A System of Systems Methodology - Revision history

Laouris at 09:52, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:52:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:52, 3 February 2023
Line 30:		Line 30:
	\| 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, 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 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.

Laouris at 09:48, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:48:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:48, 3 February 2023
Line 16:		Line 16:
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="col"\|		! scope="col"\|
	! scope="col" style="width: 60%"\| Unitary		! scope="col" style="width: 50%"\| Unitary
	! scope="col" style="width: 40%"\| Pluralist		! scope="col" style="width: 50%"\| Pluralist
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="row"\| Mechanical		! scope="row"\| Mechanical

Laouris at 09:47, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:47:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:47, 3 February 2023
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" style="width: 85%;"		{\| class="wikitable" style="width: 100%;"
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="col"\|		! scope="col"\|
	! scope="col" style="width: 50%"\| Unitary		! scope="col" style="width: 60%"\| Unitary
	! scope="col" style="width: 50%"\| Pluralist		! scope="col" style="width: 40%"\| Pluralist
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="row"\| Mechanical		! scope="row"\| Mechanical

Laouris at 09:47, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:47:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:47, 3 February 2023
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: 85%;"
	\|-		\|-
	! 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

Laouris at 09:43, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:43:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:43, 3 February 2023
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
	\|}		\|}

Laouris at 09:41, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:41:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:41, 3 February 2023
Line 24:		Line 24:
	* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.		* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.
	* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.		* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.
			\| Mechanical-pluralist contexts responded to the kind of systems design method proposed by Churchman, and by Mason and Mitroff in their 'strategic assumption surfacing and testing' methodology.
			\|-
			! 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.		Suitable for tackling problems associated with systemic-unitary contexts.
	\|-
	~~! scope="row"\| Systemic~~
	~~\| Mechanical-pluralist contexts responded to the kind of systems design method proposed by Churchman, and by Mason and Mitroff in their 'strategic assumption surfacing and testing' methodology.~~
	\| 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 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
	\|}		\|}

Laouris at 09:39, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:39:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:39, 3 February 2023
Line 21:		Line 21:
	! scope="row"\| Mechanical		! scope="row"\| Mechanical
	\|		\|
	* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.
	* Assumes that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides, so the context must be unitary.		* Assumes that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides, so the context must be unitary.
	* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.		* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.
	\| Cybernetic approaches, such as advocated by Beer and in the socio-technical systems literature		* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.
			\| Cybernetic approaches, such as advocated by Beer and in the socio-technical systems literature.
	Suitable for tackling problems associated with systemic-unitary contexts.		Suitable for tackling problems associated with systemic-unitary contexts.
	\|-		\|-

Laouris at 09:37, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:37:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:37, 3 February 2023
Line 20:		Line 20:
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="row"\| Mechanical		! scope="row"\| Mechanical
	\|* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.		\|
			* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.
	* Assumes that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides, so the context must be unitary.		* Assumes that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides, so the context must be unitary.
	* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.		* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.

Laouris at 09:36, 3 February 2023

2023-02-03T09:36:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:36, 3 February 2023
Line 20:		Line 20:
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="row"\| Mechanical		! scope="row"\| Mechanical
	\| ~~classical~~ OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems. ~~It is taken as given~~ that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides so the context must be unitary. ~~They then try to represent the~~ system in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.		\|* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.
			* Assumes that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides, so the context must be unitary.
			* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.
	\| 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.		Suitable for tackling problems associated with systemic-unitary contexts.

Laouris: Matrix

2023-02-03T09:34:03Z

Matrix

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:34, 3 February 2023
Line 20:		Line 20:
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="row"\| Mechanical		! scope="row"\| Mechanical
	\| ~~idea~~		\| classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems. It is taken as given that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides so the context must be unitary. They then try to represent the system in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.
	\| ~~form~~		\| Cybernetic approaches, such as advocated by Beer and in the socio-technical systems literature
			Suitable for tackling problems associated with systemic-unitary contexts.
	\|-		\|-
	! scope="row"\| Systemic		! scope="row"\| Systemic
	\| ~~receptacle~~		\| Mechanical-pluralist contexts responded to the kind of systems design method proposed by Churchman, and by Mason and Mitroff in their 'strategic assumption surfacing and testing' methodology.
	\| ~~matter~~		\| 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
	\|}		\|}

	mechanical-unitary contexts classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems. It is taken as given that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides so the context must be unitary. They then try to represent the system in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.

	~~Cybernetic approaches, such as advocated by Beer and in the socio-technical systems literature~~

	~~Suitable for tackling problems associated with systemic-unitary contexts.~~

	~~Mechanical-pluralist contexts responded to the kind of systems design method proposed by Churchman, and by Mason and Mitroff in their 'strategic assumption surfacing and testing' methodology.~~


	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