page_21

< previous page

page_21

next page >

Page 21

3 Systems Concepts In Chapter 2 you saw why it is useflil to know about systems. This chapter picks up that discussion again. In Sections 3.2 to 3.6 we will look at how to define systems and see what is so special about them and what differentiates them from a mere collection of parts. Section 3.8 studies how system behaviour can be described and introduces the important concept of emergent properties of systems. We then briefly look at various classifications of systems in Section 3.9. In this text, our main interest is the control of systems to achieve certain desired goals. This is the topic of the last section. 3.1 Pervasiveness of Systems In the 1950s, with the exception of a few pioneering scientists, the term system was hardly used except in words like systematic. This is rather surprising, since we are constantly surrounded by systems, belong to various systems, and create new systems. The planet Earth we live on is a part of the solar system. Our whole life is spent, shaped, controlled by social systems, like the family, the neighbourhood, the school, our work place, and various interest groups we join, participate in, and drop out of Some of us exploit political systems or are frustrated by them. Life without a telephone system would be difficult to imagine. In high school or university we learn about number systems. Modern management practices would collapse without information systems. We expect our rights to be protected by the legal system. When our digestive system strikes, we suffer. Indeed, the most important part of us, which differentiates us from other animals, is our brain, part of our central nervous system. At first sight, these things seem to have little in common. So, why are they all referred to as systems? The reason is that they are all assemblies of things that are interconnected or stand in clearly defined relationships with each other. They may have evolved to these relationships through natural physical processes, like the solar system or a biological system. These are natural systems. Or they have been created by humans, such as human activity systems, like most social systems, or abstract systems, like number systems or information systems. Figure 3-1 is an excerpt from Webster's 9th New Collegiate Dictionary. It lists more than a dozen different meanings or variations of meanings for the word 'system'. Note that in everyday language it is also used for 'procedures' or as a derogatory term for 'the ruling social order' or 'the establishment'. Our main interest in the term 'system' is as 'an organized assembly of interrela-

< previous page

page_21

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_21.html [5/28/2009 11:26:38 PM]

page_22

< previous page

page_22

next page >

Page 22

sys-tem n [LL systemat-, systema. fr Gk systemat-, systema. fr. synistanai to combine, fr. syn- + histanai to cause to stand more at STAND] (1619) 1 : a regularly interacting or interdependent group of items forming a unified whole <a number ~> : as a (1): a group of interacting bodies under the influence of related forces <a gravitational ~> (2) : an assemblage of substances that is in or tends to equilibrium <a thermodynamic ~> b (1): a group of body organs that together perform one or more vital functions <the digestive ~> (2): the body considered as a functional unit c : a group of related natural objects or forces <a river ~> d : a group of devices or artificial objects or an organization forming a network esp. for distributing something or serving a common purpose <a telephone ~> <a heating ~> <a highway ~> <a data processing ~> e : a major division of rocks usu. larger than a series and including all formed during a period or era f: a form of social, economic, or political organization or practice <the capitalist ~> 2 : an organized set of doctrines, ideas, or principles usu. intended to explain the arrangement or working of a systematic whole <the Newtonian ~ of mechanics> 3 a : an organized or established procedure <the touch ~ of typing> b : a manner of classifying, or symbolizing, or schematizing <a taxonomic ~> <the decimal ~> 4 : harmonious arrangement or pattern : ORDER <bring ~ out of confusion Ellen Glasgow> 5 : an organized society or social situation regarded as stultifying: ESTABLISHMENT 2 usu. used with the syn see METHOD sys-tem-less.

Figure 3-1 Excerpt from Webster's 9th New Collegiate Dictionary ted things'. 'Organized' implies that such systems have been created by humans. This excludes natural systems, except in so far as they may have been affected by human activity. Furthermore, it is not the notion of'systematic', in the sense of carefully using a rational method or following a well laid-out plan, that primarily concerns us here, although we will go about any applications of systems concepts in a systematic way. The emphasis in this text is on systemic, i.e., using systems ideas, or viewing things in terms of systems, or 'pertaining to systems'. 3.2 Defining Systems Out-there and Inside-us View ofSystems One of the prime sources of confusion when calling an organized assembly of things a system is what could be termed the out-there view of systems in contrast to the inside-us view of systems. When I talk about our solar system I have in mind the sun and its nine planets, of which Earth is one, and how the planets are linked to the sun and each other by gravitational forces. Similarly, an elecfric power system is viewed as the collection of various types of power stations and their equipment, the high tension power fransmission grid, the local disfribution network, with its fransformers and power lines, and the various confrol stations that regulate the flow of power, as well as what the power system does, i.e., generate elecfric power and disfribute it to its users. A computer information system consists of the pieces of data collected, the rules used to collect the data and their transformation into pieces

< previous page

page_22

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_22.html [5/28/2009 11:26:39 PM]

page_23

< previous page

page_23

next page >

Page 23

of information, the storage of this information in computer files, the programs for processing, storing, cross-referencing, manipulating, retrieving, and presenting this information on VDU's or in printed form, and finally the computer equipment needed to perform all these activities. In each of these examples, the system is seen as the physical and abstract things that make up the whole assembly, their relationships, and what the system does. This is the out-there view of systems. It is seen as absolute; it exists out there; it is viewed as independent of the observer! While most informed people today would agree on the same definition of the solar system, no such agreement can be expected for what things make up a particular electric power system or a computer information system. I did not list the hydro reservoirs, the water catchment areas that feed them, and the annual water infiow patterns as part of the system. I made a seemingly arbitrary choice of what I viewed as belonging to that system. Another observer might have included these aspects as integral parts. I guess that one of my colleagues, who is an expert in the efficient operation of such systems, would have included the pricing structure for electricity as part of the system, something partially controllable by the power company. So we see that different people may define the same 'system' in different ways, deliberately choosing what to include and what to exclude. The choice of what to include or exclude will largely depend on what the person viewing something as a system intends to do with this definition, i.e., the purpose of a particular system. The system is now not seen as existing independently of the observer anymore; it is not out there; it has become a mental construct, personal to the observer! This is the inside-us view of systems. The confusing thing is that in everyday language the word is more often than not used in the out-there meaning. This even happens if the assembly of components is a human construct or view, such as an industrial or business operation. It is described as if it existed independent of the observer. Unfortunately, even systems experts sometimes fall into this trap. Systems as a Human Conceptualization In this text, it is the inside-us view of systems that is important. Systems are recognized as human conceptualizations. They do not exist per se. It is only the human observer that may view something as a system. For instance, the grandfather taking his grandchild for a walk along an estuary may see the estuary as a beautifiil place to share the many wonders of nature with his grandchild, while the jogger, crossing their path, may be hardly aware of anything more than a few feet away from the path. The biology student studying the estuary will see it as an ecological system, where plants, insects, and all sorts of aquatic life forms interact with each other and are affected by the tides. The engineer working for the local catchment authority will also see it as a system, in fact, a subsystem of a larger water drainage system under her management. The grandfather or the jogger will hardly view the estuary as a system, while the biology student and the engineer each see a different system. But when the engineer takes her windsurfer onto the estuary, she too will

< previous page

page_23

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_23.html [5/28/2009 11:26:40 PM]

page_24

< previous page

page_24

next page >

Page 24

not see it as a system, but simply as an enjoyable playground. The point that systems are human conceptualizations is clearly driven home by the fact that the majority of systems we, as analysts, conceive are not our personal view of some real assembly of things out there in the real world. They are mental conceptualizations of things that do not exist yet, things we plan to realize, or views of major planned changes to an existing operation, still to be implemented. 3.3 Subjectivity of Systems Description So whether or not some thing or entity is viewed as a system depends on the personal interest of the observer. The purpose of studying an organized assembly of things as a system will determine the type of system seen. However, any two people viewing the same situation with the same purpose in mind may well see surprisingly different systems. The reason for this is that the way an individual views a situation is affected by factors highly personal to that individual.

Figure 3-2 Salvador Dali's "Slave Market", oil on canvas (1940) Slave Market with the Disappearing Bust of Voltaire (1940), oil on canvas, 18 1/4 x 25 3/8 in., Collection of The Salvador Dali Museum, St. Petersburg, Florida, 1991 Salvador Dali Museum, Inc.

< previous page

page_24

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_24.html [5/28/2009 11:26:41 PM]

page_25

< previous page

World View of Observer

page_25

next page >

Page 25

These personal factors are such things as the upbringing, cultural and social background, education, practical experience, and values or beliefs of the individual. For example, the three co-owners of a firm may each view their firm as a different system: the first (the materialist) views it as a system to increase his wealth, the second (the idealistic artist) as a system to exercise her creative drive, and the third (the humanitarian) as a system to provide employment for the people in the town he lives in. So one of the skills all budding management scientists have to leam is to see a situation through somebody else's eyes. Hopefiilly, this will also make them more aware of their own way of looking at the world. These personal factors are all captured in the concept of Weltanschauung of the individual. This German word loosely translates as 'world view'. It operates like a filter that channels a person's view in a given personal direction and allows her or him to attribute a meaning to what he or she observes that is congruent with his or her Weltanschauung or world view.

Ejfect ofPrevious Knowledge

Reality is even more diverse and confiising. What we may know or are told about something may affect what we see or observe. Consider the well-known painting by the famous Spanish painter Salvador Dali, depicting a girl sitting in front of a group of buyers in a slave market. It is reproduced in black and white in Figure 3-2 on the preceding page. What do you see? Now study Figure 3-3 over the page which shows a photograph of the bust of Voltaire by the 18th century French sculpture Houdon. Turn back to the Dali painting and observe how the buyers turn into the facial features of the bust of Voltaire. (You may have to go back and forth a number of time to see it!) If I had shown you Voltaire's bust first and given Figure 3-2 its official caption "Slave market and the disappearing bust of Voltaire", your initial perception of the picture might have been quite different. This little exercise neatly demonstrates that what we perceive or observe may be strongly infiuenced by what we already know.

System's Definitions Are Subjective

For all these reasons, the way you view something as a system is to a large extent 'subjective'. It is important for you to recognize that other people, looking at the same thing as a system, may not share your definition. Not only may they attribute a different purpose to the system, they may also include and exclude different things as part of the system. But, and this is an important 'but', one definition cannot be labelled 'right' or 'valid' and another one 'wrong' or 'invalid'. As long as each is logically consistent, each one is valid for the person making it. The only judgment that may be made is that one may be more effective or defensible in terms of the aim or purpose for building it. This is an important aspect of systems thinking that

< previous page

page_25

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_25.html [5/28/2009 11:26:42 PM]

page_26

< previous page

page_26

next page >

Page 26

may be difficult for the novice to accept. It is simpler, more comforting, less threatening to think in terms of a single unique answer or solution the right answer. However, systems thinking is not a matter of black-and-white, but of shades of grey. Naturally, this discussion deals with the age-old controversy of objective versus subjective. Is there objectivity? From what you have read so far, you must conclude that I am a firm believer that objectivity, at least in its traditional meaning of'the expression or interpretation of facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, in other words, independent of the observer's mind', is an illusion. It is not an operational concept. Our mind can only capture our personal perceptions coherent with our Weltanschauung. The only operational meaning that objectivity may have is what the systems thinker R. L. Ackoff [1974] calls 'the social product of the open interaction of a wide variety of individual subjectivities' a sort of consensual subjectivity. So, wide consensus of interpretations on many things is thus not excluded. Modem scientific knowledge is based on such consensus. But, as the two examples below show, this is all that it is, a consensus. Or to quote Albert Einstein: 'The only justification for our concepts is that they serve to represent the complex of our experiences; beyond this, they have no legitimacy.'

Figure 3-3 Houdon's Bust of Voltaire (Courtesy of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London)

< previous page

page_26

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_26.html [5/28/2009 11:26:43 PM]

page_27

< previous page

page_27

next page >

Page 27

Consider the interpretation of'what is insanity?' We look at past views of'being possessed by the devil' either with abhorrence or a benign smile. Future generations may think of the current view of'deep-seated emotional disturbances due to maladjustment to the social environment, particularly in childhood' as rather naive. Probably the most famous example comes from Physics. Newton's laws of dynamics have been and still are some of the most successfiil scientific theories of profound theoretical and practical importance ever put forward. Not only were these laws corroborated by countless experiments and observations, but they also proved their practical value in mechanics the building and working of all machinery on which modern life is based. Yet, at the beginning of the 20th century Einstein showed that, when considering motions with velocities comparable to that of light, or when attempting to analyze the mechanics of atoms and subatomic elements, Newton's laws, seen as inviolate for over two centuries, break down and must be replaced by postulates of relativity and quantum theory. This though in no way diminishes the continued importance of Newton's laws for operations with bodies of ordinary size, as dealt with in industry and much of space science. 3.4 Formal Definition of the Concept 'System' I choose to define a system as follows: (1) A system is an organized assembly of components. 'Organized' means that there exist special relationships between the components. (2) The system does something, i.e., it exhibits a type of behaviour unique to the system. (3) Each component contributes towards the behaviour of the system and is affected by being in the system. No component has an independent effect on the system. The behaviour of the system is changed if any component is removed or leaves. (4) Groups of components within the system may by themselves have properties (1), (2), and (3), i.e., they may form subsystems. (5) The system has an outside an environment which provides inputs into the system and receives outputs from the system. (6) The system has been identified by someone as of special interest. The crucial ingredients of a system are therefore its components, the relationships between the components, the behaviour or the activities or the transformation process of the system, its environment, the inputs from the environment, the outputs to the environment, and the special interest of the observer. A system is not a mere collection of parts that do not interact with each other,

< previous page

page_27

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_27.html [5/28/2009 11:26:44 PM]

page_28

< previous page

page_28

next page >

Page 28

i.e., it is not a chaotic aggregate, such as a pile of rocks. Adding a few parts to a chaotic aggregate or removing some does not change its nature. Doing so in a system will affect its behaviour. Similarly, a chaotic aggregate does not do anything, while a system does or at least is capable of doing things under specific conditions. System components do not have to be physical things. They can be abstract things, such as information, numerical variables that measure things, like cumulative costs or levels of achievement, and relationships between physical or abstract things. In fact, most systems of interest in decision making may often consist of abstract things and their relationships alone. What a system does its activity is the aspect of prime interest to the observer or analyst. The system behaviour consists usually of a transformation of inputs into outputs. Examples of such 'activity' are living plants, which when exposed to light transform water and carbon dioxide (inputs) into carbohydrates and oxygen (outputs), or a manufacturing firm which transforms raw materials (inputs) into finished products for sale to customers (outputs). The system environment is all those aspects that affect the system behaviour and are not in turn significantly affected by it. They are viewed as being outside the system, rather than part of the system. They provide inputs to the system or receive outputs from the system. Inputs are things the system needs to function but does not produce for itself, such as resources, like raw materials and funds or information, or they impose constraints on the behaviour of the system, such as setting quality standards or output restrictions. Any decisions or decision rules imposed on the system by somebody who has some control over how some aspects of the system function or operate are controllable inputs. Although the system provides outputs to the environment, these outputs are not assumed to affect any aspects of the environment in any significant way. If they were, then they should properly be included in the system itself. This separation between the system and its environment means that each system has a boundary. An important part of a system description is to choose where this boundary should be set. Finally, the person who views the organized assembly of components as a system has a purpose for doing so. This could be simply to gain a better understanding of the system behaviour or it could be to control the system behaviour in certain ways, e.g., to achieve a maximum output. The purpose for studying a system determines which aspects of the system the person wants to observe and study in detail. Various measures of performance or other indicators about the behaviour of the system give rise to abstract outputs of interest to the observer. 3.5 Some Examples of Systems Descriptions Let's look at some examples to clarify and elaborate on these concepts. For the sake of brevity, the examples used are somewhat coarse. Chapters 4 and 5 each consider real-life situations with all their intricacies.

< previous page

page_28

next page >

file:///D:/=FIX/=CREATE%20CHMs=/Daellenbach,%20S...20(Wiley%201994)%200471950947/files/page_28.html [5/28/2009 11:26:45 PM]