Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
References

DSS design: a systemic view of decision support

Profile image of Gadi AriavGadi Ariav

1985, Communications of the ACM

https://doi.org/10.1145/4372.4374
visibility

…

description

34 pages

link

1 file

Abstract
sparkles

AI

The paper presents a comprehensive, systemic view of Decision Support Systems (DSS), integrating diverse perspectives found in the literature into a coherent body of knowledge. It defines classical system attributes relevant to DSS, examines the implications of the systemic approach for DSS design, and argues for a context-driven methodology that prioritizes the role and environment of DSS. The study highlights the necessity of understanding environmental conditions and their influence on DSS architectures and components, suggesting that meaningful advancements in DSS design stem from this systemic understanding.

Related papers

Information Systems and Systems Theory
Guisseppi Forgionne

Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, 2005

View PDFchevron_right
Book Review: A useful reference source for systems thinking
Shamim Bodhanya
View PDFchevron_right
The Systems Approach View from Professor Andrew P. Sage
M. Kljajic

International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach, 2000

View PDFchevron_right
Systems Theory as the Foundation for Understanding Systems
Joseph Bradley

Systems Engineering, 2013

As currently used, systems theory is lacking a universally agreed upon definition. The purpose of this paper is to offer a resolution by articulating a formal definition of systems theory. This definition is presented as a unified group of specific propositions which are brought together by way of an axiom set to form a system construct: systems theory. This construct affords systems practitioners and theoreticians with a prescriptive set of axioms by which a system must operate; conversely, any set of entities identified as a system may be characterized by this set of axioms. Given its multidisciplinary theoretical foundation and discipline-agnostic framework, systems theory, as it is presented here, is posited as a general approach to understanding system behavior.

View PDFchevron_right
Defining " System " : a Comprehensive Approach
Scott Jackson, PhD, James Martin, Hillary Sillitto, Dorothy Mckinney

Over the past decades, a common definition of the term system has eluded researchers and practitioners alike. We reviewed over 100 current and historical definitions of system in an effort to understand perspectives and to propose the most comprehensive definition of this term. There is much common ground in different families of definition of system, but there are also important and significant differences. Some stem from different belief systems and worldviews, while others are due to a pragmatic desire to establish a clear definition for system within a particular community, disregarding wider considerations. In either case, it limits the effectiveness of various system communities' efforts to communicate, collaborate, and learn from the experience of other communities. We discovered that by considering a wide typology of systems, Bertalanffy's General Systems Theory provides a basis for a general, self-consistent sensible framework, capable of accommodating and showing the relationships amongst the variety of different definitions of and belief systems pertaining to system. Emergence, the appearance of a new phenomenon or capability as a result of relation or interaction between objects, is key in differentiating between objects that are systems and those that are not. Hence we propose a family of definitions, related by the common theme of emergence, which is in line with both the realist and constructivist worldviews, and covers real and conceptual systems. We believe this better reflects the current scope of systems engineering and is required to support the aspirations expressed in INCOSE SE Vision 2025. Motivation There is a need to clarify the meaning and usage of the word system, because current differences in interpretation by individuals and communities are leading to miscommunication. As this term serves different and important purposes, misinterpretations should be avoided, because they can lead to potentially adverse consequences. Our effort is to synthesize a definition, or a family of definitions, which can be shared by all those who use the term system. A well-conceived definition should enable the following objectives:  communicate the meaning of system more effectively across communities of research and practice to achieve common goals,

View PDFchevron_right
In Pursuit of Systems Theories for Describing and Analyzing Systems in Organizations
Steven Alter

2018

This research essay illustrates how the IS discipline might pursue systems theories with the goal of understanding IS in new ways, generating innovative and useful systems theories, and achieving more impact in the world. It discusses recent articles that compare different perspectives and expectations related to theories and theorizing in the IS discipline. It uses the term domain-specific systems theory (DSST) to accentuate the difference between general systems theory (GST) and specific systems theories. It provides examples illustrating how DSSTs can illuminate important concerns that variance and process perspectives do not address directly. It shows how work system theory (WST) and several of its extensions are DSSTs that provide useful lenses for understanding, analyzing, and theorizing about systems in organizations. It concludes by summarizing ways in which the IS discipline might welcome systems theories more wholeheartedly.

View PDFchevron_right
General Systems Theory: A Guiding Framework for IS Research
Shivraj Kanungo

2007

General systems theory (GST) holds the potential to address some of the issues that information systems (IS) field faces today. This paper addresses the question whether the concepts, principles and approaches prevalent in GST can be gainfully employed for studying and conducting research in IS. Using the concepts embedded in GST, we analyze the problem of "fragmented adhocracy" in IS research. We describe how the various disparate and apparently incongruent viewpoints and findings that have emerged from IS research can be organized, reconciles and leveraged using systems concepts. We also show the utility of the systems approach in studying and analyzing IS problems, specifically the IS value problem. In conclusion, we suggest that systems concepts, and therefore GST, can be applied at two levels in IS field -firstly, for helping understand and organize the body of knowledge in IS and secondly, as a guide for conducting IS research.

View PDFchevron_right
Systems Theories: Their origins, foundations, and development
Stanley Krippner

Advances in psychology, 1998

In it's broadest conception, a "system" may be described as a complex of interacting components together with the relationships among them that permit the identification of a boundary-maintaining entity or process. Since social and psychological phenomena tend to resist quantitative modeling by posing basic difficulties already on the plane of boundary identification, alternative approaches must be relied upon. One such approach draws on the body of knowledge derived from General System Theory and its application in the domain of human activity systems.

View PDFchevron_right
Understanding Elements of System Design
Jon Turner

1986

View PDFchevron_right
Philosophical Aspects of Information Systems: Methodology, Theory, Practice and Critique PAIS II July 1998 University of the West of England, Bristol Information Systems Development: Who Owns the Decision?
Cathal Brugha

Abstract. Adjustment decision making is shown to be based on having a balance between pairs of alternatives, leading to two, four and eight kinds of activities, the latter which correspond to McKinsey's Seven Ss. Development decision making is shown to have three extroverted levels embedded within three introverted levels, and to underpin Maslow's hierarchy, Jung's thinking types and the Systems Development Life Cycle.

View PDFchevron_right

References (16)

  1. Ackoff, R.L, Creating The Corporate Future, John Wiley and Sons, New York, N.Y, , 1981, [Alter 801 Alter, S, Decision Support Systems: Current Practices and Continuing Challenges, Addison-Wesley , Reaiiing , Mass, , 1980, [Anthony 65 1 Anthony, R.N. Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Harvard University GSBA, Studies in Management Control, Cambridge, Mass,, 1965. [Bennett 831 Bennett, J.L, (editor). Building Decision Support Systems.
  2. Berger, P. and Edelman, F. IRIS: A Transaction-Based DSS for Human Resources Management.
  3. Database 8(3) : 22-29, 1977. [Bonczek 811 Bonczek, R.H., Holsapple, C.W., and Winston, A,B. Foundations of Decision Support Systems. Academic Press, New York, 198 1.
  4. Bonczek, R.H., Holsapple, C.W., and Winston, A.B. The Evolution from MIS to DSS: Extension of Data Management to Model Management.
  5. In M,J. Ginzberg, W.R. Reitman, and E,A, Stohr (editors), Decision Support Systems, pages 6 1-78. Nor th-Holland , Amsterdam, 1982. [BusinessWeek 83 I BusinessWeek. A Fierce Battle Brews Over the Simplest Software Yet. BusinessWeek :114-115, November 21, 1983, [Churchman 681 Churchman, C.W. The Systea Approach, Dell Publishing b e , Inc,, New York, 1968. [Emery 691 Emery, J,C, Organizational Planning and Control Systems: Theory and Technology.
  6. Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York, N.Y, , 1969. Center for Digital Economy Research Stem School of Business IVorking Paper IS-84-8 1
  7. Ginzberg 821 Cinzberg, M.J., and Stohr, E.A. Decision Support Systems: Issues and Perspectives, In M. J, Ginzberg, W.R. Reitman, and E.A. Stohr (editors), Decision Support Systems, pages 9-32, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1982.
  8. Ginzberg , M. J. DSS Success: Measurement and Facilitation, In C.W. Holsapple and A.B. Uhinston (editors), Data-Base Management : he or^ and Applications, pages 367-387.
  9. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1983.
  10. Gorry, G.A., and Scott-Morton, M.S. A Framework for Management Information Systems. Sloan Management Review 13(1):55-70, Winter, 1971, Gorry, G.A., and Krumland, R.B. Artificial Intelligence Research and Decision Support Sys tems , In J.L. Bennett (editor), Building Decision Support Systems, pages 205-219. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass., 1983. [ Huber 83 1 Huber, G.P. Cognitive Style and DSS Designs: Much Ado About Nothing? Management Science 29 (5) :567-579, Hay, 1983. [Keen 76 1
  11. Keen, P.G.W. lInteractivet Computer Systems for Managers: A Modest Proposal.
  12. Sloan Management Review : 1-17, Fall, 1976, [Keen 801
  13. Keen, P.G.W. Adaptive Design for Decision Support Systems. Data Base 12(1/2):31-40, Fall, 1980.
  14. Keen, P.G.W, and Garnbino, T.J. Building A Decision Support System: The Mythical Man- Month Revisited.
  15. In J.L. Bennett (editor), Building Decision Support Systems, pages 133-172. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co,, Reading, Mass., 1983. [Eonsynski 801 Konsynski, B. On the Structure of a Generalized Model Management Sys tems .
  16. In Proc. of the 14th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pages 19-31. Western Periodicals, North Hollywood, CA, January, 1980. Center for Digital Economy Research Stem School of Business IVorking Paper IS-84-8 1

Related papers

0 Objectives: 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Over View of System Analysis and Design 1.3 Business System Concepts 1.4 Characteristics of a System 1.5 Elements of a System 1.6 Types of Systems 1.7 Systems Models 1.8 Categories of Information
Lucky Kohli

Looking at a system and determining how adequately it functions, the changes to be made and the quality of the output are parts of system analysis.

View PDFchevron_right
The systems approach: Its variety of aspects
Richard Mattessich

Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1982

View PDFchevron_right
Rethinking "Systems" in Information Systems (Systematically)
Raymond Panko

European Conference on Information Systems, 2012

This paper argues that the information systems (IS) field needs to widen its focus in three directions: from the systems development life cycle to the full systems life cycle, from information systems to business systems, and, most fundamentally, from Type I information work (clerical) to Type II information work (the work of line managers, staff managers, and professionals). This expanded vision will require new research and teaching methods. Most fundamentally, we need to embrace exploratory descriptive research in order to understand these areas before we can do effective theory-based empirical research.

View PDFchevron_right
Foundations of Systems Thinking: The Structure-System Paradigm
Sergio Barile

2011

ABSTRACT The aim this contribution is to propose a framework of the key concepts of a systems thinking perspective to adopt when analyzing and interpreting business as well as social phenomena. Recognizing the limits of the traditional analytical-reductionist approach, on the basis of a systems thinking, the paper underlines the need for recovering a whole view of phenomena and suggests to couple a structure-based approach, focused on the analysis of parts and relations and adequate for describing how the investigated phenomenon is made, with a systems-based approach, focused on interaction and necessary when interpreting the dynamics of functioning of the observed phenomenon. In this way, the systems path appears as a bridge between a reductionist and a holistic approach. After a definition of the qualifying elements of systems thinking, the implications of the passage from a structure-based to a systems-based view are discussed by deepening the interpretative contribution of the structure-system dualism as derived from the more general distinction between a static and a dynamic view.

View PDFchevron_right
The Process of Systems Design: Some Problems, Principles and Perspectives
Jon Turner

1985

THE PROCESS OF SYSTEMS DESIGN: SOME PROBLEMS, PRINCIPLES AND PERSPECTIVES Abstract This paper explores issues that are central to designing, and particularly to the design of information systems. It portrays ...

View PDFchevron_right

Cited by

Designing with dialogue charts: a qualitative content analysis of end-user designers' experiences with a software engineering design tool
linda jo calloway

Information Systems Journal, 1995

Abstract. Software engineering tools used by designers are critical to most systems development methodologies, and successful methodologies are critical to improved productivity. However, the way in which designers use and relate to software engineering tools, whether computer assisted or not, has received little attention in the design literature. The purpose of this study is to gain insight into how people perceive the process of using design tools. The study is a qualitative analysis of interview information from participants in a field experiment. Four teams of student designers used various design tools during the development of interactive information systems typical of those that might be developed by sophisticated end-users. The research reported here is an exploratory study aimed at understanding how designers use one of these tools, the dialogue charts. The broad range of purposes included the uses predicted by the reference literature on design. However, the end-user designers also used the tool opportunistically — they found a broader range of tool usage than the literature on design tools predicted. For example, they consistently used the tool as a communications vehicle among different phases of design and development. The results show that the relationships these ‘end-user designers’ developed with the target tool are expressed in highly emotional language. These attitudes are tightly coupled with the purposes for which the designers use the tool. The methodology uses a field experiment as a treatment and a semistructured interview with a hidden agenda for gathering data. The data analysis techniques draw on the concepts of discovering grounded theory as described by Glaser and Strauss. They further draw on the concepts of qualitative content analysis synthesized by Krippendortf and the qualitative data analysis methods described by Miles and Huberman.

View PDFchevron_right
A Survey of CSCW Systems
Tom Rodden

Interacting with Computers, 1991

Over the last decade, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) has emerged as an identifiable research area which focuses on the role of the computer in group work. CSCW is a generic term which combines the understanding of the nature of group working with the enabling technologies of computer networking, systems support and applications. This paper examines the classes of system which have emerged to support cooperative working. A framework for characterising and describing CSCW systems is presented and four major classes of cooperative system identified. Each of these classes of cooperative system are examined highlighting their general characteristics and applicability to CSCW.

View PDFchevron_right
Decision support systems research: current state and trends
Sean Eom

Industrial Management & Data Systems, 1999

View PDFchevron_right
The organizational fit of information systems
Juhani Iivari

Information Systems Journal, 1992

One can expect that the fit, match or congruence between an information system and its organizational context will be of increasing importance as information systems become more and more integral parts of organizations. Existing IS research has largely neglected the theoretical analysis of the concept 'fit', however, even though it has been widely used in a 'pre-theoretical'sense. The analysis of the concept of 'organizational fit of an information system'put forward in this article is essentially based on the recent analysis of 'fir in Contingency theory, suggesting three interpretations for the concept: a selection approach, an interaction approach and a sysrems approach. A review of the IS literature on the organizational fit of information systems indicates a lack of any cumulative tradition in existing empirical contingency research into information systems and dominance of the selection approach. Because o f the two limitations, tbis paper regards any definite assessment of the potential prospects of contingency research into information systems as overhasty and proposes a framework for future research into the siiuation dependence and arganizational fit of information systems which integrates contingency research into information systems, contingency research into IS impacts and contingency research info the IS adoption (development/ implementation) process.

View PDFchevron_right
Intelligent decision support for flexible manufacturing: Design and implementation of a knowledge-based simulator
Kurt Pflughoeft

Omega, 1996

There is considerable research in decision making for the flexible manufacturing systems (FMS) domain. Much of it tends to be fragmentary due to differences in assumptions, constraints, modeling techniques and solution strategies. This paper suggests a common basis for support of FMS decision making as an attempt to alleviate these problems. It describes the architecture of an intelligent knowledge-based simulator KBSim, that provides systematic FMS research capability. KBSim is applied to an industrial FMS scheduling problem to reduce both mean flow time and tardiness when compared to several common scheduling heuristics. It is also used in a research-oriented modified job shop scheduling application. In both cases, it outperformed traditional decision making heuristics. Its efficiency, ease of use, and portability suggest that KBSim will prove useful in the automation of adaptive system control, facilitating periodic review of FMS decisions, and giving management a competitive edge.

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved