Employing integrated reference models to represent interdependency in a complex enterprise

Successful implementation of change in a complex enterprise requires a shared understanding of system interdependency. Otherwise, the architecture of those changes risk the emergence of otherwise unforeseen obstacles. A fundamental element is understanding how the system responds to stimuli. Given the complexity of that system, no single model would adequately represent the totality of the enterprise. As such, we have employed a structured approach based on soft systems methodology and reference models to develop common pictures. These heuristic models act as anchor points for achieving a shared understanding and as a basis for the development of more detailed models. The approach has been applied to defence preparedness; a system containing many levels of inter-dependency, contested by a range of differing viewpoints, multilayered with decisions and activity at a number of levels, and often seeking to rapidly transition to solutions. We present some examples of distinct but inter-related reference models for defence preparedness.

[1]  Peter J. Dortmans,et al.  An analytical approach for constructing and measuring concepts , 2006, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[2]  Robert Chia,et al.  On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[3]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  What's the Problem? An Introduction to Problem Structuring Methods , 1996 .

[4]  Peter J. Dortmans,et al.  ‘Doing the right problem’ versus ‘doing the problem right’: problem structuring within a Land Force environment , 2006, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[5]  John Friend,et al.  The Strategic Choice Approach , 2011 .

[6]  Valerie Belton,et al.  Reasoning maps for decision aid: an integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation , 2008, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[7]  Derek K. Hitchins,et al.  Putting Systems to Work , 1993 .

[8]  W. Mason Creating the Corporate Future , 1982 .

[9]  Guido Cozzi,et al.  Stories from the Frontier , 2015 .

[10]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  Problem structuring methods in action , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[11]  Richard J. Ormerod,et al.  Rational inference: deductive, inductive and probabilistic thinking , 2010, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[12]  Michael Pidd,et al.  Contemporary OR/MS in strategy development and policy-making: some reflections , 2004, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[13]  Alec Morton,et al.  Decision conferencing for science prioritisation in the UK public sector: a dual case study , 2011, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[14]  Jim Petrie,et al.  A problem-structuring method for complex societal decisions: Its philosophical and psychological dimensions , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  Martin J. Eppler,et al.  Visual Strategizing: The Systematic Use of Visualization in the Strategic-Planning Process , 2009 .

[16]  Richard J. Ormerod,et al.  Justifying the methods of OR , 2010, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[17]  Colin Eden,et al.  Strategic options development and analysis : the principles , 2001 .

[18]  Martin J. Eppler A Comparison between Concept Maps, Mind Maps, Conceptual Diagrams, and Visual Metaphors as Complementary Tools for Knowledge Construction and Sharing , 2006, Inf. Vis..

[19]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Systems Thinking, Systems Practice , 1981 .

[20]  G. Kreweras Creating the corporate future: Russell L. ACKOFF Wiley, New York, 1981, xi + 297 pages, £10.85 , 1982 .

[21]  A. MacDonald,et al.  Problem-structuring methods and project management: an example of stakeholder involvement using Hierarchical Process Modelling methodology , 2010, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[22]  R. Ackoff The Future of Operational Research is Past , 1979 .

[23]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited , 2001 .