Knowledge that Transforms

Information Analysts observe the elements of an organization in order to gain information unavailable through interviewing and the investigation of hard data. In the past the process of observation has been intuitive at best. This article describes and develops a systematic methodology for analyzing the internal organizational environment. The approach is based on a framework used in film criticism called mise-en-scène analysis. Seven major concrete and abstract elements which influence organizational decisions are identified: office lighting and color; office design, space, and location; clothing of decision makers; individual and group decision making; abilities of decision makers; attention to multiple objectives; and cognitive maps of decision makers. The systematic framework for observation developed in this article is an alternative to the common sense approach to observation. The major advantage of the mis-en-scène approach is that it allows the Information Analyst to classify, document, and interpret important factors which usually remain at the subconscious level.

The role of the information systems manager has evolved in twenty years from that of a technician managing a relatively unimportant service function into that of a vice presidential-level, general manager whose department can substantially impact the entire organization. In this article we trace, by example, the historical evolution of the job, and through an observational study of six information systems managers, examine the position today. The analysis includes the daily activities of the managers, the nature of the oral contacts that constitute 76% of their day, and other notable observations. The information systems manager’s role is depicted as one of coordinator, motivator, and planner, with a cadre of experts, both internal and external, who provide technical expertise.

Planning for a successful MIS implementation requires understanding the effects of the introduction of a new system on the work lives of potential adopters. The effects can be assessed by the MIS practitioner/ change agent if the agent will first obtain a thorough and specific understanding of the task activities performed by potential adopters, the interactions they engage in as they perform their tasks, and their preferences for, or feelings about, those activities and interactions. An interview based approach to gathering this data is described, and a short description of an implementation in which the approach was used is provided.

Managing the resources — people, machines, technologies, and ideas — required to deal with business information has become a task so large and complex that a new perspective is needed for both management and professional communities. This article develops a framework for a better understanding of what needs to be done and why, based on a historical view of the information management arts and sciences. This framework is also based on a resulting organizational structure with the potential of avoiding many difficulties traditionally encountered in American industry. Several critical factors are identified and supported which must be addressed in order for the enterprise to derive adequate returns from its large and growing investment in the resources of information management. A profile of the information professional of the future is developed as the most critical prerequisite for meeting the information challenges of the 1980’s, and some implementation strategies are recommended for the successful launching of the types of information systems which will have genuine and measurable impact on the firm’s productivity.

Evaluations of Management Information System (MIS) tend to be subjective and are influenced by the perceptions of system objectives, as well as the experiences with system performance in accomplishing organizational objectives. Consequently, the assessments of MIS effectiveness are often controversial and can be sources of disagreement and conflict between different functional groups involved in MIS implementation — users, MIS development, internal audit, and top management personnel. This article, the second of two parts, describes and compares the evaluator viewpoints on system effectiveness for these various functional groups. The first part, which appeared in the previous issue of the MIS Quarterly (Volume 5, Number 3) presented a conceptual hierarchy of system objectives and compared various approaches for evaluating accomplishment of objectives.

Today's Decision Support Systems (DSS) are almost invariably designed to function in rational, or rationalized, decision making environments. Many organizational environments, such as political environments or garbage can environments, are more accurately portrayed, however, with models other than the Rational Model. Can DSS be useful in such environments? What are the boundary conditions for the application of DSS? These are the questions addressed in this article.

This article studies the proposition that firms of different sizes manage their computer operations differently, and it seeks to determine whether small firms face special circumstances in their uses of computers. The author presents several hypotheses which associate computer related variables with differences in firm size. These hypotheses are tested using data collected from seventy-four Los Angeles manufacturing firms of various sizes. The results indicate that selected computer-use characteristics vary with firm size. These research findings and their implications are discussed.

Previous analyses of the MIS implementation process have focused on the conduct of individual process stages as explanatory of successful or unsuccessful implementation. Process stages, however, involve multiple issues, and it is unlikely that all issues are equally important for good performance at a stage. This article attempts to identify generic implementation issues — those issues which arise at many process stages. An empirical analysis identified six such issues, and suggested that three of them were quite important for differentiating between successful and unsuccessful MIS implementations.

Managers face a dilemma in assessing DSS proposals. The issue of qualitative benefits is central, but they must find some way of deciding if the cost is justified. A general weakness of the cost-benefit approach is that it requires knowledge, accuracy, and confidence about issues which for innovations are unknown, ill-defined, and uncertain. The benefit of a DSS is the incentive for going ahead. The complex calculations of cost-benefit analysis are replaced in value analysis by rather simple questions about its usefulness.