Tuesday, December 4, 2018

Systems Development Concepts




           This article presents a thorough explanation of the various processes related to systems design and to the problems that face the conventional, or traditional, methods according to which computer systems, of all kinds, are designed. The article will then explain why the traditional approaches of system design are considered to be techno-centric.
            Before being able to answer the main question of this article, we should define certain terms in order to clarify all the elements that will be discussed later on.
            Simmers (2004, p.542-543), states that “a computer system is an electronic device that can be thought of as a complete information-processing center. It can calculate, store, sort, update, manipulate, sequence, organize, and process data. It also controls logic operations and can rapidly communicate in graphics, numbers, words, and sounds.”
            Another definition is presented by Avgerou and Cornford (1998, p.1), as they state that information systems “refer to information and data handling activities in human organizations. Information handling in this sense is a purposeful activity sustained over time, and includes the activities of collecting information, storing it, directing it to appropriate places and people, and utilizing it in various tasks within the organization.”
            The designer of the system attempts to identify a specific problem within a given environment of work, for example, and creates a set of processes that should be able to resolve that problem according to pre-determined instructions and requirements (Kelkar, 2004).
           
SYSTEM DESIGN
            A system is supposed to handle a variety of issues related to an organisation and to enable the people that deal with those issues to function properly, swiftly, more efficiently, and more accurately. This usually also involves the interaction (inter-connectivity) between all those working in a specific section.
            The person (or group of people) that are supposed to design the desired system should study and analyse thoroughly the problem sphere, identifying the various elements and factors involved in it, proposing different system options, put them into test (preferably in real working environments), and finally selecting, with the help of the management of the organisation in question, the best solution.
            Computer systems designers, almost from the very beginning of this field, tended to work exclusively within their technical realm; meaning that they were identifying the problem and creating the solution that, evidently, was successful, but that was only operable and facilitated to themselves and to people of the same technical background. This created a reality which made it, somewhat, hard for average users, who are also supposed to be the end users of today’s computer systems, to deal, interact, let alone produce efficiently using those systems.

            The main problem in this context, as explained by Doherty & King (2005, p.2), is that the designers do not, in most cases, follow most required steps in what concerns the analysis of the impact of utilising the computer solution on the organisation and in what concerns the interaction between the created system and the human factor of that organisation. According to Poulymenakou & Holmes, 1996 (in Doherty and King, 2005, p.2), “the adoption of techno-centric development approaches can be a very dangerous strategy, as it encourages developers to deliver and implement the information system, and only then, if at all, worry about adapting it to its organizational context.”

            The conventional methodology, which depends solely on creating a computer system that is successful in resolving a given problem and that works from a technical (or computer programmable and configurable) point of view, is considered to be techno-centric because the most important factor in designing the system, which is the human factor, has not be taken into consideration fully by the designer (or the designers) during the implementation of their initial plan of work.

            Many specialists and researchers keep on calling for a methodology of system design that focuses more on the social aspect of the created tool: “little progress has been made in the development of practical socio-technical methods and approaches that have succeeded in making the transition from research laboratory to widespread commercial usage”                            (Doherty & King, 2005, p.2).
            Davidson and Chiasson (2004, p.6) state that the three main stages of information technology are the development, the implementation, and the assimilation. They stress on the fact that all the details that are related to the daily use of the technology may not be seen at the time of planning because the “attention is focused on overall business goals and implementation strategy.” This makes the period following the installation and the initial implementation highly important as all the social and human related factors must be adjusted and modified to suit the users and the organisation as a whole.
            There are various examples of systems that were created according to the conventional, techno-centric, approach and that have failed at the time of implementation because the designers lacked the social-oriented element in their design. Doherty and King (2005, p.2) mentioned several failed experiences of this kind; cases such as the London Ambulance System, the Taurus System, and the Benefits Payment Card System.
            Other examples were presented by Davidson and Chiasson (2005, p.6-12) who reported that the electronic medical record systems (EMRS) that were used in two healthcare organisations were also a cause of concern, to a certain extent. The authors confirm that the original systems created for the health organisations needed to be socially modified through the implementation of TUM (Technology Use Mediation) during system development stages and throughout the period in which the systems were in use. “System configuration required changes to software infrastructure and code. Organizational size influenced the availability and the effectiveness of mediation resources.”

            Another factor that is involved in the conventional approach is the total underestimation of previously existing systems which is also another characteristic of techno-centric methods of design and system development. Ignoring the ‘old’ systems leads the designer to create something that is totally new to the organisation, and this also excludes the effects, the advantages, and the usability of the previous system. The usability of the system and the ability of people within the organisation to work with it came as a result of a long period of system modifications (whether hardware or software) and of personal training and different processes of errors and corrections; which is what can be considered as the social-related side of system development. All those elements will be totally discarded by the designer during his/her development of the new system, which will result in the new system going through the same stages that the old system passed through, and this is another form of time-related and financially-related losses to the organisation.
            Chae and Poole (2005, p.19) pose an important question: “Is it possible for a large-scale information system to be developed ‘from scratch’?” Their explanation confirms that:
Accounts of system development and the systems development literature often focus primarily on the new system and tend to underemphasize the role of pre-existing systems... Few pay much attention to the role of pre-existing information systems in IS [Information Systems] development. To the extent the new system must integrate with pre-existing systems or use existing hardware and software... Existing systems have also been regarded as problems or barriers to the development of new IS and as disablers of IS-based organizational innovation and change… This approach, too, tends to treat pre-existing systems as objects, black boxes (e.g. Markus, 1983).

            Those mentioned above are the most notable points when studying computer design in its conventional method, which is, as can be seen, techno-centric.

CONCLUSION
            Even though conventional approaches of system design have been applied from the beginning of the age of Information Technology, they are still techno-centric. What designers should focus on are those system characteristics that are more operable by the individuals of an organisation; this includes the interface design, the language used within the various parts of the system (those related to both the software and the hardware). Another important point is the adaptability to the organisation that requested the system; the designers should understand fully that various factors that can lead the newly created system to be more social-oriented and to be what the organisation needs.
            Techno-centric designs can work, but only in technical related fields and sections. Previous systems should be studied carefully before initiating the design plan for new ones; this will enable the designer to understand what characteristics worked previously, what structure are the employees and the managers used to work with, and which tools can be re-used within the new system.
            Anderson and Vendelo (2004, p.27) explain the problem of techno-centric design by stating that “when introduced into a field, the technical system often needs to be changed to take into account the more holistic requirements that are present in the field, as users need to accommodate the technology in their daily routines.”





Reference List
Anderson, K. V. and Vendelo, M. T. (2004) The Past and Future of Information Systems, Oxford:             Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

Avgerou, C. and Cornford, T. (1998) Developing Information Systems: Concepts, Issues and         Practice, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chae, B. and Scott, M. (2005) 'The surface of emergence in systems development: agency,           institutions, and large-scale information systems', European Journal of   Information     Systems, 14, 19-36.

Davidson, E. and Chiasson, M. (2004) ‘Contextual influences on technology use mediation: a       comparative analysis of electronic medical record systems’, European Journal of            Information Systems, 14, 6-18.

Doherty, N. and King, M. (2005) 'From technical to socio-technical change: tackling the human    and organizational aspects of systems development projects', European Journal of        Information Systems, 14, 1-5.

Kelkar, S.A. (2004) Structured System Analysis and Design, New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.

Simmers, L. (2004) Introduction to Health Science Technology, New York: Thomson Delmar
            Learning.





No comments:

Post a Comment