If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Effective Technical & Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems (ETHICS). What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Effective Technical & Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems (ETHICS) paper right on time.
Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Effective Technical & Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems (ETHICS), therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Effective Technical & Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems (ETHICS) paper at affordable prices!
Ethics, devised by Enid Mumford of the Manchester Business School is a methodology based on a participative approach to information systems development. In addition, it encompasses the socio-technical view that for a system to be effective the technology must fit closely with social and organisational factors. In particular, this means that an improved quality of working life and enhanced job satisfaction of the users must be a major objective of the systems design process. This is not simply to guard the interests of the users in the introduction of computing and technology, although this is obviously of major importance, but it is an essential prerequisite to achieve effective systems from an organisational and managerial viewpoint. To support her case, Mumford points to the failure of many traditionally performed system implementations, where technical and economic objectives were the only considerations.
The philosophy of ETHICS is different from most information system development methodologies (the fact that the philosophy is explicitly stated is a noticeable difference in its own right!). The philosophy is one which has evolved from organisational behaviour and perceives the development of computer systems not as a technical issue but as an organisational issue fundamentally concerned with the process of change. It is based on a socio-technical approach, where socio-technical is defined as being-
one which recognises the interaction of technology and people and produces work systems which are both technically efficient and have social characteristics which lead to high job satisfaction.
Mumford has also defined job satisfaction as-
the attainment of a good fit between what the employee is seeking from his work - his job needs, expectations and aspirations - and what he is required to do in his job - the organisational job requirements which mould his experience.
In order to ascertain how good the fit is, a theory for measuring job satisfaction has been developed on the various views of what is important in job satisfaction. Five areas have been identified-
. The knowledge fit a good fit exists when the employees believe their skills are being adequately used and that their knowledge is being developed to make them increasingly competent. It is recognised that different people have widely different expectations in this area, some want their skills developed while others are content with an easy life.
. The psychological fit a job must fit the employees status, advancement and work interest. These needs are recognised to vary according to age, background, education and class.
. The efficiency fit this is composed of three areas. First, the effort-reward bargain, which is the amount the employer is prepared to pay as opposed to the view of the employee about how much he is worth. While this is probably an area of prime importance to management, it is not necessarily a prime motivator for an employee. Second, work controls, which may be tight or loose but need to fit the employees expectations. Third, supervisory controls, such as necessary back-up facilities e.g. information, materials, specialist knowledge etc.
. The task-structure fit this measures the degree to which the employees tasks are regarded as being demanding and fulfilling. Particularly important are the number of skills required, the number and nature of targets, plus the feedback mechanism, the identity, distinctiveness and importance of tasks and the degree of autonomy and control over the tasks that the employee has. This measure is seen to be strongly related to technology and its method of employment. Technology can affect the task-structure fit substantially and can reduce the fit by simplification and repetitiveness. However, it is also seen as a variable which can be improved dramatically by designing the technical system to meet the requirements of the task-structure fit.
. The ethical fit this is also described as the social value fit and measures whether the values of the employee match those of the employer organisation. In some organisations, performance is everything, whilst others value other factors, e.g. service. Companies can be paternal or welfare oriented while others aim to achieve the characteristics of success, etc. The better the match of an organisations values with those of the employee, the higher the level of job satisfaction.
A second philosophical strand of the ETHICS methodology is participation. This is the involvement of those affected by a system being part of the decision-making process concerning the design and operation of that system. Users are involved in the decisions concerning the work process and how the use of technology might improve their job satisfaction.
In ETHICS the development of computer-based systems is seen as a change process and therefore it is likely to involve conflicts of interest between all the participants or actors in that process. These conflicts are not simply between management and worker, but often between worker and worker and manager and manager. The successful implementation of new systems is therefore a process of negotiation between the affected and interested parties. Obviously major affected and interested parties include the users themselves and if these people are left out of the decision-making process, the process of change is unlikely to be a success. This is not just because of resulting disaffection amongst the user group but, more positively, because they have so much to contribute in making the implementation a success. They are probably the most knowledgeable about the current workplace situation and the future requirements.
Mumford describes this situation as-
All change involves some conflicts of interest. To be resolved, these conflicts need to be recognised, brought out into the open, negotiated and a solution arrived at which largely meets the interests of all the parties in the situation...successful change strategies require institutional mechanisms which enable all these interests to be represented, and participation provides these.
It is recognised in practice that participation means different things to different people and that parties involved may have quite different reasons for wanting participation and quite different expectations concerning the benefits. Management may see it as a way of achieving changes that would otherwise be rejected.
Mumford distinguishes between three levels of participation-
Consultative participation is the lowest level of participation and leaves the main design tasks to the systems analysts, but tries to ensure that all staff in the user department are consulted about the change. The systems analysts are encouraged to provide opportunity for increasing job satisfaction when redesigning the system. It may be possible to organise users into groups to discuss aspects of the new system and make suggestions to the analysts. Most advocates of the traditional approach to system development would probably accept that there is a need for this level of participation in the design process.
Representative participation requires a higher level of involvement of the user department staff. Here, the design group consists of users representatives and systems analysts. No longer is it expected that the technologist dictates to the users the design of their work system. Users have an equal say in any decision.
Consensus participation attempts to involve all user department staff throughout the design process, indeed this process is user driven. It may be more difficult to make quick decisions, but it has the merit of making the design decisions those of the staff as a whole. Sometimes the sets of tasks in a system can be distinguished and those people involved in each task set make their own design decisions.
The content of participation concerns the issues and the boundaries of activities that are within the remit of participation. Generally, prior to any participation, management will want to keep certain things as their own prerogative.
Participation usually involves setting up a Steering committee and a Design Group or groups. The Steering committee sets the guidelines for the Design Groups and consists of senior managers from the affected areas of the organisation, senior managers from management services and personnel and senior trade union officials (if the organisation is unionised). The Design group designs the new system including
Choice of hardware and software
Human-computer interaction
Workplace re-organisation
Allocation of responsibilities
All major interests should be represented, including each section and function, grade, age-group etc. The Design Group includes systems analysts, although their role is not the normal one of analyst and designer, but one of educator and advisor.
The Stages of the Methodology
1. Why change?
The first meeting of the design group considers this rather fundamental question and addresses the current problems and opportunities. The result should be a convincing statement of the need for change. Presumably, if no convincing statement of change is derived, the process stops there, although the methodology does not make this point clear.
. System Boundaries
The design group identifies the boundaries of the system it is designing and where it interfaces with other systems. Four areas are considered business activities affected (e.g. sales, finance and personnel); existing technology affected; parts of the organisation affected (e.g. departments and sections); and parts of the organisation affected (e.g. suppliers and customers).
. Description of the existing system
This is to educate the design group as to how the existing system works. In practice, it is found that people will know the detail of their own jobs and those that they interact with directly, but will probably have little knowledge of the whole system. This step requires the Design Group to make two kinds of description. A horizontal input/output analysis and a vertical analysis showing different levels of work complexity and importance. The latter is based on the cybernetic model of a viable system developed by Prof. Stafford Beer.
E.g.
The vertical description of the department requires an analysis of activities at five different levels.
The first and lowest level consists of operating activities. These are the day-to-day or regular tasks that enable the principal functions of the department to be carried out. These should have been described in the input/output analysis.
The second and more complex level consists of activities directed at preventing work problems occurring and correcting these when they do occur. These are called problem prevention/solution activities.
The third level consists of activities and tasks that have to be co-ordinated within the department and between the department and other departments and sections. These are co-ordination activities.
The fourth level is the important, but often neglected aspect of development. What products, services etc. handled by the department need to be developed and improved. These are development activities.
Lastly, comes the fifth and most complex level of control. How is the total department controlled so that it works efficiently, meets its targets and achieves its objectives. These are control activities.
. Definition of Key Objectives
The Design Group considers the fundamental aspects of areas lying within the system boundary. This exercise is performed by considering three basic questions.
The first question considered is Why do these exist? What is their primary role and purpose?
The second question is Given this role and purpose what should be their responsibilities and functions?
The third question is How far do their present activities match what they should be doing?
Answers to the first and second questions provide the information to list key objectives. These are the important objectives which the areas under consideration should strive to achieve. The design task from this point on is to create a new system which will achieve these key objectives.
While these key objectives are often easy to identify occasionally attention must be paid to the reasons why the unit was set up, how its mission was defined at that time and how relevant that definition is to its future mission.
E.g.
Step 4 - Examples of key objectives of the Purchase Invoice Dept.
Key objectives are to ensure that the Company obtains goods and services from suppliers which are of the right quality and price and arrive on the date promised. Also to provide a satisfying, stimulating work environment for Purchase Invoice and Treasurers Dept. staff.Relationships with suppliers are often very poor due to inaccurate or delayed payment of suppliers accounts. This is affecting the quality of the suppliers service.
5. Definition of Key Tasks
Once key objectives have been specified then it is not difficult to ask and answer the following question. What are the key tasks which must be carried out to achieve these objectives?
Some of these key tasks will already be carried out effectively; some may be badly done, and some not done at all.
E.g.
Step 5 - Examples of key tasks of the Purchase Invoice Dept.
The fast, correct payment of suppliers accountsThe fast, correct answering of suppliers queriesThe fast, accurate notification to suppliers of rejected goods and requests for financial compensationThe monitoring and improvement of the suppliers service
. Key Information Needs
As a principal contribution of a new computer-based work system will be more accurate and timely information, the key information requirements associated with the key tasks should now be specified. The five level model used to describe work in Step can be used again here.
E.g.
Step 6 - Example of key information needs
Operating Information Information on suppliers and the state of their accounts Information on payments madeProblem prevention/solution information Accurate goods received information Which suppliers have not been paid and whyCo-ordination information Which receipts have been transferred from Purchase Invoice to Treasurers Dept. for paymentDevelopment Information Which suppliers are antagonistic to the Company and whyControl information The extent to which goods and services provided by suppliers are meeting company quality standards
. Diagnosis of Efficiency Needs
Efficiency needs can be identified by looking for variances. A variance is a tendency for a system or part of a system to deviate from some expected or desired standard or norm. In other words it is a part of the system where problems tend to occur. Variances can be of two kinds. Key or systemic variances and operating variances.
Key variances are potential problems areas which cannot be eliminated although they may be effectively controlled. They are built into the system and arise from key objectives and tasks. They frequently arise at the interface between the system and other systems. For example, a production department will always have potential problems in its relationship with the Sales department.
Operating variances are not so deeply embedded in the system and are weak links arising from earlier system design activities. When a new system is designed many of these variances can be eliminated altogether.
E.g.
. Diagnosis of job satisfaction needs.
The ETHICS method gives efficiency and job satisfaction equal weight. The argument being that the two reinforce each other. An efficient, well-run department reduces frustration and increases job satisfaction. Diagnosis of job satisfaction is achieved by use of a standard questionnaire provided by the methodology. The Design Group may adjust the questionnaire to fit local conditions. The results are discussed democratically and the underlying reasons established for any areas where there are poor job satisfaction fits. In addition, formulations for improving the situation in the new design are made and everyone is encouraged to play a major part in this design work. Where there have been knowledge or task-structure problems of fit, these are susceptible to improvement by a redesign of a system. Other areas of poor fit, such as effort-reward or ethical, may be improved somewhat in this way, but will probably require changes in personnel policies, or more radically, organisational ethos.
. Future Analysis
Most new work systems today have limited lives because of major changes in their environment. These changes can be the result of many factors - changes in legislation, in markets, in labour availability and in technology.
A new system must therefore be able to adopt to change and must be designed to do so. This means that it must have enough built-in flexibility to cope with future change.
A broad assessment of the required amount and focus of system flexibility is derived from an identification and analysis of future changes likely to affect the system within the next five years.
A Design Group may need to talk with internal and external experts in order to assess the nature and impact of such change.
Changes likely to affect a company are
Changes in available technology
Changes in Legal requirements
Changes in economic factors (e.g. product and labour markets).
Changes in employee or customer attitudes, expectations or fashions.
Changes in company organisation (e.g. the merging of plants, departments or sections).
10. Specifying and weighting efficiency and job satisfaction needs and objectives.
Mumford identifies this as the key step in the whole methodology. Objectives are set according to the diagnosis activities of the three previous steps. The achievement of an agreed and ranked set of objectives can be a very difficult task and must involve everyone, not just the Design Group itself. Often objectives conflict and the priorities of the various constituencies may be very different. These differences may not all be resolved, but one of the stated benefits of ETHICS is that at least these differences are aired. Ultimately, a list of priority and secondary objectives is produced. The criterion for the systems design is that all priority objectives must be met along with as many of the secondary ones as possible. At this stage a certain amount of iteration is recommended, to review the key objectives and tasks from steps 4 and 5.
. The Organisational design of the new system
If possible, this should be performed in parallel with the technical design of step 1, because they invariably intertwine. The organisational changes which are needed to meet the efficiency and job satisfaction objectives are specified. There are likely to be a variety of ways of achieving the objectives, and between three and six organisational options should be elaborated. The Design Group specifies in more detail the key tasks of step 5 and addresses the following questions, the answers forming the basic data for the organisational design process
· What are the operating activities that are required?
· What are the problem prevention/solution activities that are required?
· What are the co-ordination activities that are required?
· What are the development activities that are required?
· What are the control activities that are required?
· What special skills are required, if any, of the staff?
· Are there any key roles or relationships that exist that must be addressed in the new design?
Each organisational option is rated for its ability to meet the primary and secondary objectives of step 10, and should identify the sections, work-groups and individuals, their responsibilities and tasks.
In order to meet job satisfaction objectives, it is almost inevitable that the design group will have to consider the socio-technical principles of organisational design. The socio-technical approach is the antithesis of Taylorism, which is to break each job down into its elemental parts and rearrange it into an efficient combination. The traditional car assembly line which requires its operators to perform small, routine, repetitive jobs, is regarded as the ultimate example of Taylorism in action. The requirements of the machine are given priority over the requirements of the human being. This has, it is argued, inevitably led to a bored, disaffected and ultimately inefficient workforce.
Although ETHICS uses aspects of socio-technical design, the socio-technical school assumes a given technology, whereas in ETHICS, the technology is part of the design. Further they assume shop-floor situations, rather than the office situations which concern ETHICS.
Mumford recommends the consideration of three types of work organisation patterns-
· the first is task variety and involves giving an individual more variety in work by providing more than one task to be performed or by rotating people around a number of different tasks. This is the more traditional approach, but is limited especially where the expectations of job satisfaction are more sophisticated.
· in this case, the principles of job-enrichment might be more appropriate. This is where work is organised in such a way that a number of different skills, including judgmental ones are introduced. In particular, it involves the handling of problems and the organisation of work by the individual without supervision.. This may require an increased skill level on behalf of the individual, but leads to enhanced job satisfaction. A further stage in job enrichment is the incorporation of development aspects into a job. This means that an individual has the freedom to change the way the job is performed. This leads to constant review and the implementation of new ideas and methods. Obviously this cannot be introduced into every job, but there are probably more opportunities than at first imagined.
· as important as individual jobs is the concept of what Mumford calls self-managing groups. Here, groups are formed that have responsibility for a relatively wide spectrum of the tasks to be performed. These groups are preferably multi-skilled, so that each member is competent to carry out all the tasks required of the group. Again, self-managing groups are not always possible and require a good deal of management goodwill at first, but nevertheless can prove very effective.
1. Technical Options
The various technical options that might be appropriate, including hardware, software and the design of the human-computer interface, are specified. Each option is evaluated in the same way as the organisational options, that is, against efficiency, job satisfaction and future change objectives. As mentioned in Step 11, the organisational and technical options should be considered simultaneously, as often one option implies certain necessary factors in the other. It is advised that one option should exist which specifies no change in technology, so as to be able to see how much could be achieved simply with organisational changes.
The organisational and technical options are now merged to ensure compatibility, and are evaluated against the primary objectives and the one that best meets the objectives is selected. This selection is performed by the Design Group with input from the Steering Committee and other interested constituencies.
. The preparation of a detailed work design
The selected system is now designed in detail. The data flows, tasks, groups, individuals, responsibilities and relationships are defined. There is also a review to ensure that the detail of the design still meets the specified objectives. Obviously, the design detail includes the organisational aspects as well as the technical.
. Implementation
The Design Group now applies itself to ensuring the successful implementation of the design. This involves planning the implementation process in detail. This will include the strategy, the education and training, the co-ordination of parts and everything needed to ensure a smooth changeover.
15. Evaluation
The implemented system is checked to ensure that it is meeting its objectives, particularly in relation to efficiency and job satisfaction, using the techniques of variance analysis and measures of job satisfaction. If it is not meeting the objectives, then corrective action is taken. Indeed, as time progresses, changes will become necessary and design becomes a cyclical process.
Conclusions
Quite a common reaction to ETHICS is for people to say that it is impractical. First it is argued, that unskilled users cannot do the design properly, and second, that management would never accept it.
In answer to the first problem Mumford argues that users can and do, design properly. They need training and help, but this can be provided relatively easily. More importantly, they have the skills of knowing about their own work and system, and have a stake in the design.
To answer the second point, managers have often welcomed participation and can be convinced of its benefits. The methodology has been successfully used in a wide number of implementations and Mumford has published a number of accounts of successful application. One example shows how a group of secretaries at Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI) designed new work systems for themselves in the wake of the introduction of word-processing equipment. The second example shows how a group of purchase clerks helped design a major on-line computer system. One of the most interesting aspects that emerged from this study was the fact that the clerks designed three ways of working with the computer system to do essentially the same thing. The one selected depends on the clerk. Few professional system developers would develop a number of ways of achieving the same task.
ETHICS has more recently been used by a number of large companies to assist the building of very large systems. The first major use of ETHICS in the development of a large system was DECs XSEL, an expert system for their sales offices which helped to configure DEC hardware systems for particular customers.
Please note that this sample paper on Effective Technical & Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems (ETHICS) is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Effective Technical & Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems (ETHICS), we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Effective Technical & Human Implementation of Computer-based Systems (ETHICS) will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignment and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!
