Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems: Two Stories and the Narrative of An Organisation
1 like553 views
This document discusses the authors' encounters with and interpretations of socio-technical systems through their careers working with organizations. It describes two of the authors' histories working with socio-technical approaches over decades. It also discusses key concepts in socio-technical systems thinking including process mapping, action research approaches, and conceptualizations of organizations as open systems.
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems: Two Stories and the Narrative of An Organisation
- 1. Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems: two stories and the narrative of an organisation Frances Abraham and David Drabble
- 2. David – Beginning late 2000s, with a new Director who attempted to bring together evaluation and consultancy Fiddy – Beginning late 1970s with Jebson’s, worked with STS for 35 years Our encounters Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 3. First encounter Discussing TIHR with my Masters supervisor before accepting role Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 4. Second encounter Running a reading group, encouraged to learn about Socio-Technical systems “The very term "socio-technical," used to characterize work systems, implies that there has been a process of splitting which needs to be rectified. Splitting is a process of psychic economy whereby people tend to simplify a complex situation by attributing all its X characteristics to one of a pair and all its Y characteristics to the other. The goodies are all-good and wear white hats, and the baddies are all-bad and wear black hats and possibly also black moustaches. Splitting means that one is most unlikely to be presented with a black moustache under a white hat.” Lisl Klein, 1989, ‘On the Collaboration Between Social Scientists and Engineers: Dynamics and Models’ Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 5. Third encounter Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems Process mapping follows the work of Russ Akoff and whole systems thinking. Training at Vanguard on process mapping – a memorable event Encouraged to do so at a LM meeting with Fiddy Purpose of process mapping: Configure systems so they are doing their core activity in the best possible way for the customer Minimize the amount of (unnecessary) support for that activity.
- 6. Vanguard method for process checking 1. What is the purpose of the system (in customer terms)? 2. Demand: what matters to the customers 3. Capability of response 4. Flow: value work + waste 5. System conditions 6. Thinking C U S T O M E R S Points of interaction Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems Design against demand. Right first time. Single piece flow. Minimising handovers/steps. Individuals are responsible for their own work.
- 7. Encounter …4? STS Roundtable preparation Abstract writing and discovering different ways of understanding STS Attending first STS conference Getting into the archaeology of STS Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 8. My story of Jebsens UK The company: a bulk carrier, UK subsidiary of Norwegian company (no UK ports used) The presenting problem: ships stuck in ports around the world due to lack of crew: problem of recruitment? Diagnostic stage: 2 sequential lines of enquiry: • Analysis of recruitment, numbers involved etc, is there a problem there? Yes and No • What happens to staff once through the door: enquiry through ship- based studies revealed a range of issues: lack of community on long (9 month voyages) through segmented social life and spaces: AR and Culture change • Getting to know Emery’s 9 step model through Michael Foster Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 9. Action research to improve shipboard life: main features • Steering Group of Jebsens SMT, NUS, MNAOA, action researchers (PQ, ES, FA) • Large scale simulation of issues leading to • Piloting a shipboard community: ship’s company (selected by CEO) + SG conference start-up • Developing ownership through the fleet • Redesigning back-office functions • Re-designing ships’ social spaces • Whole systems conference for industry Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 10. Definitions and issues for practice Socio-technical systems design: takes work processes as its starting point, maps how work crosses organizational and departmental boundaries, expects to design/redesign boundaries around the social and technical requirements of work processes eg team working – can be used as an expert practice, can get stuck at the lower levels, can be captured by Taylorists Action research: deploys a cycle of planning, taking action, collecting data about that action to support: can emphasize research or can emphasize action Participatory action research: involves the actors in the enquiry participating as enquirers, can lose intended focus, dissipate into terms and conditions Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 11. Near Environment Far Environment Input Output Conversion or Transformation Feedback Loop ‘Open Systems’ Model as Basic Tool for STS Design Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
- 12. My notions of STS Approach: STS and the psycho-social (based on Miller & Rice, via Michael Foster) • Three types of organisation are required for conversion or transformation of input to output – Perform and manage primary task – Meet sentient needs of belonging and identity – Regulate the balance between task and sentient needs • STS boundaries are drawn at points of discontinuity (interfaces) – Within the boundaries are continuities • Operating, managing, controlling, servicing the primary task • This is a first order differentiation – In relation to the first order, there is a second order differentiation • Operating, managing, controlling, servicing those who are in first order – A manager can only be held accountable for what happens within the boundaries of their differentiated part of the organisation
- 13. Questions Does a concern for the psycho-social bring humanity to designing work? What other approaches do that? How do your starting points shape your understanding of STS and how has that changed through your experience of it? Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems
Editor's Notes
- #5: Using texts mostly from the Eric Trist’s Anthology on the topic, m y first introduction to work and organization design was through some of the main texts written by social scientists and those working with a systems psychodynamics approach at The Tavistock Institute. Lisl Klein text These pioneers seemed to me to have developed a concern in their work for meaninglessness in manual work and saw the reason in the pre-occupation with the technical aspects of work over the social, resulting in a psychological split between the two.
- #6: In a bid to be introduced to a more recent practice deriving from STS, and after encouragement by Frances Abraham a long-time employee of the Institute, I was trained by Vanguard, at a workshop on Process Mapping. Yet my subsequent experiences with process mapping left me confused on the nature of STS, on which view was authentic, and how exactly my introduction to STS, through reading texts written decades ago, influenced my opinion on the topic. For instance, is STS more psycho-dynamically informed than Vanguard methods? Does it even make sense to distinguish between them on this level?
- #7: Design against demand . Right first time . Single piece flow . Minimising handovers/steps . Individuals are responsible for their own work . For those of you familiar with Emery’s 9 step approach you can see what the similarities and differences are Step 1 Mapping purpose: Decide upon the purpose of the system from the customer’s perspective. Step 2 Mapping demand: Decide what is the “demand” of the customers. » Value demand : demand, where customers pull value from the organisation » Failure demand : demand caused by a failure to do something or do something right for the customer Step 3 Mapping capability of response: How successful the system is in meeting demand. Step 4: Creating a process map Step 5: Check on other conditions which may affect the process. Step 6: Alter the thinking around the task at a wider level in order to decide upon what changes need to be made to a system.
- #8: Abstract writing on a comparison of STS and Process mapping led to showing my ignorance on the topic Preparation for this conference, a seminar by Jean Neumann deepening knowledge And discussing TIHR archives and the development of STS (and the other anthologies) showed me how starting points, even if they are anthologies, can influence strongly what you think of as STS.
- #13: Show samples from Miller & Rice