ISECON 2003 Conference San Diego, California, USA November 6-9, 2003 K.H.VAT (Mr) Department of Computer and Information Science Faculty of Science & Technology University of Macau, Macau SAR China

Architecting of Learning Organizations: The IS Practitioners’ Challenge in Systems Thinking Motivation The Situation of Concern The Organizational Context for IS Solution The Idea of Systems Thinking The Architecting of Learning Organization The Implications for Information Systems Challenges for Continuing Development

Motivation  Organizational Transformation: The mechanistic VS the organic manifestation;  Need for Renewed Architecture: Actions results from the meanings that members of organizations attribute to their own and each other’ acts.

The Situation of Concern  IS contextual shift: Automating - Replacing human with machine; Informating - Enhancing human with machine; Knowledging - Tapping human for knowledge synthesis;  Organization Transitioning: away from being a Mindless Machine towards being a Living Organism

The Organizational Context for IS Solution  Places where people continually expand their capacity to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together (Peter Senge: The Fifth Discipline 1990).  An organization which focuses on developing and using its information and knowledge capabilities in order to create higher-value information and knowledge, to modify behaviors to reflect new knowledge and insights, and to improve bottom-line results (David Garvin: Building a Learning Organization 1993).

The Idea of Systems Thinking (ST)  Moving away from working with the idea of an obvious problem which required solution;  Moving towards the idea of working with a situation which some people, for various reasons, may regard as in need of solutions.

The WHY of ST in the IS Context  To ensure that the IS environment is aligned with the organizational imperatives  To help build an IS environment that is extensible and capable of accommodating changes  To communicate appropriate views of the IS solution among various stakeholders  To help keep the IS environment intellectually manageable

The WHAT of ST in the IS Context  Any system which serves another cannot be modeled until a definition and model of the system served is available;  Appropriate levels of abstraction are installed to fulfill the needs of different stakeholders;  Models of human activity systems should consist of structured sets of verbs which stakeholders could in principle directly carry out.

The HOW of ST in the IS Context  Find out about a problem situation culturally and politically;  Formulate some relevant purposeful activity models;  Debate the situation, using the models, seeking from that debate both a) changes which would improve the situation, and are regarded as both desirable and culturally feasible, and b) the accommodations between conflicting interests which will enable action-to-improve to be taken;  Take action in the situation to bring about improvement. (Peter Checkland 1999)

The Architecting of Learning Organization  Reframing  Restructuring  Revitalizing  Renewing

Reframing  Install new vision and new resolve (Mind)  Mobilization: motivation from the level of individual to the team, and to the entire organization  Vision: shared mental framework giving a sense of purpose  Measurement: actions to reach the targets, creating a sense of commitment  IS Support for: achieve mobilization, create vision, and build measurement system

Restructuring  The need to be lean and fit (body) -- competitiveness  An economic model to find out where and how value is created and destroyed  A physical infrastructure to support a network of facilities and other assets upon which organization processes depend  A work architecture to enable a complex network of processes  IS support for: construct an economic model, align the physical infrastructure, and redesign the work architecture

Revitalizing  The issue of igniting organizational growth through various sources  Typical requirements: cross-fertilization of capabilities often scattered throughout an organization’s business portfolio, and the creative assembling of them to develop new offerings  IS support for: achieve organizational focus (market/target-oriented); invent new businesses; change the rules through state- of-the-practice information technology (IT)

Renewing  Organization’s regeneration mechanism (spirit)  Investing individuals with new skills and new purposes to enable knowledge dissemination within the organization  Reward structure -- build a sense of gratification  Individual learning -- promote self- actualization  Organizational learning -- foster a sense of community  IS support for: create a reward structure, build individual learning, develop organizational learning

The Implications for Information Systems  If information is interpreted as what we get when human being attribute meaning to data in a particular context, then an information system (IS) will be a meaning attribution system. Namely, an IS is a system through which people make information meaningful in a particular context in order to support them who are engaged in purposeful action. More precisely, an IS serves or supports people engaged in what for them is meaningful action.

The Implications (contd)  Systems Thinking can provide a way of conceptualizing the social processes in which, in a particular organizational context, a specific group of people can conceive their world and hence the purposeful action they wish to undertake. This provides the basis for ascertaining what information support is needed by those who undertake the action. Only then does it become appropriate to ask how modern IT can help to provide that support and to provide it.

Challenges for Continuing Development The LUMAS interpretation Here a user, U, appreciating a methodology, M, as a coherent set of principles, and perceiving a problem situation, S, asks himself: What can I do? He then tailors from M a specific approach, A, regarded as appropriate for S, and uses it to improve the situation. This generates learning, L, which may both change U and his appreciations of the methodology: future versions of all the elements LUMAS, may be different as a result of each enactment of the process.