This work is an application of the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) to improve an information system to fully support the related process-based management system and help its internal improvement. Design and Control Systemic Methodology (DCSYM) is used as a modelling tool to facilitate conceptual models comparison within the SSM context.

1. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system
Panagiotis Papaioannou
University of Piraeus, CSAP, PhD cand.
p.papaioannou@gmail.com
HSSS 10th
National & International Conference, 29-31 May 2014, Athens, Greece
This work is an application of the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) for the purpose of
improving an information system in order to fully support the related process-based
management system and to help its internal improvement. Design and Control Systemic
Methodology (DCSYM) was used as a modeling tool and to facilitate conceptual models
comparison within the SSM context.
The case study refers to the Education and Training (E&T) department of a large scale
organization. It acts as a facilitator in organizing E&T activities for the company’s
employees and also provides E&T services to external customers.
An early but efficient information system has been developed to support E&T activities
and it is still in use. In order to improve the quality of services, a new Quality
Management System (QMS) for this department was developed and established recently.
The functions of the information system were incorporated into the QMS.
The challenge and the project initiated after that was: How the existing information system
could be enhanced and improved in order to (a) fully support the processes scheme
defined by the QMS and (b) contribute to operations improvement according to the
specified performance indices.
The early approach revealed the “mess” consisting mainly of poorly defined
organizational problems similar to the Ackoff’s description. A good reference point was
the requirements set by the QMS. Stakeholders’ expectations were reviewed and taken
into account. The fulfillment of these expectations was critical in order for the QMS to
operate as transparently as possibly and with the minimum operation over-heading.
Stakeholders’ list included all company employees who receive E&T services, external
clients, the top and middle management as well as the E&T department team.
SSM was used as a tool which helped us to understand and manage the “problematic”
situation, in other words to bring order into chaos. The 7 stages of SSM, including the
CATWOE statement, were used in order to describe the current situation, the desired state
according to QMS requirements and stakeholders’ expectations and to specify the actions
that should be taken in order to bridge the gap between the present and future situation. A
critical issue in the whole process was the representation of concepts in several stages of
SSM. Conceptual modeling was used to represent the system viewpoint of each
stakeholder (or stakeholders group), the QMS map of processes, the information system’s
operational model as well as the analyst perspective of the whole system. DCSYM was
used as a common modeling methodology not only for its effectiveness in modeling but
also in order to facilitate models comparison. Models comparison was based on their
structure and the properties of their elements or relations. The comparison outcome was
the differences, compliances and/or gaps between the information system model and the
QMS model including stakeholders’ expectations.
The final outputs include: (a) Information system improvement requirements, (b) QMS
improvement proposals and (c) Processes and operations understanding.

2. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap
between a process-oriented management system
and its supporting information system
Panagiotis Papaioannou
University of Piraeus
CSAP, PhD cand.
p.papaioannou@gmail.com
Professor Nikitas Assimakopoulos
University of Piraeus
HSSS 10th National & International Conference, 29-31 May 2014, Athens, Greece
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
2
Is there a gap between Business and IT ?

3. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
3
Is the Gap between Business and IT Shrinking?
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
4
Gap between Business and IT: What do we mean ?
This failure rate is referred to as the Business-IT Gap
Gap between Business and IT :
The failure of IT to support efficiently the business objectives

4. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
5
Business - IT alignment is a dynamic state in which
a business organization is able to use Information Technology (IT)
effectively to achieve business objectives - typically improved financial
performance or marketplace competitiveness
Business – IT Alignment
a) Support the processes scheme defined by the QMS
b) Contribute to operations improvement according to the specified
performance indices.
Specific issues regarding a Process Oriented Management System
(actually a QMS) and its supporting Information System:
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
6
SSM as a tool
to bridge the gap between business and IT
Software itself is a hard system
When it is deployed in the context of an Information System it becomes a soft
system:
• It supports business processes and objectives
• It is operated by people
• It is part of a change
• It is evaluated according to business needs and stakeholders expectations
• It enhances business capabilities
All the above formulate a problematic situation, a perfect field to employ SSM
SSM has already been used as a complemantry tool in SDLC
(typical example: Requirements Engineering)

5. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
7
Soft Systems Methodology
Systems Thinking
Systems Thinking
Real World
Real World
Opportunity for further systemic approach
1) Entering the
problematic situation
2) Expressing the situation
(the Rich Picture)
3) Root Definitions
(CATWOE statement)
4) Creating Conceptual Models of the activity
5) Comparing models
with the real world
6) Defining possible
changes
7) Taking action
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
8
The approach in this case:
SSM in combination with other systemic methodologies and concepts
SSM as a general framework
DCSYM for modeling
A “Models Comparison” methodology (*)
(*) Smith, Linda Jane, Graph And Property Set Analysis:
A Methodology For Comparing Mental Model Representations (2008)
Key concept:
• Business Modeling as a system of processes
• Information System modeling as a system of functions
• Models comparison

6. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
9
SSM (stage 2): The rich picture
Technology
Changing
Issues
Dept Mgt
Trainees
Partners
Other Depts
ISO
Quality Mgt
System
Employees
Hierarchy
Compan
y Rules
Company’s
Mgt
IT Dept
Case study: Education Training Dept
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
10
SSM (stage 3): The CATWOE statement
Beneficiaries (or victims) of this particular system
Who would carry out the activities which make this
system work?
Customers
Customers
C
Actors
Actors
A
O
T Transformation
Transformation
W Weltanschauung
Weltanschauung
Owner
Owner
E Environmental
constraints
Environmental
constraints
What particular worldview justifies the existence of this
system? (which factor makes this system meaningful?)
Who has the authority to abolish this system or
change its measures of performance?
Which external constraints does this system take
as a given?
What are the inputs and what transformation do they go
through to become the outputs?

7. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
11
SSM (stage 4):
Implementation:
• Business Model as a system of processes
Implementation:
• Information System Model as a system of functions
• Models comparison: Business model vs IS model
Modeling methodology:
System represented as a graph (nodes and edges)
Each node or edge has specific properties
SSM (stage 5):
Building Conceptual Models of Human Activity Systems
Comparing the models with the real world
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
12
Business Model as a system of processes
RESOURCES MGT
1s
03:HR Mgt
11s
04:Equipment Mgt
12s
02:Management Review
2s
MEASURE IMPROVE
3s
09:Audits
31s
10:NC-Prev-
Corrective Actions
32s
01:Files and Doc. Mgt
4s
PRODUCTION
5s
06:Course
Development
51s
08:Course
Delivery
52s
05:Educ. Period
Scheduling
53s
07:Procurement
Mgt
54s
ENV
6s

8. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
Information System mode as a system of functions
Educational
Period
1s
Seminars
2s
Course Design
3s
Persons
4s
Departments
5s
Partners
Evaluation
6s
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
Models comparison # 1 / 4
Smith, Linda Jane, Graph And Property Set Analysis:
A Methodology For Comparing Mental Model Representations (2008)
A Language of Graphs – Basic elements

9. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
The concept of graphs is compatible with DCSYM
Systems or Individuals = Nodes
Relations (comm. or control) = Edges
Nesting (hierarchy) is another type of relation
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
Smith, Linda Jane, Graph And Property Set Analysis:
A Methodology For Comparing Mental Model Representations (2008)
Types of comparisons that might be made between mental models
expressed in terms of graph elements
Models comparison # 2 / 4

10. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
List of possible comparisons
Models comparison # 3 / 4
Smith, Linda Jane, Graph And Property Set Analysis:
A Methodology For Comparing Mental Model Representations (2008)
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
Model A
Total
Nodes Edges
Properties of
Nodes Edges
Properties
for common
Nodes Edges
Same Properties
Different or Missing
Properties
Model B
Total
Nodes Edges
Properties of
Nodes Edges
Smith, Linda Jane, Graph And Property Set Analysis:
A Methodology For Comparing Mental Model Representations (2008)
Models comparison # 4 / 4
Comparison concept for two mental model representation

11. Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
SSM (stages 6 7): Define Changes Take Action
Models comparison Changes definition
Changes to Information System in order to fully support the management
system or, at least, to improve the “alignment” between them.
Results
1) Information system improvement requirements
2) QMS improvement proposals
3) Knowledge: Processes and operations understanding
4) Contribution to Requirements Engineering
5) Part of the Software Development Life Cycle
Applying systemic methodologies to bridge the gap between a process-oriented
management system and its supporting information system CSAP
Conclusions
Approach summary
• SSM as a roadmap
• DCSYM for modeling
• A Methodology for comparing models based on graph representation
and properties listing
• DCSYM CASE TOOL: Properties listing for each system element
• We made a structural model comparison.
For the purpose of aligning Business and IS we may need to compare
activity models based on event logs.
It may requires more detailed process modeling.