A crash course in system analysis (part 3)

Case Study II

Case Study II comes from a perspective that healthcare organizations can learn much from other industries.

A small, growing, import/export corporation, with an inventory of 10,000 different items, needed to expand the role of decision making to the middle management level. The key to the company's success was predicated on timely and appropriate purchase of product.

The company’s conversion from manual to automated processing had focused on data storage relative to individual departments. However, the cross referencing and analysis of data badly needed for corporate wide decision making was unavailable. Thus, decision making relative to product purchase was still intuitive based primarily on the personal experience of executive managers. If the company was to grow, middle managers would have to be brought into the decision making process. Middle managers, however, were department heads whose expertise was department based. They had minimal experience in the analysis and synthesis of data for corporate wide operational decisions. Executive management knew what was needed were corporate wide integrated reports, but not how to effect a solution.

Their first step was getting executive and middle managers (the users) involved in an open dialogue with a systems analyst. The users and the analyst became partners in a re-education program in which the systems analyst challenged the users to think beyond automated processes to the end needs of the company. The analyst then detailed the myriad ways in which individual department stored data could be integrated and used corporate wide. With this information users were challenged to re-focus their thinking from specific department lines to global corporate wide decision making utilizing synthesized department data.

The systems analyst took on the role of educator. The opportunity to look at the system beyond its ability to collect data opened up the realm of possibilities for the users, documented the way in which data could be manipulated to furnish the information needed for decision making and provided the users with the insight they needed to make technology a partner. They could now engage in a discussion based on the company need. They were ready to engage the 5WH.

· Asking “What decisions do you need to make?” documented the way in which data could be manipulated to provide the reports needed for corporate wide decision making. It focused thinking on what aspects of data collection were essential to the decision making process.

· Asking “Why are these decisions mission critical?” refocused thinking from individual departments to corporate wide analysis.

· Asking “Who will be involved in the decision making process?” documents which middle managers must receive mission critical reports.

· Asking “When will the information be needed?” documents report generation that will occur in a timely manner.

• Asking “How the information should be presented”

documents the format in which the reports were to be generated.

The analyst brought everybody together in a room and immediately they were engaged in a chaotic and unstructured manner of “what do you want.” The analyst turned the discussion to reality by asking them to re-focus on “what do you need”. This resulted in brainstorming solutions. They were now thinking of product in terms of top ten, fastest moving, backed orders, dead orders - all came to the forefront in terms of what they really did need. The reports could then focus on movement and purchase of product.

The lesson from this case study is that the analyst provided questions for the users - not the solutions. The questions forced the solution. The solutions came as the result of the analyst challenging the users with 5WH; asking them what data reports can be combined, eliminated, simplified, and changed; and what report recommendations did they have to solve the movement and purchase of product.

 

2.Complete the following passage with the words from the text:

techniques, define, user, solution, innovative, system, eliminated, recognizes, understand,

 

Conclusion

The asking of why, what, where, who, when and how provides the 1___ with a basis to ___ 2___ a problem and system. By questioning whether the step or process can be ___ 3___, combined, changed or simplified, further defines a ___ 4___, and can lead to a re-engineering ___ 5___. The "what do you recommend?" question ___ 6___ those closest to a process often have the solution. These questions are invaluable for both the person asking the questions and the person answering to better ___ 7___ a system or problem, and to determine options and solutions. Data gathering ___ 8___ are tools designed to support the questioning techniques.

"Why, what, where, who, when, how, eliminate, combine, simplify and change, what do you recommend" may not always result in a drastic and ___ 9___ solution, but they certainly recognize solutions that are often there simply by "asking".

 

 

3.Make a written translation of the following passage.