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
Avgerou, C. and
Cornford, T. (1998) Developing Information Systems: Concepts, Issues and Practice, New York
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.
Simmers, L.
(2004) Introduction to Health Science Technology, New York
Learning.
Learning.
No comments:
Post a Comment