Unbounded Systems Thinking
INTRODUCTION
The nature of enquiry we were required to make in the assignment calls for “Unbounded Systems Thinking” as the most appropriate mode of enquiry. Reconciling real world pressures in IS design and forecasting and foreseeing advances in IS/IT in the next five years are “Soft” or “messy” problems and messy problems demand a creative approach to their solution as they are inherently Human Activity Systems(HAS).
¬MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVE CONCEPT
Unbounded Systems Thinking(UST) or as Ian Mitroff calls “The Fifth Way of knowing” or as Churchman’s philosophy calls “Singerian IS” is about adopting the Multiple Perspectives when making an enquiry.
The value in using multiple, T, O, and P perspectives lies in their ability to yield unique insights. None by itself suffices to deal with a complex system, but together they give a richer base for decision and action. Each dimension facilitates comprehension.[1]
All complex problems –especially social ones, involves multiplicity of actors, various scientific / technical disciplines and various organizations and diverse individuals. In principle, each sees a problem differently and thus generates a distinct perspective on it. Both the problems discussed in Task 1 and Task 2 are good examples of such problems and therefore the Multiple Perspective Concept of the Unbounded Systems Thinking strives enable us to understand the problems of IS design better.
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF UST OR SINGERIAN IS
Strengths
• As mentioned earlier its major strength of UST is its suitability to undefined ill-structured problems where other modes of enquiry fail. It can be applied to a wide spectrum of “messy” systems ranging from a corporate acquisition and integration of a new technology into a business unit to the prediction process in a public power administration.
• UST includes all the other inquiry systems as sub-models and adds to the enquiry the notion of Human Activity Systems. It therefore yields to the
The nature of enquiry we were required to make in the assignment calls for “Unbounded Systems Thinking” as the most appropriate mode of enquiry. Reconciling real world pressures in IS design and forecasting and foreseeing advances in IS/IT in the next five years are “Soft” or “messy” problems and messy problems demand a creative approach to their solution as they are inherently Human Activity Systems(HAS).
¬MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVE CONCEPT
Unbounded Systems Thinking(UST) or as Ian Mitroff calls “The Fifth Way of knowing” or as Churchman’s philosophy calls “Singerian IS” is about adopting the Multiple Perspectives when making an enquiry.
The value in using multiple, T, O, and P perspectives lies in their ability to yield unique insights. None by itself suffices to deal with a complex system, but together they give a richer base for decision and action. Each dimension facilitates comprehension.[1]
All complex problems –especially social ones, involves multiplicity of actors, various scientific / technical disciplines and various organizations and diverse individuals. In principle, each sees a problem differently and thus generates a distinct perspective on it. Both the problems discussed in Task 1 and Task 2 are good examples of such problems and therefore the Multiple Perspective Concept of the Unbounded Systems Thinking strives enable us to understand the problems of IS design better.
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF UST OR SINGERIAN IS
Strengths
• As mentioned earlier its major strength of UST is its suitability to undefined ill-structured problems where other modes of enquiry fail. It can be applied to a wide spectrum of “messy” systems ranging from a corporate acquisition and integration of a new technology into a business unit to the prediction process in a public power administration.
• UST includes all the other inquiry systems as sub-models and adds to the enquiry the notion of Human Activity Systems. It therefore yields to the
Bibliography: [1] The Unbounded Mind –Breaking the Chains of Traditional Business Thinking. Ian Mitroff & Harold A. Linstone [6] Malhotra Y (2000). From Information management To Knowledge Management: Beyond the ‘Hi-Tech Hidebound’ Systems. In K. Srikantaiah & M.E.D. Koenig (EDs). Knowledge Management for the Information Professional. Medford, N.J.: Information Today Inc, 37-61