A System of Systems Methodology: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 13: Line 13:
Problem-contexts, it followed, could also exhibit a 'unitary' or 'pluralist' character. Bringing the two dimensions of 'systems' and 'decision- makers' together, to form a four-celled matrix, yielded a classification of problem-contexts as mechanical-unitary, systemic-unitary, mechanical-pluralist and systemic-pluralist. Some brief justifi- cation was provided for the choice of the two dimensions forming the matrix.
Problem-contexts, it followed, could also exhibit a 'unitary' or 'pluralist' character. Bringing the two dimensions of 'systems' and 'decision- makers' together, to form a four-celled matrix, yielded a classification of problem-contexts as mechanical-unitary, systemic-unitary, mechanical-pluralist and systemic-pluralist. Some brief justifi- cation was provided for the choice of the two dimensions forming the matrix.


{| class="wikitable"
{| class="wikitable" style="width: 100%;"
|-
|-
! scope="col"|
! scope="col"|
! scope="col"| Unitary
! scope="col" style="width: 50%"| Unitary
! scope="col"| Pluralist
! scope="col" style="width: 50%"| Pluralist
|-
|-
! scope="row"| Mechanical
! scope="row"| Mechanical
Line 28: Line 28:
! scope="row"| Systemic
! scope="row"| Systemic
| Cybernetic approaches, such as advocated by Beer and in the socio-technical systems literature.
| Cybernetic approaches, such as advocated by Beer and in the socio-technical systems literature.
Suitable for tackling problems associated with systemic-unitary contexts.
| The soft systems thinking proposed by Ackoff and by Checkland could minister to problems set in systemic-pluralist problem-contexts. For example, Ackoff's 'interactive planning' exhibited, through the participative principle, a method to cope with pluralism and, through the proposed design for a 'responsive decision system', an attempt to come to terms with systemicity.
| The soft systems thinking proposed by Ackoff and by Checkland could minister to problems set in systemic-pluralist problem-contexts. For example, Ackof's 'interactive planning' exhibited, through the participative principle, a method to cope with pluralism and, through the proposed design for a 'responsive decision system', an attempt to come to terms with systemicity
|}
|}
The above analysis is:
* Of practical importance because it can assist problem solvers to choose an appropriate methodology for the particular circumstances they faced.
* Its theoretical message is that OR and the other systems-based methodologies, far from being in competition with one another, could be used in an informed way, as a set of complementary tools, to tackle a much greater range of problem types.

Navigation menu