Copyright 2004 Monash University IMS1805 Systems Analysis Week 2: Analysis and IS

Copyright 2004 Monash University 2 Recap of week 1 Fundamental importance of analysis Variations in possible approaches and techniques for doing analysis: Discipline-based (engineering, psychology, sociology, business, etc) Aspect-based (people, objects, events, etc) Parameter-based (statistical, textual, visual, etc) Effective analysis is about using the right technique Our main focus is on the communication aspects of analysis

Copyright 2004 Monash University 3 Examples of analysis and communication (from last week) Consider the following statements: “I felt a little lachrymose when I woke up today” “Je suis un homme tres beau” “To be or not to be: that is the question” F=Gm 1 m 2 /d 2 (see diagram shown in class)

Copyright 2004 Monash University 4 Examples of analysis (from last week) See examples shown in class Are these “good” analyses? What is wrong with them? What sort of analysis was needed?

Copyright 2004 Monash University 5 Agenda Aim: To extend our understanding of analysis in the context of communication Analysis, communication and meaning Perception Explanation (Note: a transition from last week’s 50,000 ft view down to a 10,000 ft view)

Copyright 2004 Monash University 6 Analysis, Communication and Meaning From a communications perspective, analysis is a process of finding meaning Two key elements: Perception Explanation Perceived world -events, -objects, - etc Understood World - explanation - meaning

Copyright 2004 Monash University 7 1. Perception and meaning Perception is the process of using our senses to gather information about the world People’s sense are similar, but not the same People are selective about what they choose to perceive These differences create problems for analysis For example: What do you see in the picture on the bottle in the following slide? How many people/objects and what are they doing?

Copyright 2004 Monash University 8

9

10 Perception and meaning Is it possible to see anything in more than one way? (Is there anything which can be seen in only one way?!) Whose way is the ‘right’ way? Do we see what we expect (or have learned) to see?

Copyright 2004 Monash University 11 Problems of perception Good analysts are aware of the possibility of different ways of perceiving and try to see things in different ways Is there a world out there independent of my perceptions of it …. ? …. Or is all meaning entirely subjective? Is my perception the ‘right’ one? How does it match with the perceptions of others? Analysts may seek objective facts but have to accept that they may be stuck with subjective perceptions

Copyright 2004 Monash University 12 An example of problems of perception A practical problem: Should the company close a business unit down? Analyst A: Sociologist Analyst B: Accountant Analyst C, D, E, etc ?! Are they all valid ways of seeing the situation? Are they equally valid and relevant? How do we decide which one(s) to use? (Homelessness problem)

Copyright 2004 Monash University Explanation and meaning Explanation is the process of making sense of what our senses have perceived Any set of observations (perceptions) may be capable of many different possible explanations Analysis involves seeking explanations of what has been perceived in a way which brings a shared understanding and meaning

Copyright 2004 Monash University 14 Steps in developing explanations Select which of the perceived information we will focus on (we usually perceive far more than we can manage): Apparent importance Relevance to our interests/problem Identify possible relationships - cause and effect, influences, etc Test and determine which relationships seem to work best as explanations of what has been perceived Find the language to express the explanation in a way which conveys meaning

Copyright 2004 Monash University 15 Explanation and meaning Our tools for explanation - textual, visual, etc The limitations of our explanatory tools Finding imaginative and powerful ways to convey meaning and explanation (visualisation, metaphor, etc)

Copyright 2004 Monash University 16 Problems in explanation How do we generate alternative explanations for the things we have perceived? How do we decide which possible explanation is ‘best’? How can we be sure our explanation is understood in the same way by everyone? Mis-use of explanation - “spin” and propaganda

Copyright 2004 Monash University 17 Examples of problems of explanation Maxwell Smart and the Rorshach test Umpires and football matches The invasion of Iraq

Copyright 2004 Monash University Putting it in the context of IS What are the things we need to perceive in IS? To whom do we have to explain them? What are the best analytical techniques to use? IE groups and analysis To be the discussed in more detail tomorrow

Copyright 2004 Monash University Summary From a communications perspective, analysis is about perception and explanation to bring shared meaning In both these areas, development of a shared view can be difficult multiple ways of perceiving multiple ways of explaining/understanding Good analysis is aware of and sensitive to these problems We need to use a range of analytical techniques to provide different perspectives

Copyright 2004 Monash University Some advanced ideas (just to confuse you!) Is the analytical approach I have taken to understanding and explaining analysis the only possible one? If I took a different approach, might analysis be viewed as a different sort of activity? How do I know whether the approach I am taking here is the ‘right’/‘best’ one? Butterflies and dreams; The Matrix/Total Recall

Copyright 2004 Monash University 21 A paradox of expertise? Argument 1 To be a good analyst, I need to be good at applying analytical techniques The more I focus on a technique, and use it, the more I will know about it and the better I will become at using it Therefore, the more I know about a specific technique, the better I will become as an analyst Argument 2 To be a good analyst, I need to be flexible and adaptable in choosing the right analytical technique for the situation The more I know about a particular technique and the better I am at using it, the more I will tend to favour it Therefore, the more I know about a specific techniques, the worse I will become as an analyst How do we get this balance right?