All papers are checked via
|← ROWE Program at Best Buy||Managing Human Resource →|
Considering the Social Side: Does it Really Make A Difference?
Management Information Systems (MIS) have had many difficulties and failures in the past. The difficulties are brought about by the way system operators view organizations, the employees and the objectives of MIS within them. These opinions are put in a methodology, which directs development and setting up of an MIS. The design is usually referred to as Socio-Technical System (STS). It is a current version of system, which has made tremendous improvements in job output (Brandan, 2007).
The above system is often used to reengineer already existing systems and to provide means for new ones. It has been proved that its use has substantially reduced the problems of MIS and it ensures that future problems are solved at an early stage. By using these systems, it is assumed that the department is fully a Socio-Technical system. This means that the station has both the social and technical parts that work together to produce a finished system. The technical system is usually concerned with what is required to make final data, while the social is concerned with the people in the organization.
Many common denominators cause adequate and inadequate designs. Most of the times they make it hard to change the existing strategies and together they show the companies reference. The most important and common two are less objective orientation and inadequate frameworks. Limited or less orientation view taken by the designer shows their operators work to the technical portion. Hence, the designer’s point of reference of an MIS will be the objective of an intervention, which checks on the technical part of the system.
The changes made in the social system, which are made into the MIS, are usually the ways to increase the rate of job accomplishment by use of good control of the variations that are available. An example of this kind of scenario would be performance-checking management information system. Here, there has to be a definite design that has individual working conditions or problems associated with the working conditions of the organization’s head or the employee himself. The mostly used reference would be the manager. This is because he/she is always the best control mechanism that can be used (Jossi, 2009).
The issue raised here is that the person is chosen without any considerations. When improvements are noted, the head of the organization is not always given any credit for a work done. The issue has been often raised by those in the US and other countries. They agree with their counterparts by saying that good information and efficiency usually lead to the making of a suitable MIS. As the STS improves, the quality of life also betters. The efficiency is usually at a degree that is desirable for production to merge with it.
The only problem that usually arises is when the quality of life is made to oppose the output and efficiency of the system. When the system produces negative results, the managers and supervisors are usually seen as being positive towards the system. The other important parameter for less design is less conceptualization of operational systems that are being used by designers. The main duties of an operational information system are usually centered on the data that is available for analysis. This includes the decision made and the manipulation of the existing data.
After successful completion of data analysis, the Management Information System is usually made to change the data from people to the computer. Here, new exercises are developed and the old existing ones are usually made to be compatible with the new ones. All designers should always put in focus and mind the kind of system that is being made use of. When a designer ignores the important steps, there is a likelihood of ignoring that more changes may lead to alterations within other components in the same system. The changes that occur in this stage are usually referred to as secondary, because they never get a label in the primary setting of a MIS. Any change that is usually scheduled in the working conditions is usually transferred to the task condition that was being worked on.
Such correlation is important in any organization; when they are neglected, adverse effects, such as interpersonal conflicts, usually arise in many organizations. The secondary changes are usually very important, as they aid the connection between the people and the organizations they work from. The changes that are experienced should be made to comply with other available systems. An example is when supervisors and other junior staff are taken to management level, they usually have a focus of decision making that is upward (Brandan, 2007).
The total direct changes usually make this kind of group to have high level of motivation and quality work produced. The opposite makes the workers loose morale towards their work and job satisfaction is mostly questionable. The lower group is seen working at lower pace, hence producing very little for the company.
The difficulty of designers’ type of job is not new to STS. Others view the whole system as a group of jobs put together. This is because the people intentions are always to lift some jobs, while others are derailing. All the individuals of any company should always view all work systems as technical output machines. If they fail to recognize that fact, it will mean limited or no improvements (Jossi, 2009).