather than experienced. |
1.5.2.4.3 Knowledge to Wisdom |
When knowledge is generalized to cover not only the
specific area from which it came but other areas we have gained wisdom. Unlike data,
information and to some extent knowledge, wisdom is subjective. It exists only within an
individual or through individuals the organization. Wisdom may enter the organization
as doctrine. In this case, it had been accepted by a sufficient group (or sufficiently
powerful group) to be taught as given truth. Care has to be taken to assure that these
cultural doctrines due well for the organization and do not act to blind side decision
making. A major function of MIS is to provide sufficient concurrent data to reduce this
risk. The ability of data to progress from raw information to wisdom depends on the form
that the data takes. The information needs to conform to the thought processes or
metaphores that the decision maker uses. |
1.5.3 Value of Information |
Not all information has the same value. The value of
information in a decision process is related to when it arrives, its perceived importance
and its perceived validity. |
1.5.3.1 Timing |
As previously noted, when information arrives can greatly
effect its value. Concurrent information has more impact than confirmational, which as
more impact on the decision than tracking information. However, it should be noted that
information that becomes a part of the wisdom set and even enter as cultural doctrine can
have even greater impact that just concurrent information. |
1.5.3.2 "Data Quality" |
Perceived data quality effects its impact. Data that is
perceived as unreliable or not on target will be rejected by those that do not like its
message. |
1.5.3.2.1 Specificity |
Available information normally does not read directly on
the decision being considered. We tend to use surrogate data to infer information about
the decision. How close that information is to target will effect its perceived quality. |
1.5.3.2.2 Validity/ Reliability |
The validity of data differs widely. The data may not
reflect the phenomena that we are interested in. Information can be considered unreliable,
by which we mean that other measurements of the same phenomena will produce different and
contradictory results. |
1.5.3.3 Acceptability |
Even if the information is on target and reliable it may
be not acceptable to the decision makers. |
1.5.3.3.1 The Message |
If the message is not what the decision makers wants to
get, they may find it difficult to believe. Information contrary to a decision, is often
most valuable since it could prevent a mistake. However, the way it is packaged is
critical for its acceptance. The delivery is also a problem to prevent the Bearer of Bad
Tidings from being symbolically killed. In organizations this can result in denigration of
the value of subsequent information from that source. |
1.5.3.3.2 The Media (Form) |
The media or form of the information can also effect the
willing of the organization to accept it. As previously noted the background and
disposition of the decision makers can greatly effect what is acceptable and which is not.
In many cases, it is useful to present the same in multiple formats. Unfortunately, this
has the tendency to overly weigh a specific piece of information since it may appear as
multiple sources. Care needs to be taken to prevent this. |