Thoughts

B00 Thoughts Table of content

A02B01 Aha + A way of thinking + Thoughts
A02B02 Systems, Systems, What is a System?
A02B03 Bits, Bytes, and Beyond
A02B04 The Systems Approach
A02B05 What makes a Manager Unique
A02B06 Information and Data are they Synonyms
A02B07 I can't see That + Supporting Definitions
A02B08 Material and Nonmaterial Resources and Giving and Sharing
A02B09 Is Communication a Two Way Street?
A02B10 Data Processing
A02B11 Comments on The Systems Approach
A02B12 Glossary + Bibliography

Return to Index Table of content

B01 'Aha'

Have you ever had an 'aha' experience? Many times I awake with a thought, idea, or solution nearly complete in every detail and I can't go back to sleep until I write it down. When I'm awake, I am aware of the struggle and suddenly the nonverbal part of my brain connects with the verbal part and my nonverbal thoughts are converted into verbal format. The 'aha' comes when the conversion is complete.
Most of our thinking is done in nonverbal format, but we are not aware of our thoughts until they are converted. The verbal mind is the conscious mind. Many thoughts are never shared because we are unable to convert them into verbal format. We cannot share our nonverbal thoughts with anyone, not even ourselves, until they are converted into verbal format.
I am a visual nonverbal person. I have struggled with words and language all my life, barely passing English in school and German in college. I have great difficulty converting my nonverbal thoughts into verbal format, sometimes years have passed before I could put them into definite, distinct, complete, and correct statements to my satisfaction. I started to write 'Thoughts of Systems Analyst' in 1972, need I say more?
The thoughts, ideas, and solutions of other people were almost always received in verbal format, but never my own. I cannot recall a single thought, idea, or solution that originated in verbal format.
My use of words, like yours, is unique. Because I'm nonverbal, my meaning may be much more restrictive than yours and I may not use enough words to guide you from one thought to the next. Please keep my limitations in mind as you read this web site.
Since I cannot learn your vocabulary and how you use it, only one course of action is available, to define, describe, and use my vocabulary. A glossary is included at the end of DATA to assist you in learning my vocabulary. Please avoid reading the definitions in the glossary for words that have not been introduced until you have answered the questions asked following the thoughts that introduce the systems approach. The the thoughts in comments were spawned by the systems approach and reinforce or expand previous thoughts.

'A way of thinking'

'Tell it like it is,' was a popular saying several decades ago and my motto as a young man. My goal was to learn as much as possible, to be objective, to join a group of like minded people, and together we would solve the problems of the world. But the clear cut pigeon holes of youth faded as the ambiguity of mid-life took over. Reading, 'a way of thinking is at the same time a way of not thinking,' marked the end of that transition, I believe the statement was written by S. I. Hayakawa, I don't remember for sure.
Let me use the analogy of a tree to explain the situation. Each of us is like a tree. Our roots have three main branches, fixed, variable, and chosen. Each of which branch into many; who, what, when, where, why, and how. These in turn branch again into all the events that make up our past, such as our heredity, our environment, our choices, our experiences, etc.
For example our birth, on our fixed root, two 'who' branches and a 'when' will intertwine; one 'who', is our mother, the other 'who', ourselves, and the 'when' will be our date of birth. Most of the roots intertwine, but all converge to the trunk to form the unique person we are.
The limbs are our senses, sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, and kinetic. These in turn have branches, all the tools and methods we use to enhance the ability of our senses. Again, most of the limbs and branches intertwine. The leaves of uncertainty, bias, and error cover each branch. Our limbs struggle to reach into the future, never quite reaching it because each instant moves very quickly to the trunk, the present, and to the roots, the past.
Occasionally we stand on a branch and try to see the world between the leaves and other branches. Now, it's true that as we grow more branches we can climb higher and have a better view of the world, but at the same time the branches and leaves can block our view, every way of thinking has a least one blind spot. While each new approach can be useful, we must be careful to use it appropriately or it will obstruct our view and even when we are careful it will always block a small amount of our view, we will always have to look around it; hence, away of thinking is at the same time a way of not thinking.
Much of the systems approach is common knowledge, but it is taken for granted and largely ignored; therefore, not used or used improperly. It is a very useful tool when used appropriately and I would like to share with you what others have shared with me. It will help avoid errors, but it can never eliminate them. Having said that, what follows is not the way it is, I cannot tell you the way it is, I can only tell you the way I know it and interpret it. All I ask is that you climb my tree and look at the world from one of my branches, the systems approach, I hope you will add the branch to your tree. You don't need any special knowledge or skill to understand the systems approach, although a knowledge of computers will make the climb easier, because I will use some examples from my experience.
Some of the questions I will ask, you may think they are trivial, but having the capability to answer the questions is definitely not trivial. Many have no correct answer and some, many answers. It will be instructive for you to write your answer for review later. I suggest three or more sheets. On the first sheet write your initial answer, on the second write an answer after consulting a reference, such as, a dictionary, an encyclopedia, a text book, etc. On the third sheet write the system approach answer in your own words, even say them out loud. Use as many senses as possible, a strategy that seems to aid retention. Maybe multiple copies in different areas of the brain helps us to remember.

'Thoughts'

You know one reason for writing the answers, let me remind you. Our thoughts and those of others flit across the page of our memory so rapidly we can only capture a few and store them. Thoughts are elusive, in fact, they seem to do everything they can to avoid capture, they twist and turn, they merge with other thoughts, change form, and even disappear without leaving a record of their comings and goings. That is the reason for writing, that is the reason for this web site, to provide a record of some of these thoughts.
Because of the ephemeral character of thoughts and their ability to merge, who can say where they came from, who can claim originality. For this reason the only claim I make is that I made an attempt to introduce you to the systems approach and some of the thoughts it spawned for me. Some of the thoughts are unique and unexpected.
Whether you accept the conclusions presented here or not, I will be surprised if your view of systems, data and information, giving and sharing, management, communication, and allness does not change and maybe even your view of the world.
The more I read and learned, the less I was satisfied with the current definitions. The Thoughts of a System Analyst is a consolidation of many books and articles and obviously slanted toward my background. The original consolidation was for my own use and I didn't, regretfully, keep all of my notes and references. A bibliography at the end of DATA contains the references I did keep or could remember.

Before I continue answer the following question.

You have a very reliable stock broker and his predictions have been very accurate. You bought a stock against his advice because a friend gave you a hot tip. Soon after you bought the stock, its price fell losing half of its value. During the next year the price rose slowly. Your broker calls, "Your stock hit a new high yesterday. I predict you have one chance of the stock price returning to your original purchase price and three chances of the price falling back to its all time low. If you wait and the price falls back to its all time low, you will lose double what you would if you sold now. If you sell now you will lose twenty five per cent. If you wait and stock returns to your purchase price, you will not lose any money. What do you want me to do?"

Now, define the word system and then look up the definition in a reference book and write it on a second sheet. Do the same for goal, instruction, bit, effective, and efficient. On another sheet of paper list on every other line the names of some systems you know, you can stop at ten.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B02 'Systems, systems, systems, what is a system'

My work began when I reached for my dictionary, the definitions were not very useful. I researched the literature, the current topics were open and closed systems which I thought was ludicrous and raw and processed data which I thought was even worse. If a system was truly closed and nothing came in or out, how would we ever know about it? Not very useful. If a system received the letter 'A' and output the letter 'A' who could tell which one was raw data and which one was processed? Again not very useful, but several elements suggested by the authors I could accept.
All systems were defined by people, some systems were created by people. Every system has boundaries, although some boundaries were very nebulous, and within the boundaries an environment. During the research many more systems were named. I added a few of my own and suddenly I was swimming in systems.
The first of course, was computer system followed by accounting, billing, marketing, refining, etc. I stopped briefly and then solar system came to mind. My thoughts expanded and the deluge was on, electrical, heating, air conditioning, judicial, financial, school, circulating, management, highway, plumbing, water, digestive, gambling, etc.
The systems ranged from the size of the atom to the size of the universe. The diversity was mind boggling. What did all these systems have in common, what were their universals, what remained constant regardless of the system? Were they all systems? Was I ignoring other systems? The size of an atom, wait a minute, every atom, every molecule,every cell, every living thing was a system and living things contained additional systems. Now the number of systems went beyond astronomical numbers toward the infinite and their complexity varied from the hydrogen atom to the biosphere.
As I reviewed the list, the ending 'ing' occurred very frequently. Two more attributes of a system were apparent, first, they achieved something, a goal, and second, they did something to achieve the goal, all systems were active, at least once. When a system was inactive it was 'dead', a non living system can be reactivated by another system.
For any definition to be useful, for me, it had to some how incorporate the attributes of the computer and the business systems with which I worked. I didn't know how to do that so I turned to my difficulty with the use of the words management and information. I didn't have any success there either, until after attending a professional seminar on communication. The instructor used a simple class exercise to demonstrate his argument that communication was a two way street. The instructor demolished all the theories I knew and replaced them with his incomplete theory. He was still searching for a more complete answer.
That seminar turned my research in a different direction I researched other fields in addition to the computer field and each author added another attribute of a system, such as, time, energy, people, money, data, information, management, control, organization, regulation, rules, law, etc. Many of these words were different types of the same attribute of a system. For example, some were resources used by a system, others were different goals of a system, and others were different activities of a system, etc. I chose synonyms for some words to avoid using the same word in two different ways.
One definition contained all the common attributes of a system except one. The author for some reason omitted such words as management, control, organization, rules, or regulation from his definition. I added the word directed to his definition producing the following definition.

A system is directed activities using resources within an environment to achieve a goal for a user.

The next turning point came when I was toying with Basic Assembler. Most instructions had three parts, the location of the input data to be operated on, the operand to operate on the data, and the location of the output, but some instructions were shorter and some were longer, why? Because some of the instructions were incomplete, they needed another attribute in order to execute the operand or to retrieve or store the data properly.
The next conclusion was easy, all the assembler instructions were incomplete. Every instruction must answer four of the five W's and H, who, what, when, where, and how. A complete instruction must contain seven parts, where is the input, where to store the output, what operand to execute, who will execute the operand, where will the operation take place, when will the operation take place, and what to do next.
By hard wiring some parts of the instruction into the computer only the remaining parts had to be supplied by the programmer, reducing the amount of work needed to be done to tell the computer what to do. The computer was the operator, the time was now, where was in the computer, and what to do next was the next instruction at the location in the address register. The parts were still present, but not visible. Also, by executing several incomplete instructions in a series, the proceeding instructions could supply the missing parts for the following instructions. Remembering all these details made programming the first computers very complicated, very tedious, and very error prone. Soon compilers were developed to handle some of the details.
I became very familiar with the details. I spent hours reading core dumps trying to find errors in programs. A core dump is the printout of the values for every data storage location in use at the time an error caused the computer to stop executing a program. Those values were our representation of the computer values. By linking the computer values at each location with two printer symbols, the printer could print something we could understand, but it was not what the computer could understand, it was only our representation of what the computer understood. Linking the values of one thing to the values of another is called assignment. One value can replace another in the representation. If A = B, we can replace either symbol with the other without loss of meaning or value. A = A is a tautology, an identity.
We had tried to find an error in one program many times without success when one of the programmers suggested moving the instruction to another part of core. At that time computers were constructed of many ferrite rings, strung on wires. Each ring represented one bit of data. Nine of these rings was called a byte, one known location in core, it had an address. All the rings together were referred to as the core of the computer, hence the name core dump.
Two printer symbols were used to print the value of the eight rings at each location. The ninth ring was the check bit. The value of the magnetic field orientation, up or down, was assigned a value of one or zero, the now familiar binary code. One printer symbol was assigned to each possible combination of values for each half byte. These symbols are known as hexadecimal code, the numbers, zero through nine plus the characters, A through F. These hexadecimal characters were in turn assigned, in sequence, to all the values needed to instruct the computer. By knowing the format of the instruction, all the parts of the instructions, the data, and their location could be determined.
After changing the location of the instruction, the program failed at a different instruction, but at the same location in core. That meant only one thing, at least one ring at that location was 'bad'. We ran a test program and it found an error at that location and removed that byte from the address list. The Computer would never use that location again. We executed our program and it ran perfectly, confirming the hardware error.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B03 ' Bits, bytes, and beyond'

That exercise focused my attention on one bit of data. What was a bit? For our computer one bit was the magnetic field direction of one ring. If the magnetic field was to strong or not strong enough, the computer ignored it, it was as if there was no magnetic field at all. In other words the magnitude of the magnetic field had to be within a given value or else the computer considered the magnetic field direction absent, even if it was present. The computer ignored all other attributes of the magnetic field, it recognized whether that magnetic field direction was present or absent and that was all.
Was this relationship true for all systems? For me it had to be. A bit is a singularity, one unique attribute of a resource. When a system recognizes a bit, it recognizes if that attribute is present or absent and nothing else. A bit is scalar, it does not have directions or dimensions. Don't confuse the attribute with the resource nor the resource with the attribute.
For example the letter 'A', the letter can be large or small, it can even change shape a long as it does not lose it's 'Aness' and a system will recognize it as the letter 'A'. If it is to small or to large or if it changes to much, a system may not be able to recognize the 'Aness' of the letter. The size and shape of the letter is another attribute, another bit. A computer cannot recognize the letter 'A', but an optical scanner and people can. A bit to one system may not be a bit to another system.
Data to our computer was one storage location or one byte. Data for any system then, was one or more bits, the number was determined by the system. Most people would not recognize computer data. Data to one system may not be data to another system.
When executing a program, a computer operates one instruction at a time, on data at one location at a time. The computer is the operator. An operation is an operator operating an operand from input to output. The operand operates on input stored at one location and produces output to be stored. Therefore; the operation is the lowest level of activity and an activity is one or more operations. By the same analogy, directions are one or more instructions. Now the lowest level of a resource and the lowest level of activity had been established for a system. After some though, it seemed that every system had certain activities in common, that is a certain minimum number of activities.
Using the computer as a model along with the activities named in the literature, the minimum activities seem to be, processing, storing, receiving, sending, transporting, and regulating. A system could have more than one of any of the activities and it could have additional activities. For example, a system could have a warehouse, a cashier, and a mail room; each one is a receiving and a sending activity and it could have additional activities, such as a data processing, a communicating, a management, etc.
The next logical question was, 'Was there a need for lower levels for any of the other attributes of a system?' The literature didn't mention any and none were obvious to me. From the literature and from my own experience, it was obvious that a system could have more than one of any of the attributes of a system or any combination of them. Everything was arbitrary, all of the terms were chosen and defined by people. No one could tell it like it was, we could only tell it like it was useful for us.
People have a tendency to accept things as being true or that's the way it is, when in fact it is arbitrary and not a question of truth or the way things are, it's merely a useful, a convenient, or an arbitrary way of doing things. Our language, alphabet, numbers, money, weights, and measures are examples.
People from the United States are very prone to committing this error. Have you ever heard an American tourist ask, "What is the price of this in real money?" Real to who? Their money is just as real to them as ours is to us, but both are arbitrary.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B04 'The systems approach'

The same thing is true of the systems approach, it only has meaning or value, if it is useful. Before demonstrating its usefulness, we need to do some more base building. First the word community needs to be defined. A community is two or more systems joined by a common bond. The attributes of a community will change with increasing numbers and with diversity, a community may be homogeneous or heterogeneous. For example, a few gold atoms to a gold ring, a few oxygen molecules to the atmosphere, a few molecules of clay to a clay layer to dirt to the earth, or a family to a tribe to a city to a state, etc.
Now a review starting with a hierarchy based on the definition of a system, going from right to left and down, adding comments from the literature as we go.

Directions Activities Resources Environment Goal User

Instructions Processing People Capacity Fixed Community

Receiving Material Protection Variable System

Transporting Money Boundaries Chosen People

Storing Time

Sending Energy

Regulating

A user can be any system or community that gains satisfaction from goal achievement. Since all living things and some of their creations are systems, the list of possible users is large, plants, animals, people, corporations, partnerships, organizations, committees, etc. Every user has goals and they seek to satisfy as many goals as possible. Each user will attempt to choose which goals have priority and how the goals will be satisfied. To satisfy a goal resources must be expended.
Goals can be satisfied in several ways. Users may achieve a goal by using the output of their own system or purchase the output of another system or create a new system or adapt or modify another system. Regardless of the way, the user will try to conserve or optimize resources. The choices will be influenced by which resources the user is trying to conserve or optimize and which resources the user is willing to spend or expend.

A goal is a condition a user wants to achieve and maintain

There are three types of goals, fixed, variable, and chosen. Fixed goals are chosen by the user at creation time and cannot be changed by the system. Variable goals change with an internal or external condition. Chosen goals are set in some arbitrary way. For example, we must eat, a fixed goal. When and how much we eat is a variable goal determined by how much space is available to store energy. What we eat is a chosen goal.

An environment has attributes of quality, quantity, and capacity. A system may have more than one environment within its boundary. The environment contains and protects the directions, the activities, and the resources of the system. The permeability of a system boundary varies, some things can cross without limit, others on a selective basis, and others can never cross. Every system is contained within the environment of another system or community. At creation the environment must contain a least one operation and enough energy and instructions to begin the receiving activity.

A resource is anything that can be used by a system to achieve a goal, everything else is waste. The attributes of a resource are determined by the user. Directions are one or more instructions. Every activity has directions.

Directions are known by many different names, such as, program, policy, procedure, plan, law, rules, script, etc. Some tell what to do, others tell what not to do. Directions must be logically consistent and complete.

An activity is one or more operations. Some operations can be described, others cannot, such as those of a car, a computer, the human brain, etc. An operation uses support resources, it occupies space, uses time and energy, etc. Systems use support resources even when they are not producing output. An operand operates on one or more attributes of input producing output. An operator follows instructions and can start and stop the operating of an operand. A system may have only one operator, an operator for each activity, each operation, or many operators and many combinations of operators and operands.

Processing produces the output that will achieve a goal, all other activities support the process.

Receiving is recognizing a resource outside the system, taking or accepting the resource, transporting the resource across the system boundary and placing the resource in storage. The resource can be a process resource or a support resource.

Transporting is moving a resource from a known location to another known location without loss of value.

Storing is placing a resource at a know location within the system and protecting the resource.

Sending is transporting a resource or waste from storage across the system boundary out of the system.

Regulating is to compare and to select the appropriate instructions as indicated by the output of the compare operand. The compare operand uses a reference point, a data resource created by the user and stored in the environment to compare an attribute of another resource.

If a system lacks a compare operand, it is very limited and regulation must be supplied by another system. Also, some systems need a housekeeping activity because operators may not complete an operation or may not follow instructions and operands may not function perfectly or completely. A compare operand allows a system to compare the output from an operation to a reference point, an if the output does not meet specifications, it is waste and can be recycled or eliminated from the system, saving space, time, and energy.
A compare operand allows a system to have many operations operating concurrently and many different combinations of operators, operands, and instructions. The output of the compare operand can be used to coordinate very complex activities ensuring efficiency and effectiveness.
A system will be effective if it achieves a goal and efficient if it conserves or optimizes the desired resources. A system will not be efficient if it does not:

1. Receive resources on schedule.
2. Store resources as soon as possible and at the lowest level.
3. Identify and eliminate waste as soon as possible.
4. Operate only necessary operations and in the proper sequence.
5. Output at the lowest level needed and on schedule.
6. Protect all resources.

If receiving and sending are not balanced the environment will be void of needed resources or obstructed with to many resources or waste. Either condition will bring system activity to a halt. Pollution is a system out of balance.
A system many be internal or external, dependent or independent with respect to other systems. An internal system is a lower level system with respect to the higher level system that contains it. A system can use another system or any part of another system, it becomes a user and the used system a subsystem of the user. A subsystem can be internal, external, independent, or dependent.
For example, a house is a dependent system, it lacks a regulation activity. It becomes a home, an independent system, when people live in it. People become internal independent systems with respect to the home. The house also contains many internal dependent systems, such as, the electrical, plumbing, and heating systems. The house is external with respect to all the lower level internal systems. In turn the internal systems may be dependent or independent, for example the furnace is dependent upon the thermostat for regulation which in turn dependent upon the people for regulation. All the systems in the home are subsystems of people. The house in turn is internal to the external system the biosphere.
Since all systems are dependent upon another system or a community for resources, this dependency is not a useful distinction between systems and has been eliminated from the definition of dependent. A dependent system is a deficient system, at least one part is missing and the system is dependent upon another system, which becomes a subsystem of the system, to supply the missing part or parts. If the subsystem ceases to be active the dependent system will cease to be active when it needs the missing part. Obviously an independent system is a sufficient system.
Some systems are so dependent it is difficult to decide if they are truly systems because they are nothing more than a set of directions, such as a legal system, a math system, or a gambler's system. However in the mathematics of systems, a dependent system plus and independent system equals an independent system. This explains why people play such an important role in every system we create. People are employed to create independent systems out of dependent systems.
Subsystems are used to save resources by eliminating redundancy, to reduce complexity, to increase control, and to concentrate on important activities. A system can be used by many users, like a service bureau, a telephone company, a library, etc., saving resources for all. The resources saved by using a subsystem is off set by the need for communication and coordination between systems.
A system is defined by a user, but both the user and the system are limited by the higher level system containing them. If a higher level system ceases to be active so do all internal systems, a point continually ignored, along with dependency, by radicals and anarchists, whose only method of change is destruction.
Every system has size limits, it must big enough and small enough. Peter Drucker explains why GM is the right size and American Motors was to small to be viable international automobile producing and marketing corporations. Every system must be large enough to contain the resources necessary to achieve a goal and small enough to react to changes in the external environment.
The attributes of a system is a function of all the attributes of its parts. Usually a system is more than the sum of its parts, a system has synergy, an attribute unique to systems. A system cannot have an attribute that is not an attribute of one of its parts or the resultant of a combination of the attributes of its parts. All attributes of a system are limited by the ability of the user who creates the system and by the attributes of the resources available to the user. A system will only do what it is directed to do, it can only operate on resources that are available to the system using operands in the system.
It seems stupid to make these statements, but how quickly people forget. We assume if our system has an attribute, every system does, not true. A frequent example is a parent scolding a child, "Why can't you remember what I told you to do?" The child can't remember because the child has not developed a long term memory, the child's growth program is not yet complete, his system does not have the attribute. "Can't you hear," the other person writes, "No, I'm deaf." "Every child can learn to read." Maybe, if their IQ is above 80. In order to learn a system must be capable of changing some of its own instructions and or some of its own reference points. If this capability is missing the system cannot learn.
We are more willing to accept the corollary, if our system lacks an attribute, another system may have it.

Before continuing answer the following questions.

1. The survivors of an arctic exploration shipwreck were lucky to escape in a life boat with food, water, and sleeping bags. They had no choice but to begin the thirty day journey back to base camp. After several days of rowing along the shore of Greenland through the debris of glaciers and sea ice, they exhausted their water supply. How did they survive?
2. Another exploration crew was lost in the desert without water. How did they survive?
3. A truck diver was not paying attention and wedged his truck beneath a low bridge. He could not move the truck forward or backward. He tried to flatten the top of the truck by placing a crow bar between the truck top and the bottom of the bridge, but that only freed the truck near the edge. How did he free his truck?
4. Define problem.
5. What must you know before you can solve a problem?
6. Define management.
7. Label the systems on your list, dependent, independent, internal, external, user, or subsystem. If internal, name the higher level system, if dependent, name the subsystem.

Choose a system and name each attribute of the system. Start with the last word in the hierarchy of a system and progress one word at a time to the left and down as you name each attribute.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B05 'What makes a manager unique'

Once a system is created the parts of a system are fixed unless the system contains an additional activity, the management activity. It is the most powerful of all system activities. It can plan, organize, allocate, schedule, implement, evaluate, etc., the principles of management, but all of these activities only provide support for the most powerful activity of management. Management can dact operators, operands, and instructions to ensure the goals of the system are achieved and maintained. This capability allows the management activity to indirectly dact an entire system. The management activity can dact instructions to dact the system or any part of the system. A new operator and or a new operand maybe needed to operate the dacting instructions.
Why an new word? Because change maybe capricious, random, or accidental and dacting has none of these attributes. Jerry Noder created the word dact from the acronym for file maintenance operations, Delete, Add, Change, Transfer, during my tenure as manager of information systems.

Delete identify as waste and eliminate a resource.

Add create or accept a new resource.

Change change an attribute of a resource.

Transfer move a resource to a different location.

The last two operations can be achieved by executing the first two, but in doing so the efficiency of the system is reduced. Later the word dact was expanded to include all the steps necessary to achieve and maintain a goal.
The management activity does not operate the system, one or more operators operate the system. In a simple system with only one operator, obviously that operator will operate the management activity as well as all the other activities of the system. Generally the management activity is supplied by another system, the management system. It may be internal or external, dependent or independent. The user can be the management system.
The effectiveness of the management activity is limited by the quantity and quality of the goals, reference points, and directions supplied by the user; by the precision and accuracy of the dacting; and the quality and quantity of the communication between the management system and the managed system.
Precision and accuracy can be thought of as the result of a marksman shooting three rounds at a target. If the three rounds hit the target close together, the marksman was precise, if all three hit the bull's eye close together, the marksman was precise and accurate.
The power of management is directly proportional to the operators, operands, and directions that management can dact. Management can not manage what it can not dact. This explains our difficulty with bureaucracies. A bureaucracy does not have a management system only a supervisory system. All directions are created external to the bureaucracy and can not be changed by the supervisors.
To evaluate is to compare all attributes of a resource to reference points and to determine the meaning of any significant differences. If a difference is significant, does it indicate what dact should be performed next, if so management should create the directions to be used to perform the dact. During the evaluation management should create directions to be used during regulation for each possible output of the comparison. Never let an operator guess what to do next.
People resist dacting and are more likely to resist the social changes rather than the technical changes listed below.

1. Threat to status, new position below old position.
2. Threat to ego, present skills not needed on new job.
3. Economic threat, loss of job or reduced income.
4. Job complexity, a new system is usually more complex.
5. Job ambiguity, system appears to be in control instead of a person.
6. Job rigidity, program and system time schedule must be met.
7. Insecurity, a report replaces people contact and or relationship changed because of a change in data flow.

Because of these reasons people have been unwilling to participate in system dacting. 'If it's not broken, don't fix it,' and 'leave it the way it is,' are common responses. Rarely can a system stay the way it is if new equipment is used. New codes will be needed to tell the new equipment what to do.
A system must operate in reality (today) not what someone thinks it should do or what someone would like it to do (tomorrow). Once a system is operating (today), then plan the system dacting so the system will do what is desired (tomorrow).
Don't confuse plan or intend with wishful thinking, people often say they plan to do something or they intend to do something when their plans or intentions are little more than wishful thinking. A plan is the intended directions of a system to definitely do something at a scheduled time in the future. There is nothing wishful about a plan, it will be carried out unless conditions change, a plan is a variable goal.
On the other hand technical people have been trying to teach the users the technical aspects of a system instead of a general understanding of the system. How can communication take place if a general understanding and the definition of new terms has not taken place?

People will support system dacting because:

1. Development and growth.
2. More opportunities are possible.
3. New skills to be learned.
4. A new system should eliminate dullness and drudgery.
5. An increases in status.
6. Work is more satisfying.
7. Greater rewards.
8. More efficient.
9. Decrease in pressure.
10. Work simplified.
11. A person is in control.

Does it surprise you that the reasons to support system dacting were often the opposite of the reasons to resist system dacting? To often we resist before we analyze.
The systems approach is a useful way for people to define and analyze their world and to restructure or create new systems.

The steps to dact a system are:

System analysis

Problem solving

Design

Construction

Implement

Audit

During each step use the definition of a system as a guide to help prevent errors of omission. Make sure the level of detail is appropriate to achieve a given step. The following assumes the above steps have been assigned to a special subsystem, a project team, consisting of users, mangers, system analysts, operators, etc.

    System analysis

Determine goals

Establish reference points

Determine present conditions

Why change

Gather data

Present system analysis to management and obtain approval to proceed, else recycle through the analysis.

    Determine goals

Determining the goals is the user's responsibility. The attributesof a goal must be logically consistent, otherwise the goal can not be achieved. If a system has multiple goals, the goals must be logically consistent or the achievement of one goal may negate the achievement of another, leaving one or more goals permanently unsatisfied.
Don't limit the number of possible solutions by stating a goal in terms of form, structure, or method because many times the attributes of a goal can be achieved with a different form, structure, or method.
A goal is not a solution, never state a goal in terms of a solution, obviously the number of solutions is one or minor variations of that solution. For example, our goal is to increase the income of the poor by taxing the wealthy and giving the taxes to the poor. A better goal would be, our goal is to increase by five thousand dollars every family with incomes below five thousand dollars.
State goals in concrete attributes. Choose attributes that are countable, measurable, comparable, or observable, in this order. If these conditions are met, everyone can recognize the progress toward the goals and morale and enthusiasm can be easily maintained to reach the goals. Don't say, "We want a fast efficient system," say, "We want a system with a one hour turnaround and at a cost of five cents or less per transaction."
Counting can be very precise and accurate, such as counting eggs, oranges, or dollars. Measuring is less precise and accurate than counting. Measuring is using a standard to make a comparison. A reference point becomes a standard when two or more systems agree on the value of the reference point. If two or more systems agree on the accuracy and precision of the standard and the measurement, the value of a measurement will be the same for all systems, it will be objective. A comparison is subjective, it has value only to the system that made the comparison.
The purpose of a goal is to give everyone a way to recognize what has to be done without constant re-explanation. If goals are to be effective, they must be thoroughly understood and accepted. If those responsible for achieving the goals participate in setting the goals, understanding and acceptance is more likely. The most effective way for a user to communicate a goal is to make their actions consistent with the goal; to state the goal in concrete terms; and provide rewards only to those who move toward the goal.

Establish the reference points.

Identify the factors that will determine success or failure and create reference points to be used during regulation and evaluation. A reference point is a data resource stored in the environment to be used by the compare operand to indicate a goal is being achieve, it has been achieved, and it is being maintained.

Determine the present conditions a system survey

What is being done?
How much is being done?
How long does it take?
How is it being done?
Where is it being done?
When is it being done?
Who is doing it?
How safe is it being done?
Is protection adequate?

Why change?

Why is it being done?
Why is that much being done?
Why that long?
Why is it being done that way?
Why is it being done there?
Why is it being done then?
Why is it being done by that operator?
How well is it being done, can it be improved?
Is there duplication, substitution, similarity else where?
What and where are the obstacles?

Are these the only questions that should be asked? No! Every system is unique and most of the questions will be unique to the system. Beware of the error of allness, I shall return to it later.

Gather data

What are the facts (data)? What are the obstacles? Research the historical records, determine the different types of transactions, the resources involved, their volume, their frequency, and their identity. Don't forget to include the historical records as part of the data gathered. Identify resources, their attributes, use, and source. What is the order of events? What degree of accuracy is wanted and needed? What regulation is required, the level, time, and location?
Interview the users and operators, ask for ideas. What should the new system produce and in what format? How can it be done more easily? Take notes and write a memo to the users and operators and ask for comments on what you thought they said. This helps to eliminate misunderstandings and documents the interview.
Observe the system in action. Remember an inexperienced operator is usually of little help and an experienced operator may know the system very well, but may not be able to communicate that knowledge.
An old story illustrates this obstacle. A traveling salesman was lost, not a building or a road sign was in sight. He saw a small boy sitting on a stump near the side of the road and felt a little relieved.
He asked the boy, "How do I get to the nearest town?"
"I don't know."
"What is the name of this road?"
"I don't know."
"Is there a main road near here?"
"I don't know."
"Where do you live?", and the boy pointed across a field.
"Tell me how to get there."
"I don't know."
The salesman was very frustrated but continued to think of questions to ask the boy in the hope of gaining some information. "How do you go to town?"
"I don't go."
"How do you get to school?"
"I follow the cow path to the creek and the creek to the bridge and then I follow the railroad tracks to the highway and there's the school."
"How do you do go to church?"
"My dad takes us."
"Which way do you go?"
"I don't know." The salesman had reached his limit.
"You don't know very much, do you?"
"I know one thing."
"What?"
"I ain't lost."

Sometimes the only way to learn about a system is to observe the system in action, follow the operators without interfering with the operations. Record what they do and when they do it. Take special note of any unusual resources used. Don't frustrate an operator by asking 'why'. Remember, an operator follows directions, so ask, 'Can this operation be done another way?' Be careful not to ask questions that will put anyone on the defensive. Follow the principles of active listening and transactional analysis.
A word of caution, be prepared for the unexpected when observing a system in action, you may discover operators not following directions and managers not doing their job, such a discovery can be very embarrassing for all concerned. Also you may discover larceny or other forms of misconduct, know what your response will be before you are faced with such situations.
Review the data, eliminate irrelevant data, consider the source of the data and consider the quality of both the data and the source. Make sure the data gathered covers the entire scope of the system. Recycle through the system analysis steps until the system analysis is as complete and error free as is feasible. Can a system analysis ever be 100% complete? No!

Present the system analysis to management and obtain approval to proceed, else recycle through the analysis
             again.

The systems analyst must translate the user's and operator's statements into system specifications. The principle cause for disappointment with systems analysis is the failure of the analyst to obtain proper data from the users and operators. They may have made many elegant statements, but none of the terms were defined and neither was a method of quantification established. When such statements are translated into system specification they will be incomplete and incorrect. The users and operators usually don't know or can not communicate all the details in one interview and the systems analyst is not allowed enough time to do a thorough job, making systems work evolutionary instead of revolutionary. Why is there never enough time to the job thoroughly the first time, but always time to do it over?
In addition, users and management have abdicated their responsibility by refusing to become involved or acquainted with new technology and is applications. This abdication is not new, it has occurred with every new technology. The technicians on the other hand continue to teach the user and management the technical aspects instead of a general concept.
Management does not manage the technologies, it lets them manage themselves, viz., medicine, law, engineering, accounting, etc. A technician becomes a manager of a technology and eventually learns the principles of management.
Systems analysis gains by eliminating the execution of unnecessary instructions. For example, a secretary receives five documents every hour, opens the file drawer, removes a file folder, places the documents in a file folder, places the folder in the drawer, and closes the drawer.
Each step takes ten seconds, for a task time of fifty seconds. This task is done each hour of the work day for a total time of four hundred seconds.
Let's change the instructions. The secretary allows the documents to accumulate in the 'in box' until the end of the day and opens the file drawer, removes a file folder, places five documents in the folder, replaces the folder, and shuts the drawer, and repeats the instructions until the task is finished. The total task time remained the same.
Let's change the instructions again. At the end of the day, the secretary opens the file drawer, removes a file folder, places all forty documents in the folder, replaces the folder, and shuts the drawer for a total time of fifty seconds, a savings of three hundred fifty seconds.
'More is better,' is a very common fallacy, it assumes time was saved by handling 'more' at one time. The handling of 'more' didn't save the time, handling 'more' was the result not the cause. If the instructions had remained the same except for changing the task from each hour to the end of day, the first change, no time would have been saved at all. The time savings was gained by eliminating seven redundant repetitions of the task, the second change. Remember an operator follows instructions and operates the operand according to the instructions, nothing more and nothing less.
According to Drucker optimizing resources ranks third in increasing resources. He ranks exploitation first and discarding unused resources second.

    Problem solving

Determine the problem

Solve the problem

Do a feasibility study

Present the study to management and obtain approval to proceed, else recycle through the appropriate steps
            again.

Determine the problem

The problem is how to achieve the goal, how to proceed from the present conditions to the conditions of the goal. In order to state the problem, the present conditions and the goal must be defined. State the problem in terms of attributes of proceeding from the present condition to the goal. If the problem is not stated in terms of proceeding from the present conditions to the goal, the problem may be forced to fit a solution.

Solve the problem

What should be done?
Why should it be done?
How much should be done?
How long should it take?
How should it be done?
Where should it be done?
When should it be done?
Who should do it?

Think about the attributes of the problem in rapid succession several times until a pattern emerges which encompasses all the attributes simultaneously. Suspend judgment. Don't jump to conclusions. Explore the environment. Vary the temporal and spatial attributes of the resources. Examine each attribute independently and coupled with other attributes. Create as many solutions as possible. Be careful, the first solution tends to inhibit or limit other solutions, so create a second solution as soon as you can.
During problem solving don't concentrate so much on the trees, the forest can't be seen or vice versa. If you can't create solutions, change your representational system, if concrete, try abstract, if similar, try opposite. Examine corollaries and their converses. Vary attributes. Take a break. Do something else. Talk about the problem. Redefine the problem.
Remember, some problems have no solution and some solutions are infeasible. Some problems can be proved to have no solution or current technologies may not be capable or current knowledge may not be far enough advanced to provide a solution or a solution may not be achieved in a reasonable length of time or without expending unreasonable amounts of other resources.
For example, find the integer values of the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter or travel to another galaxy, or manually count a billion one dollar bills or manually count the number of connecting wires from each node to every other node in a net work with twenty nodes. In such cases, redefine the goal to create a new problem that can be solved.
Wait until you have generated three or four solutions before evaluating any of the solutions. Critically evaluate your solutions, constructively evaluate the solutions of others. Don't criticize the solutions of others and above all don't ridicule their solutions. I don't know of anything that will stop the formation of new ideas any faster than ridicule. Everyone's mind will go blank faster than you can blink and no one will be able to create another solution. Ridicule has a very serious and insidious side effect no matter how subtle, it inhibits the sharing of ideas. Don't ridicule, it discloses the bigot, the demagogue, and ideologue. Ridicule is a sign of stupidity, ignorance, and prejudice. Always show respect for yourself and those around you. Estimate the resources required to effect each solution. Then choose a solution, but have at least one alternate solution available. Make a list of who and what will be affected by the solution and how they will be affected.
How successful the solution to a problem will be, depends upon the nature of the system and its operating directions, the support management gives to the solution and the systems projects staff, the technical skill and personal finesse of the staff, and the degree to which the solution is regulated.
For a solution to be successful, regulation needs to be centralize, for cost, quality, quantity, coordination, and education of staff and users. If a solution is the first of its kind, then construction and implementation must be a part of the solution.
Remember, a goal is not a solution, an error common in the political arena. Many times a goal is touted as a solution or a solution is touted as a goal, they result in highways that end in the middle of nowhere, factories on one side of the river and workers on the other, refrigerators sent to a topical country to store pharmaceuticals and the country doesn't have electricity, etc.

Do a feasibility study

Compare the operating cost of the current system with the estimated operating cost of the new system. Don't forget the cost of new equipment; the cost of maintenance on all equipment, systems, programs, and training of staff and users; plus the cost of error and failure recovery procedures; and the cost of documentation and paper handling. Compare the benefits of the new system to the old system. Will the benefits justify the cost of dacting the new system?

Present the feasibility study to management and obtain approval to proceed, else recycle through the appropriate steps again.

Design

Define and design the output that will achieve the goal, then define and design the process that will produce the output, then the resources can be determined that will be needed by the process. Then the supporting activities can be defined and designed and their resources determined. Then the directions for all activities can defined and last, the environment can be defined and designed.
At the operation level work backwards from the output that will achieve a goal, define the operand than will produce the output, followed by the operator, the input, and the instruction. Then define and design the next to last operation whose output will be the input to the last operation and continue to work backwards toward the first instruction of the activity.
An example will illustrate why this order should be followed. A baker must know the output first because most baked goods are made from three main ingredients, flour, shortening, and water. Their ratios and preparation methods may vary some what, but the major difference is the leavening. The difference between bread, biscuits, crackers, and pie crust is, bread is made with yeast, biscuits with baking powder, crackers with soda, and pie crust without any leavening. If the output is not defined first, the baker may end up with wallpaper paste.
The two steps, determine the problem and define the output are the most difficult to do and the most critical to the success of the project.
If the system design includes more than one operator and or uses one or more systems, communication and the delegation of authority and responsibility must be included in the design. Do not separate authority and responsibility. Is it any wonder why 'good' people never run for public office or work for the government or any bureaucracy. The people in control want to keep the authority and give you the responsibility.
When the design is complete recycle through the design step again until the design is as consistent, complete and efficient as is feasible.

Construction

Construction and implementation are unique to the system, only general guide lines will be presented here. Use the systems approach on every step of construction and implementation. Using the system design, add a list of all the resources needed by the construction activity along with an estimate of quantity and quality to the list of resources needed to create the system.
Select the construction crew, organize, coordinate, communicate, and train. Assign responsibility for each construction activity and allocate resources to each crew member. Together develop a manpower schedule and a relational schedule for each construction activity. Use such techniques as PERT, Critical path, etc.
View schedules as a long trip, if the speed limit is not exceeded, everything that happens will slow the trip, the only way you will arrive on time is if you made a lucky guess or a very poor estimate. Emergencies, absenteeism, reruns, delays beyond the control of the construction crew, etc., make detailed time schedules infeasible. Errors in estimates and instructions and failure of operands and operators can not be predicted. Besides, most systems are unique, they have never been built before so how can anyone have had the experience to make a time estimate, how could a detailed time schedule be accurate? A detailed time schedule will be a waste of resources make a relational schedule instead. What should be done in what order.
People tend to underestimate the time needed to do any given task. One of Murphy's laws states that a well planned project will take twice as long as planned, a poorly planned project will take three times as long.
If a project schedule slips, seven alternatives are often used, the first three are constructive, the last four are smoke screen.

1. Change the schedule.
2. Increase resources.
3. Decrease quality.
4. Start another project.
5. Point out problems in another area.
6. Reorganize.
7. Tell someone else how to do their job especially if unqualified to do so.

Changing the schedule is the most realistic choice. Decreasing quality is undesirable and increasing resources is generally a waste. Once a project is behind schedule, it takes four times the resources to get back on schedule, not twice as much as most people assume. They forget the learning curve of new crew members and the time lost by old members while teaching them.
Over time is not a viable option for more than two weeks, don't use it on a large project. After two weeks of over time the amount of work being done in an over time day will be less than the amount done in a normal work day before over time began. After one month the error rate will be so high more errors will be made than were corrected and the project will fall further and further behind schedule.
Make progress reports to all involved at predetermined intervals of time and on the completion of major segments of the project. Make sure everyone knows who is involved, who is going to do what and when, where the resources are, and the communication links between each system involved with the project.
Make detailed specifications for all parts of the system and detailed instructions for their construction. Name each element of data, each type of transaction, each activity, each resource. Make each name unique to avoid misunderstandings. Modify the system design as the detailed specification become known for all parts of the system and the construction activity. Make a list of all critical points for all activities.
Review the plans to construct the system and the system design to ensure errors are absent. Update all documentation and begin construction. Using the previous list create detailed recovery procedures at all critical points. Test each part as soon as possible and run the new system in parallel with the old if possible. A one for one comparison is the most reliable error check. Macro testing almost always exposes errors not discovered in micro testing. Recycle through the appropriate steps until all known errors have been removed. Update all documentation, make the final project report to management, and obtain approval to implement the new system.

Implement

Before doing so, double check user and operation manuals, train users and operators, and establish operations schedules. Don't let up now and make a foolish mistake when the project is nearly complete. Coordinate the implementation. Create detailed instructions to implement the system. Use the list made earlier to review and remind, who is involved, who and what will be affected by the new system and how they will be affected.

Implement the system, shut down the old system, and update all documentation. Be sure to remove all old user and operation documentation and store them. Have an alternate plan ready to execute, such as restarting the old system or doing it manually if something unexpected happens.

Audit

At an agreed time following the implementation, audit the new system. I mean audit, not review, check or test every detail. Does the system perform as designed and deliver the anticipated benefits? Compare the results of the audit to reference points to make sure all goals were met. If not, dact the goals, the reference points, the system, the documentation, etc., until the user is satisfied.

Was the project accomplished within the budget? What improvements in the management activity may have permitted better estimates and avoided the schedule slippage. Would additional training or knowledge have helped. Did the new system create unanticipated obstacles? Were the new obstacles eliminated? What new dacting should be considered as an extension of the old dact?

Present the audit report to management. If additional dacting is approved recycle through the appropriate steps, otherwise prepare for the next project.

Dacting a system is a recursive and a reactionary process, it will always be evolutionary. There is no way to be certain a system is consistent, complete, and error free. When an error is found, invoke the appropriate recovery procedures, recycle through the appropriate steps to correct the error, and proceed.
Thinking should be done before a crisis, most people do not think well under pressure and it is highly improbable any solution created during a crisis will be effective and almost impossible for it to be efficient. Do a system analysis before a crisis is reached, before panic prevents effective thinking.

Before continuing, use the systems approach to answer the questions from the last chapter.

1. Did you state their goal, their present condition, and define their problem? What was their goal? Did you say 'survive'?
I intentionally threw you a curve ball by asking, 'How did they survive?'. Users and operators commonly describe their situation using similar statements. Selecting which data elements to focus on can save time; however, when you asked, 'What is the obstacle?', you should have reformulate their goal.
The obstacle to survival was the lack of fresh water; therefore, their goal was to have a supply of fresh water, their present condition was the lack of fresh water, and their problem was how to obtain a supply of fresh water. Did you gather data and then vary form, structure, and method?

2. The crew in the desert had the same problem.

3. The key to the man and the truck is to concentrate on what conditions can be varied and by trial and error a possible solution will emerge.

1. To solve their problem you do have to have some knowledge about what constitutes fresh water and the various forms of water. Sea water and sea ice contains salt thus eliminating those two sources. Glaciers are formed by layers of snow and snow is frozen fresh water. By selecting the small pieces of glacier ice, melting the surface in their hands to remove the sea water and placing the remainder in containers for later consumption, they were able to obtain a fresh water supply.

2. The solution to their problem involves another form of water, water vapor. They slept during the heat of the day and at dusk they hung every piece of metal in their possession to expose as much surface area as possible. As the night air and the metal cooled, what little moisture was in the air condensed on the metal surfaces. They collected the water and filled their canteens. At day light they traveled until it was to warm and repeated the process.

3. A little boy suggested, "Let some air out of the tires."

Next define information, recognition, a document, a carrier, a channel, giving, and sharing. You should be able to answer, "Which came first the chicken or the egg?" And what makes a manager unique?"

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B06 'Information and data are they synonyms?'

The word information, in my opinion, is the most abused word in our language, next to love. Twice in his book, Claude Shannon, the father of information theory, made a distinction between information and data, very few people have paid attention to this distinction, most people treat data and information as synonyms.
I can only vaguely remember one entry, he said in effect, "Obtaining information from data is like playing a game of twenty questions." If you are not familiar with the game, the first question is, 'Is it animal, vegetable, or mineral?', after the first question all other questions are answered yes of no.
It seemed to me that information is a logical extension of a bit and data. If a bit, in our language, is a character and data is a word, then information is a sentence. Information is the output of the intelligence activity operating on sentence equivalent data; subject, verb, and object; the minimum dimensions of information.
For example, 'John painted the house.' The characters are the bits, the words the data, and information can be created by the intelligence activity because the minimum dimensions of information are present. If any dimension of information is missing, it will be supplied by the user with the possibility of arriving at the wrong conclusion. Allow me to use a crude example from my school days that illustrates this difficulty very well.

Oh, Johnny let's not park here.
Oh, Johnny let's not park.
Oh, Johnny let's not.
Oh, Johnny let's.
Oh, Johnny.
Oh!

In the last line all three minimum dimensions are missing. When analyzed in context with the preceding statements the intelligence activity can create information; however, the information created may not be what the sender intended.
Please analyze the data in the following table (an array) one line at a time so you eyes cannot skip ahead.

Person                  A    B      C      D

Kisses per day      0     4     40     20

What information do you have? Add another row.

Person                 A     B     C      D

Kisses per day     0     4     40     20

Sex                      F    M      F     M

Did your information change? Add another row.

Person                A     B       C     D

Kisses per day    0      4      40    20

Sex                    F      M       F     M

Years married    0     40    0.02    0

Did your information change again?

The value of old data does not change, but information changes as new data is acquired. Generally new data will add another dimension, direction, or perspective to the information already available.
Information is vector, it has dimensions and a direction. It is subjective with respect to systems, that is, it cannot be transported by a system across its boundary. The direction is dependent upon the coordinate system of the system, and because of this dependence information is only available to the system that creates it.
In order to transfer information to another system, data must be created from the information, the data transported to the other system, and information created from the data by the other system, a very error prone activity. It is imperative that only necessary data be transported without omitting essential data and the data be in a format that aids the quick and accurate creation of information without any loss of value (meaning). Remember the meaning is not transported with the data, only the bits are transported, bits that can easily be recognized as data. The receiving system must recall from storage the agreed meaning of each data element and then create information from the agreed values.
Bits are scalar, they do not have a direction or dimensions. Bits are objective with respect to systems, that is, they can be transported by a system across its boundary. Bits are created by a change in a system, by a compare operand, or arbitrarily by a user. A bit is any sign, signal, symbol, etc., a singular attribute of a resource. When a system recognizes a bit, it recognizes that singularity and nothing else. Each bit is recognized in isolation from all other bits, even when many bits are received and recognized at the same time. A bit to one system may not be a bit to another.
For our eyes, each photon is a bit, for our nose the smallest number of atoms necessary to cause a neuron to fire, etc. For writing, the smallest bit is one character of our alphabet, a number, one blank space, one punctuation mark, etc., but marks in sand, in clay, on paper, etc. or light, heat, sound, electricity, magnetism, etc., can be bits and bits can be created from geometric figures, art, music, etc.
Data is one or more bits whose value is assigned by a system. Bits do not have a value until a system gives them one. Data is scalar, because bits are. Data is objective with respect to systems, that is, data can be transported by a system across its boundary because bits can. Data can be logical, numeric, alphabetic, etc. Written words and numbers are common data, but data can be created from any bit, any singularity. Remember, the vast majority of data is nonverbal.
The value of data is the result of assignment. A user arbitrarily places a value (meaning) on a combination of bits of a resource to represent the attributes of something else. The value of the assignment can be as simple as yes or no, true or false, or present or absent; or as complicated as love, freedom, or democracy. People tend to think of the last three words as information, but they are only data, data representing a different level of abstraction for sure, but still data. The same is true for the name of a set, a vector, or a hierarchy. The name is still data no matter what it represents; therefore, if data is to have objective value, every system using the data must agree on its value (meaning), the systems must cooperate.
Don't confuse the bit with the resource and don't confuse the resource with the bit. Be sure the value of a resource is congruent with the value of the attributes of the resource and assign value only to attributes that are recognized as data and don't confuse the assigned value with the value of the resource or any of its attributes.
Even when systems use the same data and agree on the value of each data element, information can and does vary between systems. Each system has a different history, a different environment, a different perspective, and different capabilities, each of these is a separate coordinate for each data element. Each coordinate is determined when the data element is first stored in the system. These coordinates may change slowly as new experiences are acquired. Information is vector because when a system analyzes the data under consideration it also analyzes all of the coordinates of each data element, this results in information having a direction as well as dimensions. The direction of information points toward knowledge.
Let me use another author's example in an attempt to make the distinction between scalar and vector clear.
If I were to stand in a corner of a room and point a two foot long two by four so it bisected the angle of the walls and was parallel to the floor, the walls and the floor become the coordinate system to determine the location and dimensions of the two by four. Now if I moved to another corner and did the same thing, the two by four would point in a different direction because the new corner would create a new coordinate system.
The length, width, and height of the two by four is independent of either coordinate system, the appropriate calculations would determine them to be the same in both coordinate systems; therefore, the dimensions of the two by four are scalar. The direction of the two by four is vector because it is coordinate system dependent. In order for the two by four to point in the same direction in both coordinate systems, its coordinates must under go what is called a coordinate system transformation when transported from one coordinate system to the other.

Data is the output of the assignment activity operating on one or more bits. Data is scalar because data is coordinate system independent. Data can be transported by a system across its boundary. Information is the output of the intelligence activity operating on data.

Information is vector because it is coordinate system dependent. Information cannot be transported by a system across its boundary because the direction of information is coordinate system dependent. The intelligence activity can create data from information.

Knowledge is the output of the wisdom activity operating on information. The wisdom activity can create information from knowledge thus allowing the whole process to be reversed.

Because of synergism each system has an intrinsic value, a value to itself; therefore, systems tend to be self centered and self perpetuating. Also the intrinsic value seldom agrees with the value assigned by a user.
As users, we have assigned a value to the data processed by a computer. The computer knows the value of electric and magnetic fields and whether circuits are open or closed, but it does not know the value we have assigned to the data. We force the computer to follow our directions and it processes input data to produce output data, both have value to us, but not to the computer. The computer does not process information, it processes data.
A radio wave does not know it is carrying laughter, music, talk, or noise. The wave does not know the value we have assigned to it. Use and value are the responsibility of the higher level or using system not the lower level or used system. This responsibility cannot be abdicated.
Some systems can only recognize bits at one level, other systems can recognize bits at many levels. The difference between written and spoken language and decimal and binary numbers illustrate this difference. In the system of written language, a bit is one character or a blank space, in the system of spoken language, a bit is one phoneme or the absence of a phoneme. In the decimal system of numbers, a bit is a numerical character zero through nine or a blank space, in the binary system of numbers, a bit is zero or one or a blank space.
Since a system can only recognize bits, only the scalar attributes of a resource will be recognized by a system. For example, one pea, a spoon full of peas, a serving of peas, a can of peas, a case of cans of peas, a pallet of cases of cans of peas, a system will recognize the pea, the spoon, the serving, the can, the case, and the pallet. It will treat each as a bit, it will ignore the other attributes of the resource until it can make a comparison and determine the other attributes and then it can create data to represent those attributes.

A vector must operate on a system as a whole or else one or more parts of a system will be changed or destroyed; therefore the resultant of all vectors must be zero or at least below the stress level of the system. A system will only recognize the result of the vector's action on the system.

For example, time, motion, and gravity, all operate on a system as a whole and a system can only recognize a scalar component, the result of a comparison, the difference between two arbitrary points. The change in time as measured by a clock, a distance between two points as measured by a ruler, or the difference between zero and the weight of an object on a scale.
A system cannot distinguish between being at rest and moving uniformly in a straight line. For example, we don't notice the rotation of the earth or its movement in orbit even though neither is a straight line. The force of the angular acceleration is below our stress level and we cannot detect it without making a comparison.

A vector may operate on a system, a vector may enter a system, and a vector may pass through a system, but a system cannot recognize a vector, it will treat the vector as a bit.

A transaction is the sending of a resource across a system boundary and being received by another system. Since a bit is scalar, recognition is scalar and all transactions will be recognized as scalar by a system; therefore, a system cannot 'knowingly' transport a vector across its boundary.

This is why information, knowledge, and all other non material resources are available only to the system that creates them. In order for one system to share non material resources with another, data must be created to represent those resources, the data transported to the other system and then the other system must recreate the non material resource from the data received.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B07 'I can't see that'

An incident with a coworker convinced me that the distinction between data and information was more than an intellectual conclusion. By choice, I use a red pencil to mark errors because the red contrasts very well with the black and white of the page preventing uncorrected errors. But my coworker missed my red circle around an error I found in his report and he distributed his report with a major error, much to his embarrassment. When I saw the uncorrected error, I went to him to find out why he had missed my circled mistake on his rough draft. He exclaimed, "I can't see that, I'm color blind, I can't see red! It appears black, I can't see the contrast you can!"
Obviously, his bits was not the same as mine so his data and information could never be the same as mine, but it is also true for normal people. Our eyes can only detect three wavelengths of light yet our brains 'see' all colors. We can point to a color chart, the bits, and we can assign an agreed value, a name, to each color creating data, but the color on the chart is not the information the brain 'sees'. The brain creates information from data, it cannot 'see' the color on the chart, it only 'sees' the nerve signals, the data from the eyes corresponding to the intensity of the three wavelengths of light, the bits that the eyes can detect. The color, the information the brain 'sees', is not the bits the eyes saw. The color, the information, my brain 'sees', is not the same as the color you brain 'sees'. Oh, how much we take for granted.

A bit to one system may not be a bit to another, data to one system may not be data to another, and information to one system is never information to another. It may be close, but never the same and data is not information and information is not data.

'Supporting definitions'

Are you aware of the vector attributes of any book, any sentence equivalent data, subject, verb, and object, the minimum dimensions of information. Information is vector, it has direction and dimensions, so do paragraphs, pages, articles, magazines, books, plays, movies, etc.
Input, operand, and output is sentence equivalent data; therefore instructions are vector. Instructions must be followed in a certain order. The operator following instructions may be oblivious to the vector attributes of the instructions and many times the system as a whole is oblivious to the vector attributes of the directions. Directions have direction. Directions should point to the goal. Often we lose sight of the goal.
Because data to one system may not be data to another, an instruction to one operator may not be an instruction to another, and directions to one system may not be directions to another. An instruction can be as simple as the shape of a nail, as direct as the instructions in a bevel, as complex as quantum mechanics, as difficult to interpret as DNA or the interaction of complex forces.
For example, the bevel on the bolt of a door 'instructs' the bolt to slide into the door and to push against a spring as we close it. The tension in the spring 'instructs' the spring to push the bolt into the latch hole when the door is aligned with the latch plate.
Also, one system may recognize only one level of bits and data and therefore only one level of directions, while another system may recognize more than one level of bits and data and may recognize more than one level of directions. The hierarchy of each system can be vastly different, very simple to very complex.
Each system has its own hierarchy and if the difference in hierarchy is forgotten a major obstacle to accurate thinking will be created. Confusion. One way to eliminate some confusion is to have agreements between systems as to the meaning of data. Avoiding confusion places a very high value on agreement and agreement implies cooperation. Our society pretends to ignore the value of cooperation, we place way to much emphasis on competition and use cooperation all the time without giving it the emphasis it deserves.
The recognition (identification) of a resource can be made by comparing its attributes to reference points, a tedious and time consuming process. To avoid repeating this process, a data tag, such as a name or a code, can be attached to the resource following recognition. Comparing the data tag is much faster than comparing attributes for all subsequent identifications. An even faster way is to store the resource at a known location within a system. Its location then becomes the resource's identity. For example, water from a faucet, gas when we turn the valve on a stove, electricity when we plug an appliance into an outlet, etc.

A transaction is the sending of a resource across a system boundary and the receiving of the resource by another
                     system.

A record is the data describing a transaction or an operation.

A document is a permanent (nonperishable) carrier used to transport and store one or more records.

A file is an environment that can contain one or more records or documents.

A carrier is a resource that is capable of transporting resources from one location to another.

Many carriers are familiar, such as, trucks, ships, paper, pictures, etc. To use a given carrier, a resource may have to be converted to a different form and reconverted on receipt. Be careful with some carriers, like pictures they may be worth a thousand words, but they are also worth as many interpretations as there are observers, because they carry billions of bits. Each observer chooses only a small number of bits to use and the value to place on them. The large bulk of the bits are ignored.

A channel is an environment used to facilitate transportation and contains the carrier. It protects resources during transportation and limits the number of resources that need to be recognized upon receipt. Recognition is faster if the channel contains one carrier and a small number of resources, a telephone line or a radio, for example.

Broadcasting, and its synonyms, is the sending of resources in all directions. The intended receiver may or may not receive the resources and other systems may receive the resources for whom it was not intended.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B08 'Giving and sharing and material and non material resources'

I spent a lot of time consolidating my notes, the vast majority were worthless. Most of the authors duplicated what others had already written, they just used different words to say the same thing. Why was duplicate data worthless? Then, because the systems approach provided a different way of thinking and the appropriate definitions, a major distinction between resources, one most people know instinctively, was raised to the conscious level. Data does not have a quantity attribute.
Let me explain.
All resources fall into one of two major categories, they are either material resources, such as metal, wood, cloth, cement, plastic, plants, animals, people, etc. or they are non material resources such as data, information, thoughts, ideas, solutions, experiences, feeling, love etc. Review this list and add your own to it. Did you notice an attribute common to all non material resources? All non material resources are the product of a brain.
These two major categories have very distinct attributes. To describe one attribute, I chose to limit the meaning of the word sharing to my connotation. The words giving and sharing are used as synonyms and yet to me sharing has the connotation of fairness, equality, and ownership, I still have the resource, while giving always gave me the feeling of unfairness, "Why do I have to give my brother part of my cookie?"
Material resources occupy space and have a quantity attribute, a giving and taking attribute. Any system can take more of any material resource provided the system has enough space to hold more and obviously, a system can never give more of a material resource than it has. A system can give and take material resources, but if a system uses a material resource, the resource maybe degraded and the system can no longer give the original resource to another system.
For example, if someone gave me food, I could in turn give the food to another person as long as I didn't eat it or let it spoil. Once I ate the food or let it spoil, I can't imagine anyone else would want it. When we give a material resource to another system, it is gone, it is out of our control, we don't have it any longer.
Non material resources do not have a quantity attribute, they have a sharing attribute. A non material resource can be shared with another system and both systems have the resource. A non material resource can be shared many times, it is not degraded during sharing. Energy and other resources are expended during sharing, but the non material resource is conserved. As with a material resource, control is lost, the other system can do as it pleases with the non material resource, but the sharing system still has the resource, it only lost energy and any other resource expended during sharing.
Another peculiar attribute of a non material resource is, once it has been shared, a second sharing is meaningless. Sharing is an all or nothing activity, you can never have more of a non material resource. Like the words on this page, if you have two copies of the same page, do you have more data or information? No, you have two copies of the material resource, the page, but no additional data or information. Non material resources do not have a quantity attribute, they have a sharing attribute. You either have it or you don't.
Did you apply this attribute to love? If you did you came to an astonishing conclusion. You cannot love one person more than another, you can spend more time with the person, you can pay more attention to the person, you can form more and stronger bonds with one person than another, you can value one relationship more than another, etc., but you cannot love them more. Love is a non material resource, you either love the other person or you don't, love does not have a quantity attribute, it has a sharing attribute. We can share our love with as many people as we like and never run out, this is one aspect of love that children do not understand. For me, the sharing attribute more than compensates for the absence of the quantity attribute.
You can have the same experience more than once, but you will only gain more information from the second experience if you did not completely analyze the first experience. The only benefit of the second experience was to have a second chance to finish the analysis.
The value of any resource is determined by the user, but the value of a non material resource has a peculiar twist. A material resource gains value with scarcity, as more systems want the resource and the smaller the amount available, the more its value increases. Its value becomes infinite if one system can corner the market and hoard all of a material resource.
If one system hoards a non material resource its value does not increase above the value the system places on it. To increase its value it must be shared, its value increases the more it is shared and only stops increasing in value when all systems have the non material resource. The more you share the more you gain because when you share other systems are encouraged to share with you and you gain their information, knowledge, love, etc., the value to both systems increases.
The corollary is also true, if we do not share a non material resource it becomes worthless. For example, if we do not share our love or knowledge, what good is it and when we die it is lost forever if we do not share. For me, solutions are the most valuable resources we can have, especially the solutions to our survival. Not to share them is the epitome of stupidity and greed.
The consequences of the peculiar attributes of non material resources are far reaching. Obviously I have only begun to explore the consequences, but several are readily apparent.
First, our economic system encourages people to hoard non material resources, thoughts, ideas, solutions, etc., in an attempt to use them to gain material resources such as, food, money, gold, jewelry, property, etc., decreasing the net value to the community.
Second, our welfare system cannot succeed or at best it can only partially succeed because we can't share material resources, we can't share a share of material resources, we can only give a share of material resources to another system, and we cannot force another independent system to spend it resources wisely, a euphemism for the way we would want them to spend their resources. Since all systems require material resources to survive, it would be ridiculous to destitute one system to help another. We may disagree on what constitutes an excess, but we can only give excess material resources away.
Third, our dislike of taxes and welfare is apparent. Taxes are forced giving and instinctively we rebel against the inherent unfairness incorporated in giving and we rebel even stronger because we are forced to give away resources which we do not consider excess.
We don't like to accept welfare because of the inherent unfairness of taking. Everyone likes to think they earned it or at least deserve it. Again, because of the inherent unfairness of giving, we don't like to give welfare because we falsely assume the recipient hasn't earned it or doesn't deserve it. We confuse the intuitive repulsion to the unfairness of giving and taking with pride, a very unfortunate error because it blocks our view of the truth and interferes with finding a better solution.
Fourth, because only scalar attributes are recognized by a system and all non material resources are vector except data, data must be created to represent the other non material resources before sharing can take place and before sharing can take place agreement must be reached upon the meaning (value) of the data being shared. This means we must cooperate, cooperation is much, much more important than competition.
For example, we cannot share an experience (an event) with another system, we can only share our interpretation of the experience after we have created data to represent that interpretation. More than one system may witness an event, but because all systems occupy space and move in the time dimension, each system will observe an event from a different perspective and the data received from an event will be filtered through the history of each system; therefore, the information created from each event will be unique for each system witnessing the event. We place the value on the experience, the experience itself has no value until we give it one.
People have a tendency to exaggerate the value of an experience, we give it much more or much less than it deserves. "I'll teach him a lesson," is a common error. Who among us is wise enough to predict what the other person will learn from any experience we create for them. More often than not it will not be what we expect. It will probably be more than we expect because our value of the experience was to narrow, to focused, to limited. We can not teach anyone anything, we can only create an environment in which the other system has the opportunity to learn.
Another common error is to say, "That was a horrible experience for you." In doing so we have exaggerated the experience for us and the other person, making it worse than it was. We must be careful when we share data about an event to avoid placing our value on the other person's experience. The result of this error can be observed at any funeral, people will place their value on another person's experience and in most cases making the situation worse than it should be.
Remember, you cannot share material resources, you can only give and take them, but you can share non material resources as often as you like and you will never have less, you will never run out, you will never lose the non material resource by sharing.
I hope you will do three things.
First, I hope you will be able to share experiences with other people without placing your value of the experience on the other person. There is so little we can do for one another, but we can share and we can avoid placing our value on the other person's experience.
Second, I hope when you give or share you realize the difference between giving and sharing. Resources have very unique attributes and unless these attributes are kept in mind our actions and our thinking will not be congruent with the resources used.
Third, I hope you will add to our common knowledge by sharing your knowledge of giving and sharing.
Remember, a bit to one system may not be a bit to another system, data to one system may not be data to another system, and information to one system is never information to another. One system may not recognize the same attributes as another system, one system may assign a different value to the data, and information and all other non material resources are vector and cannot be transported to another system, only data representing the other non material resources can be shared.

Before continuing a few stories and questions.

A wealthy English couple left their estate while their home was being redecorated. On their return, the wife suddenly remembered she forgot to lock the family heirloom silverware in the safe. She was beside herself, the silverware had been in the family for centuries. It was covered by insurance, but it could never be replaced. What a way to end a very enjoyable vacation.
After entering their home, both ran to the dinning room. The safe was open and the silverware was gone. Scotland Yard investigated the loss. No one had seen the silverware, not the neighbors or the decorators. The neighbors had seen an unknown man in the neighborhood shortly before the decorators came. Scotland Yard found a thumb print of a notorious burglar, John Robbie, in the new paint on the windowsill. The window was open and decorators had closed all the windows before they left.
Are the following statements true?
1. John Robbie entered the dinning room through the window.
2. The silverware was stolen.
3. John Robbie stole the silverware.

Some story questions
4. A man was killed in a car accident, his son received severe head injuries. At the hospital, the neurosurgeon refused to operate saying, "I can't, this boy is my son." Explain?
5. What becomes wetter and wetter the more it dries?
6. A plane flying from Lansing to New York crashed in Ontario, where do you bury the survivors, in Michigan or Ontario?
7. You are riding in an electric train 'A' going east at forty miles an hour. Before you reach a north south crossing an old steam engine 'B' crosses going north at thirty miles an hour and after you cross a diesel engine 'C' crosses going south at ten miles an hour. A stiff wind is blowing from west to east at twenty miles an hour. How fast and in what direction is the smoke moving from engines, A, B, and C?
8. How many baseball players on a team?
9. How many balls to a walk?
10. How many strikes to an out?
11. How many outs to an inning?
12. Define communication.

Which came first the chicken or the egg?
For every new species the egg contains the directions to create the new chicken, but every egg is created by a construction crew, the old species, the chicken. You may think this answer begs the question and in away it does, because the usual question is, 'Who constructed the construction crew?' No matter how far back into the past you wish to go, another construction crew constructed the later construction crew.
The egg and the chicken is a restatement of the prime mover problem and is created by our way of thinking. A way of thinking is at the same time a way of not thinking. A way of thinking can create problems as well as solve them. The answer begs the question because of our 'western' way of thinking, linear cause and effect. We can extend the egg and chicken problem forward and backward in time without end, but how did it begin and how will it end? Our way of thinking creates an infinite series, one we cannot answer to our complete satisfaction.
In 'Eastern' thought the problem is not linear, but circular, a large circle of eggs and chickens. There is no beginning or end, only an endless repetition of the cycle. The problem for the 'Eastern' thinker is 'How to end the cycle?', stop the world I want to get off.
Every way of thinking has at least one blind spot. To avoid having our thinking imprisoned in a blind spot, we must be able to create new ways of thinking, we must have diversity. Diversity can create conflict, a topic to be discussed later.

What makes a manager unique?

If you can dact the directions to a system you are unique you are the manager of that system.

You should be able to answer, 'If a tree falls in a forest and there was no one present to hear it, was there a sound?

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B09 'Is communication a two way street'

Communication is the transporting of a resource from one system, the sender, to another system, the receiver, and the sender knowing the resource was received without loss of value. Communication consists of a message transaction, a reply transaction, validation, responding, and verification.

A message transaction is the sending of a resource, transporting the resource to the receiver, and the recognition and acceptance of the resource by the receiver.

A reply transaction is the sending of a resource from the receiver, transporting the resource to the sender, and the recognition and acceptance of the resource by the sender.

Generally, the reply will be a data resource indicating the value of the message. The receiver should reply. If the receiver does not reply, the sender is responsible for requesting a reply.

Validation is the receivers responsibility, a responsibility abdicated at the receiver's peril; hence the old proverb, 'buyer beware.' The receiver must determine, does the message have value, is it useful, accurate, true, etc.

Responding is the change in the receiver's activity in accordance with the receiver's interpretation and agreement with the message received.

To verify the message, the sender compares the value of the reply and if the result agrees with the sender's reference points, the message is verified, that is, the message has been received without loss of value. This does not mean the receiver agrees with the message, it only means the receiver received the message without loss of value, the message was not damaged, polluted, corroded, eroded, etc., during the sending, transporting, and receiving activities. If the sender does not agree with the reply, the sender will send another message requesting additional data and or sending additional resources. Messages and replies will be sent back and forth until verification is reached. Verification is the senders responsibility.
Caution, the receiver may deceive the sender by sending a reply indicating agreement when in fact the receiver does not agree with the message received; therefore, the only reliable conformation of agreement is to observe the receiver's response or the result of the receiver's response.
An example,

Bank Robber                     Teller                      Comments
Approaches window    'Good afternoon'            Both systems ready
Hands teller a note      Reads note                   Message sent and received
                                   Pushes alarm button     Reply sent Message verified and reply
                                                                        indicates strong disagreement
Runs away

Another example,

Customer                          Clerk                       Comments
Approaches counter        'May I help you?'       Both systems ready
'I would like an
ice cream cone.'                                               Message sent and received
                                       'What flavor?'            Reply sent requesting more data
                                                                        because the message was incomplete
'Strawberry'                     'Single?'                    Still incomplete
'Yes'                               Prepares cone           Receiver is responding
                                      hands to customer
Observes the cone
is a single scoop
Tastes cone and it is
strawberry 'Delicious'                                       Message verified
                                      'One dollar please.'   Message sent
Hands clerk a bill                                            and received
                                      'Thank you.'              Reply sent,
'Have a good day.'         'You too.'                   received and message verified

                                End of communication

Usually, the first message is an inquiry message to ensure the other system is ready to communicate and to check on the details of communication before sending the main message. When communicating with some systems every transmission must contain an inquiry message preceding the main message and other systems are ready all the time and an inquiry message is not necessary.
When communicating with a complex and or a busy system, an inquiry message is a must, otherwise the message will never be received, it may not even be accepted by the channel let alone the receiver. An end of communication message is not necessary, but it insures that both systems know all messages belonging to that communication session have been received. The sender should send the last message.
Communication is a very powerful activity and it is very very vulnerable to noise, error, erosion, corrosion, etc. Also, the value of the message and the reply must be objective, both systems must agree on the value of all resources sent and received. Some of these difficulties can be eliminated or reduced by establishing a communication system between frequently communicating systems.
Communication will fail unless; both systems have the capacity to communicate, both must have a data processing and a communicating activity; both are ready to communicate; both agree on the value of the resources transmitted; and the resources are protected during communication.
An obstacle in communicating with complex technical systems is their messages are very precise, complete, logical and without loose ends, everything is defined. Less precise systems have a tendency to transmit 'You know what I mean' messages. No system knows what another system means unless there is a prior agreement. The agreement must be logical, consistent, without error, and without omission.
Remember, the difference between communication and sending,transmitting, broadcasting, dispersion, etc.; is the sender knows the message was received without loss of value. Once the fundamentals of communication have been mastered, then the art of conversation, dialogue, persuasion, consensus, compromised, etc.; can be learned and used. If communications fails the others cannot possibly succeed.
I'm well aware the above definition does not include the mass media as forms of communication. The mass media are not communicators, they are senders. This point was demonstrated very clearly to me by a class exercise meant to stress the importance of 'two way vs. one way communication.'
The class paired off and sat back to back. One person was given a picture of geometric figures and the other person a blank piece of paper and the geometric figures. The person with the picture told the other person where to place the geometric figures on the paper without responding. When the person with the picture was done communicating 'one way,' a score of one point was awarded for each piece in the proper place and another point if it was in the proper orientation.
The students exchanged places and repeated the exercise using 'two way communication,' the students with the blank sheet of paper could respond, they could ask questions. It was obvious to me that 'one way communication' was a misnomer, it was merely sending, and the 'two way communication' was really communication. If the activity didn't have at least two transactions, a message and a reply, it was not communication.
Now some comments from the literature on human communication. The sender and the receiver see and hear subjectively and selectively. The essential, important, and incidental are not determined by logic alone, but rather by a curious mix of cognitive and emotional factors. Again, a way of thinking is a way of not thinking. People tend to magnify the pleasing and diminish the unpleasant. People don't necessarily agree on what is significant. Perspective and premise underlie all communication, both must be addressed to prevent misunderstandings.
All communications reflect attitudes, they govern our perceptions and conceptions of reality. Communication is an experience band phenomenon, it covers the whole of our experiences and is a function of the receivers expectations.
I attended a seminar on problem solving, expecting my problem to be solved. When all I received was how to go about solving my problem, I was very disappointed. A moments thought rectified the error in my thinking. Only I could solve my problem, no one else could and my focus shifted, but my disappointment did not leave me until much later. My expectation was unrealistic and I should have known better, but that was my expectation at the time. Expectations are real, don't ignore them.
Observation and judgment are related, but distinct processes, don't jump to conclusions, analyze. He who discriminates well communicates well. One characteristic of intelligent people is they perceive difference when others see only similarity and similarity when other see only difference.
Be careful with 'either' and 'or', they may simplify communication and at the same time introduce over simplification (noise). Examples are an example of over simplification. Words are uncertain vehicles for the transmission of ideas. Messages should be organized according to the logic of the receiver, transmitted on the receiver's wavelength, and use the receivers language.
Guard against the error of 'allness', that is, the communique contains only and all there is to be said about the topic. Remember for communication to be possible in the first place the time dimension had to be contracted, be sure to re-expand it. No one can possibly say 'all' in the short time span of communication, nor could any one receive it 'all'. The error of allness is the most frequent error people make and we make the error most often during communication.
The 'picture' sent is not reality, what the sender sent cannot be all that was in the senders system and what the receiver received is not all the receiver perceives. Communication is the exchange of different pictures of reality, be sure to disagree agreeably or another obstacle will be created, don't put one another on the defensive. That's why I used the introduction I did. I tried to avoid putting you on the defensive before you were introduced to some of the more novel ideas of the systems approach in the hope you would examine the ramifications as they were introduced.
Manner is usually more important than meaning. Select the proper channel and don't over load. The interaction between sender and receiver must be conducive to the free flow of data.
Communication is organizationally determined and organizational pressures cause noise. Every field has its own vocabulary and unless the communication patterns and procedures are well planned, chaos will result. Principles govern the implementation of techniques. Techniques cause rigidity, principles are flexible. Rules are not meant to be broken, they are meant to be guides to action, only break a rule when the situation warrants their breaking.
As a sender ask; what do I intend to say, what will I actually say, what will it mean, what is the emotional impact, what will the receiver expect, what will the receiver actually receive, and how will the receiver feel about what was received?
The sender is more the servant that the master, the sender may dictate what is sent, but the receiver will dictate what will be received and what the response will be.

The answers to the previous questions.

'If a tree falls in a forest and no one is present to hear it, was there a sound?' Yes there was a sound, but no data or information. Bits were created by a change in a system, the tree falling created sound (bits) signifying a change in the system had occurred. The sound was potential data, but without an intelligent system to assign a value to the sound before the sound dissipated, any data and therefore any information, was lost along with the sound.

Is communication a two way street? Yes, if the activity does not contain at least two transactions, a message and a reply, it is not communication.

1,2, and 3, did you jump to conclusions?
4, did you vary attributes?
5, 6, and 7, did you focus on one attribute and ignore another or did you focus on both without considering each one independently?
1, 2, and 3. A few days after their return, a neighbor also returned from vacation and brought the silverware to them. She forgot they had left and came to tell them she was leaving. She found the house empty, the servants had left before the decorators arrived. She found the silverware and didn't know what to do, she couldn't make the safe door lock. She took the silverware with her and put it in her safe.
Scotland Yard found John Robbie murdered by another robber. He had cut John Robbie's thumb off and used it to make thumb prints all around the house to confuse Scotland Yard.
4. Did you vary the gender of the surgeon, if you did the solution is easy, the surgeon was his mother. This question exemplifies our difficulty with stereotypes and returns us to 'a way of thinking is at the same time a way of not thinking.' Habits, pigeon holes, labels, stereotypes, and ways of thinking reduce our work load, but at the same time they block our view.
5. If you focused on drying instead of wetter, you might have come to the conclusion, a towel.
6. Again did you focus on one attribute at a time? If you did you would realize that survivors are not buried.
This type of error is a constant source of difficulty, the brain 'knows' what should be present and over rides the data sent to it from the senses. Be sure to recheck all input data to make sure this mistake is not made.
7. This time did you couple attributes to the engines and waste to the carrier? If you did, you would know an electric train does not produce smoke and the wind carries the smoke at the speed of the wind and in the direction of the wind, regardless of the speed and direction of the source.
8. Nine on a team during play.
9. Four.
10. Three.
11. Six. Did you forget the other team?

Next, define data processing. Name a few forms and reports you use. Examine them. What do you like about them? What don't you like about them. A hint, consider income tax forms, credit card invoices, bank statements, credit card statements, or utility bills.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B10 Data Processing

This chapter contains my thoughts on data processing and is slanted toward computer data processing, but much of the material applies to every data processing activity.

Data processing is an additional activity that all but the simplest systems have. In some systems it is the process of the system, such as, accounting, mass media, telephone, newspaper, computer data processing, etc.

Data processing is collecting, auditing, editing, storing, processing, and reporting.

Collecting is receiving input data or obtaining it. Use forms to aid the quick and accurate creation of data from information.

Auditing is comparing the data for validity, accuracy, legibility, length, values, valid names and codes, check digits, etc. The audit activity should identify the error, which data element and document, and report the errors, the data, and documents in the same order as received.

Editing is auditing plus the capability of correcting errors by evaluating and using judgment.

Reporting is outputting data in a format that aids the quick and accurate creation of information.

Always report as soon as possible. Also, report statistics such as, the number of documents, records, data elements, lines of print, number of errors and type of error by operator and batch, also report the amount of time required to process each batch through each step and operator. With this data, repetitive errors can be detected and corrected and any change in the validity of the data will be more visible. The first use of this data should be to determine the cost benefit ratio to determine which statistics are worth gathering and reporting.
The input data should be audited and edited to prevent system efficiency degradation by processing waste. Intelligent systems edit, other systems audit. Intelligent systems can use judgment. For example, computer data processing (CDP) systems can be programmed to find someerrors, but not all errors and some errors intelligent systems can find much more efficiently. Spelling is a case in point. A CDP system does not check spelling, it searches a library and if the word is found, the system assumes the spelling is correct, but it could be the wrong word, such as meat for meet, write for rite, Smith for Smythe, etc.
Some errors a CDP system cannot detect at all, such as the wrong words as illustrated above or the transposition of account numbers, 1093 for 9013, if both numbers are valid account numbers, the transaction will be posted to the wrong account. An intelligent system may not detect these errors either, but CDP system never will. Check digits were appended to account numbers in a effort to eliminate this type of error. Some check digit schemes are so sophisticated they are error correcting, but they require more space and time.
If like documents are grouped together, a batch, the amount of coding and data conversions can be reduced. The like data can be entered once for all the transactions in the batch, reducing the amount of data input and the corresponding risk of error. Common groups of data are dates, location codes, and resource codes. Like wise, if fixed input data, such as today's date, this location, this activity, this resource, etc., are entered and stored in a CDP System and retrieved as needed with respect to the fixed data a large amount of input data can be eliminated, again saving resources and reducing the possibility of error.
Assign a code to each batch and store the code so it can be compared to prevent the same batch from being entered twice. Total like numbers in each record and store in a batch header record and compare to a total computed by the audit activity. This procedure can reduce input errors. For people, keep the batch size to fifty. Be sure to audit for errors of entering, transcribing, converting, and balancing.
Addressing instructions are needed to store and retrieve resources. Obviously, the storage environment has to be created and maintained before it can be used. The environment is designed to protect the resources. Store a surplus of critical resources. Critical data should be copied and stored at more than one location within the environment. Create a recovery plan, the instructions to restore resources from storage should an error or accident occur.
For example, a CDP system could use the grandfather, father, and son approach. Data is output to file A. File A is used as input to the next step and data output to file B. B becomes the input to the next step and output is stored on file C. C becomes the input and the output is stored on A, and the cycle repeated. If an error occurs, two correct files are always available, by reprocessing the appropriate steps. I use this procedure when I write, if I make an error or I'm not satisfied with a revision, I use the previous copy to restore the data.
Data consists of three main types, logical, numeric, and character. The data type determines the allowed operations and the speed of each operation places an economic limit on the operation.
The logic operands are 'and', 'or', and 'not', which can be combined to create, operations such as compare, search, sort, etc. The numeric operands are 'add', 'subtract', 'multiply, 'divide', etc., the familiar operands of arithmetic. Character operands, sometimes referred to as string operands, are 'move', 'truncate', 'pad', 'concatenate', which can be combined to create such operations as read, write, display, edit, etc.
Data processing in array (table) format is fast provided the instructions are simple and repetitive. Exceptions require more instructions; therefore exceptions slow data processing. Data processing in sentence format is slow, it must follow the rules of grammar and the rules are usually not simple. Sentence format is commonly used by people when talking, reading, writing, etc. CDP in sentence format follows the rules for character data.
To be useful, data processing operations must shrink the time dimension, in other words, data processing must be fast to have value. Logic operands and instructions are short and compact, requires few bits and very little space and time. Numeric operands and instructions are longer and are not as compact, require more bits, space, and time. Many character operands and instructions are long and slow and require many bits. Data entry requirements follow the same pattern.
Systems process bits, the larger the number, the larger the space and time needed for processing. Since the data processing requirements for numeric data is more compact than character data, numeric data processing is much faster. Is it any wonder then that the first computers were number crunchers. Word processing had to wait for lower cost and higher capacity computers. Also, numeric data entry is faster, only one hand is needed to enter numbers, the other hand can be used to move documents.
Array format is rows and columns of data, the identity of each element is determined by its relative position with respect to a name or code at one end of each row and column. A telephone book is a familiar example, names in one column and numbers in the other.
Sentence format is character data. Identity is made by data type and location, sometimes a slow and complex operation. A name and address on a letter is a familiar example, also the sentences on this page, subject, verb, and object.
Most reports are either action, status, or reference. An action report requires a reply, such as invoices, checks, exception reports, etc. Exception reports imply a reference point, exception to what? Statements, statistical reports, aging reports, reconciliations, etc. are status reports. Books, stock holder reports, historical financial and sales reports are reference reports.
The principle users of the data should have considerable freedom in determining the report content and distribution. However; the users should only ask for data they will use. The data supplied will depend upon the user's goals and quantified by what data is available and feasible to obtain.
The usual difficulties with forms and reports are to much data, unnamed data, missing data, obsolete data, and nice to know but not needed data. Ask about the data, is it useful, relevant, would it be missed if not available? What would a change in data reveal? Would a change indicate dact was needed and if so, what dact was needed? Does it measure achievement? Does it reflect performance vs reference points? Is additional data needed? Would a different data type yield a better profile?
Design forms and reports to fit the systems and procedures not the other way around. Design reports first and forms last, remember, output first, input last. Reports should be designed to aid the quick and accurate creation of information from data. Forms should be designed to aid the quick and accurate creation of data from information. Both should meet all the requirements of a communication message.
Establish a forms and report file containing data, history, and a copy of each form and report by subject (name), function, number, and date of last revision. Choose one to be the file and cross reference the others. The name should be descriptive, for example, don't use, report 1.
When designing a form or a report consider the following: necessity, purpose, duplication, circulation, economy, the frequency of use, where used, central or decentral, the work environment, addressing requirements to store and retrieve, sources of data, other sources that may use or supply data, the nature of the data and its sources, uses, and sensitivity, public relations and advertising, and the distribution and communication methods and the speed required. Facilitate distribution by using titles, numbers, copies, and color. Use as little data as possible, as few lines, pages, and copies as possible. Pay close attention to the data needed, the field size for each data element, the body, the format, the equipment used, and the sorting sequence. Consider the scope of coverage, the degree of detail needed; storage, where, how long, and method of disposal. Economize by using standard sizes, small size, few copies, and a short storage time.
Reduce costs by reducing regulation, paperwork, forms, and reports in this order. Save money with forms and reports not on them. Paper is cheap, regulation and paperwork are expensive. Good forms and reports can eliminate unnecessary paperwork and aid in the regulation of activities. The effective use of data is the final measure of a form or a report.
For reports: Use array format when possible, remember to identify each row and column. Page headings should contain dates, page number, report number and name.

For forms consider:

the heading, the body, and the closing
the company name and logo
the instructions on the form
dates, signatures, seals, affidavits
methods available to record
the data volume used in a time period and the frequency of the period
copies, use and distribution
use of lettering
zoning, put like data and from one source in a contiguous area
specifications, size, color, paper,quality, quantity, etc.
purchasing or producing internally
inspection

Identify data fields on a form by name, such as invoice number, today's date, billing date, address, etc. Design for easy use internally and externally, by data entry, by the audit and the edit activity, and by all machines that process the form. The steps in preparation should be easy to follow, have continuous flow, minimum entries, don't jump around the form to enter data on it, and use machines effectively and efficiently.
Instructions should be readily available given the form number or name, at the level of the operator who enters the data, and easy to confirm the appropriate instruction has been located. The instructions must define the purpose of the form, who enters various entries, the data field terms, and the distribution of copies. Have complete instructions for all types of transactions entered on the same form. Never let an operator guess, always instruct exactly. Forms should be readily available where needed and should be a part of a planned management communication set.
Until this chapter I have kept detail to a minimum, but people have a tendency to ignore forms and reports because the work is boring and unglamorous. Unfortunate, the report should be done very well because the report is the end product of data processing, it is the only thing the user will see as the result of all the work you have done and the user will judge all of your work by the report.
Forms gather the data that form the basis of the report. If the input is garbage so will the report. Why defeat the entire purpose of data processing with poor reports and forms.
I only gave about half of the detail needed to design forms and reports well, but I think it was enough to indicate how much effort should be expended on them, the rest of the detail should be supplied by the vendor of the material and equipment used.
I would like to share with you a time saving procedure and how it came about. Maybe you will have more success in implementing it than I had. For more than five years I tried to convince users to lay out their own reports. Almost all refused on the grounds it would take them to much time. One user did and the time savings was real.
When I began programming, our computer was very small and slow, every step was a separate program. To produce a report involved extracting the desired data from files, sorting the data, accumulating the data for each data element of the report, sorting the accumulated data into report order, and printing the report.
One user refused to participate in designing his report, he told me to do it, he was too busy. He told me vaguely what he wanted and I produced a report and showed it to him. He wanted a couple of changes. I made the changes and showed it to him again. This procedure was repeated for six months before the report was acceptable.
I never could convince him how much time we were both wasting. Every time he made a change, I had to change every program and the sorting parameters, increasing the possibility of error. I made enough mistakes in writing the programs, I didn't want his corrections to add to the number of errors I made. Since his salary was much greater than mine, he would not believe by saving my time he could also save his.
At that time all the other programmers were doing the same thing, so I didn't get any inspiration from them. One day while I was rummaging through our unused furniture warehouse, I came across an old wide carriage pica typewriter, I later learned it was used to create financial statements before the computer was installed. The carriage was wide enough to hold fourteen inch computer paper and I knew what I was going to do with it. When ever a user would not cooperate in report design, I typed what I thought the user wanted using green bar computer paper and the users thought it came from the computer, only a few ever discovered what I was doing.
I could make changes in an hour. The users never could understand why I was so fast to finalize their reports and so slow in comparison, to put their reports into production. They didn't know I didn't write a single program until they agreed to the final report layout. I used this procedure at every opportunity.
The user came up behind me while I was typing his report. He didn't interrupt me until the last number, by then he realized what I was doing. He pulled the report from the typewriter, examined it, and burst out laughing.
He, like many people, had deified the computer, its output was written in stone. The value he had assigned to the computer was so in congruent, it not only blocked his view, it prevented him from thinking about this area of his work.
He knew every number on the report was fictitious, but every number was reasonable, he could not tell it was not produced by the computer. He realized what he already knew and understood, every receiver must validate the message, the report, received. He had to have reference points, accounting people call them 'controls', to compare the message, the report, for validity. He knew computer output was no more accurate than the instructions people created for the computer to follow and the data people gave the computer to process. His way of not thinking was exposed and he burst out laughing.
He gave me full cooperation on all succeeding projects, unfortunately he left the company before I could enlist his aide in convincing more than one other user. That one user soon learned what I was trying to tell him. I could not put all the data he wanted on one sheet of paper without cluttering the report and reducing the easy of creating information. As he continued to type his report designs he quickly learn which changes were easy to do and which ones were difficult. He also learned that the changes he wanted were completed faster and with fewer errors.
Many years later, while I was reflecting on the above story, I also learned, as with aiding memory retention, using as many senses as possible helps people understand easier and faster. Tell, show, and do. Tell them what you want, give them a copy of what you said so they can read it. Show them what you want, give them an example of what you want so they can see it. Demonstrate what you want and have them demonstrate it. With caution use touch, smell, and taste, as well. Does this sound familiar, it should, every teacher uses it.
Allow me to share another personal anecdote. One of the advantages of using a computer is the low cost of collecting data (statistics) concerning any task done by the computer. Every member of our staff and every system, program, and task had an individual identification code. At the end of each day, week, and month, data was summarized and reported. Insignificant data was eliminated from the collecting process.
Data concerning programmers and data entry operators supports the conclusions of the 'Mythical Man Month', (see bibliography). A monthly program report identified every program recompiled during the month and the number of lines of code for each program. Every recompile indicated a mistake was made by someone, a user, a systems analyst, or usually a programmer. For data entry operators, a weekly and monthly report contained the key strokes, the time, and number of documents for each data entry task. By combining the corrections made during verify mode for each task an error rate and the number of key strokes per hour could be calculated for each data entry task and operator.
Over a long period of time each person had a characteristic error and productivity rate. After reading the 'Mythical Man Month', I compared the error and productivity rate of over time work performed by each person to their regular time work. The error rate increased and the productivity fell for every person and continued to do so for each day of over time. When I could, I would stop the person involved from working over time until their error rate and productivity returned to normal.
Many times other managers questioned why my people were not working over time when theirs were. I had the numbers to support my position, but do you think I could convince any of the other managers? No! I don't understand it, most people think computer reports are written in stone, but no one else would accept my response to the error rate and productivity report and follow my example and stop their people from working overtime.

Before continuing answer the following question.

Your broker advised you to buy a stock and during the following year the price rose until you had a fifty per cent profit. Your broker called, "The stock hit a new all time high."
"Do you think it will continue to rise?"
"Yes, I think it has three chances of going higher during the next year and one chance of returning to you purchase price. If you wait and the price falls, you will not make any money. If you sell now, you will make fifty per cent. If you wait and the price does rise you will double your money what do you want me to do?"

Did you recognize this question as the opposite of an earlier question. Neither question has a correct answer. Most people will take the sure gain and wait hoping to avoid a loss. The answers to these questions points toward a natural bias in the way we think, we have many more built in biases, but better studied under psychology than systems.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

B11 The Systems Approach

Did you notice the very limited role history played in problem solving? Only a small amount of very current history was needed to establish the present conditions. Avoid using to much history, more often than not, history is an obstacle to problem solving, old solutions tend to inhibit new solutions. But don't discard history out right because of this obstacle, an old solution is better than no solution and an old solution in one field may be a new solution in another.
Were you surprised the word 'computer' was not used more often. The systems approach is not limited to computer use, in fact, it has nothing to do with the use of computers. Computer use should be the result of the systems approach, not the cause, a very common error when considering the use of a computer. A system analysis should have been done long before the use of any new equipment was ever contemplated. Very often the old system is so inefficient that two jobs must be done in a very short period of time. One, clean up the old system and two, convert to new equipment, placing a tremendous burden on everyone concerned.
The word 'need' was also used sparingly because of the difficulty in distinguishing between an actual and a perceived need and since both are encompassed in the word goal, why use two words when one will do.
The word 'objective' used as a noun is absent, again why use two words when one will do. To use both 'goal' and 'objective' is redundant and if one is the name of a set and the other a member of the set why are they being treated as equal, the value of using a hierarchy will be lost. This error is common in definitions and descriptions, I hope I have avoided it. To avoid misunderstanding, never use the name of a member of a set as the name of the set and never use the name of a set and one of its members as equivalent.
The word 'control' was used very sparingly because it is reserved to describe regulation in a closed loop feed back system where regulation is much more precise and accurate, such as, using a thermostat to 'control' the temperature of an environment. The capability of control is really very rare and usually requires a large expenditure of resources.
As humans we like to think of ourselves as being in control, we are 'free', we can go anywhere, do anything. We habitually ignore, we can't go anywhere, do anything, we must remain in our biosphere at all times and must follow its directions, not ours, if we are to survive.
For example we travel under water, in the sky, and in space, but do we really? No. Everywhere we go we must take a microcosm of our biosphere to surround us and we must return to the biosphere when we deplete the resources or pollute the environment of the microcosm.
Resources can be used as long as directions are followed. Every system must follow directions or risk being destroyed. We don't even know the direction of our own system, we can't even manage ourselves. The only instructions we can dact are the very few we have learned. Is that what we mean by control?
Systems use resources according to the directions of the using system, but the resource continues to follow its own directions and if the system directions are not compatible with the resource directions the attributes of the resource will be destroyed. We use the euphemism 'degrade'.
For example, we can cut a tree into lumber. We can continue to cut the lumber and as long as we follow directions we can continue to use the attributes of lumber, but if we don't, we will end up with sawdust and the attributes of lumber will be lost. We can burn the lumber for fuel, in doing so we have destroyed all the attributes of lumber and have traded those attributes for the attribute of energy and also have created waste, ashes and gasses.
In both cases we used certain attributes and in the process we destroyed some attributes and or systems. We can use the attributes of a system or a community of systems, but for every use there is a loss and waste. We lost the shade of the tree, its oxygen production, and its erosion protection to name a few. We must always balance use with loss and waste.
Users have some degree of control at the level of the attributes used, but the individual systems in the resource continue to follow their own directions without regard for the user and at that level the user does not have control.
The tree was a system of cells and the cells were created from a community of atoms and molecules. Each level has a different set of attributes. As long as the directions at each level are followed the attributes can be continually used at that level, but the individual cells and atoms follow their own directions, not the user's.
Unfortunately, when ever a system uses another system, the system is used as if it was a single attribute, a bit, the other attributes of the used system are ignored.
A system can enter and leave another system, but it does not give up any characteristic while doing so, it keeps its integrity. Therefore, the management system of the now higher level system can communicate, supply or withhold resources, or expel the internal system and can deny entrance thereafter, but it cannot dact the system, even when it is within its environment.
Most economic systems and most employers (users) consider employees as a resource and ignore that every person is an independent system. This error has been a source of difficulty for centuries. Every normal person has their own management system and is capable of evaluating the environment surrounding them and can change directions if they disagree with the conditions and or the activities in the surrounding environment. The change in direction may not be compatible with the goal of the using system.
Most changes are made capriciously, dacting is not capricious, dacting encompasses all the steps of the systems approach. Dacting is guilty of malice of forethought, dacting is premeditated. Monotony feeds us, variety pleases us, change scares us, dacting satisfies us.
Remember dacting only applies to the directions, operators, and operands, all other dacting is done indirectly by an operator operating operands while following directions, such as a surgeon, a contractor, or a repairman, but great care must be exercised or the other system may be damaged or destroyed. The directions of a system are known best by its creator.
By definition, a system can be used by another system and system activities are confined to the environment. The effectiveness of dacting is in direct proportion to the knowledge of the directions of a system. The management of any resource is in direct proportion to the dacting that can be done. If a manager can't dact the direction of a system, a manager can't manage the system; therefore, a manger manages a system, a manager leads independent subsystems.
We need to define, develop, and use the leadership activity. An activity that has been known for centuries, but is still not understood. Any search of the literature will disclose how little is known. One article will contradict another and some authors contradict one paragraph in another. This much is known, the leadership activity can obtain the willing acceptance of goals by another independent system. Most books and articles on management blur the distinction between management and leadership and confuse the issue. Management is not leadership and leadership is not management. A manager manages a system, a manager leads people.
The old activities of authority, power, fear, coercion, etc., must be eliminated from our interaction with independent systems because they can not be managed, independent systems must be lead. We must place much more emphasis on cooperation and much less on competition. We must use communication, persuasion, motivation, agreement, etc., the attributes of leadership or we will eventually destroy our own economic and political system and possibly ourselves as well.
When a thinking system spends most of its time thinking about itself, it is in trouble. Its way of thinking will become so restricted and its way of not thinking so expanded that it will die from self inflicted stupidity. Parochialism will develop, we are the best and our way of thinking is the only way to think. We must encourage diversity in order to prevent this from happening. Diversity encourages different ways of thinking. We must create many new and different ways of thinking to avoid being imprisoned in a blind spot of any one of our ways of thinking.
Unfortunately, diversity can lead to conflict by reducing the conformity needed to maintain a community. We must continually balance the needs of the individual (diversity, individualism, freedom, etc.) with the needs of the community (conformity, sameness, parochialism, etc.) so we can maintain some level of peace, a low level of selfishness (the hoarding of resources and pollution), and a higher level of sharing.
We must change our parochial thinking, the universe was not created for us, we are a product of the biosphere and we must live by the directions of all higher level systems. We are capable of indirectly dacting another system, but we can effectively dact only the systems we create and even then we must be careful because most of the systems we create are meta stable at best, we must continually renew and support them.
For example, we have created our own economic system, a higher level system that can exist within the environment created by a community of systems (people) and the higher level system, the biosphere. We can dact our economic system, because we created it and we should know its directions (do we?), but we can't dact the biosphere. We can rearrange it, we can take resources from it and dump waste into it, but we can't change the directions of the biosphere to suit our desires. We can't dact what we don't know and we can't manage what we can't dact and we certainly can't control what we can't manage. I think we need to be a lot more humble. We must eventually learn the directions of the biosphere and follow them or else we will destroy ourselves.
We can never have complete peace, we can only strive to minimize conflict. The primary source of conflict is the activity of each system. Every system must be active. The activity of one system may interfere with the activity of another system. One way to minimize this type of conflict is for all systems to be a member of the same community. In trying to minimize one conflict we have created another. A community requires agreement and to have agreement every system must sacrifice some individuality. This conflict between the individual and the community can never be resolved. The best that can be achieved is a balance between the needs of the individual and the needs of the community.
Did you notice how the error of allness creeps into almost everything we do? Communication is fraught with opportunities to commit the error of allness followed by listening, reading, writing, problem solving, data gathering, data analysis, etc.
'Our standard of living fell because labor productivity fell,' is another example of 'allness'. That's All there is to say and its All labors fault. Why is management's failure omitted from the statement. Our standard of living fell because management failed, not labor. An operator only follows directions, if productivity fell, what was management doing? Management is supposed to compare, evaluate, and dact the system, this is not the operator's responsibility. Correcting this statement would disclose the ineptness of what we call management. Labor unions would be nonexistent if management was doing its job.
The mass media are failing miserably when such inaccurate statements are repeated without pointing out the error. But they are not alone, the thirty second sound byte and sensationalism are not new, 'Look before you leap,' or 'He who hesitates is lost,' or read a history book. Storytellers and historians, for some reason, record much about the triumph of power and the horrible results of errors, but very little about ideas or solutions. The mass media are, just, continuing a 'bad' tradition.
Did you notice mass media, mass education, mass citizenship, etc., violates three rules of communication, speak on the receivers wavelength, use the receivers logic, and speak the receivers language. It would be impractical to do otherwise. In the country that made mass production the world standard method of production, the lack of knowledge about the requirements for mass production, mass education, mass anything is sorely missing.
To use mass media, mass communication, mass citizenship, etc., for any reason requires mass agreement on the meaning and the use of data. We must trade individuality for community. We must continually remind ourselves why we need agreement on words and language and why we need one language. Without it, we will not have one community, one nation, one world.
We need to remind ourselves why we do things the way we do and our storytellers, historians, and mass media should help not hinder the process. When we change the way we do things, we should stop reminding ourselves of how we used to do things and move into the future instead of remaining in the past. If the 'good old days' were so good why did we change?
We must stop repeating incomplete and inaccurate statements to the point they are accepted as fact. 'The squeaky wheel on the wagon always gets the grease,' is an excellent example. Why is this part repeated without the rest of the verse, the omitted part is far more important. Do you know the rest of the verse? 'The squeaky wheel on the wagon always gets the grease, but it is the worst wheel on the wagon because it always requires attention.'
Another example, one I really love, 'Those who can, do, those who can't, teach.' Do you know the rest of the saying, 'Those who can do, those who can't, teach, those who can't teach, preach and those who can't do any of the above misquote this saying.'
The rules of grammar and the definition of our words limits our effectiveness. Our language and how we use it profoundly affects our verbal thinking, in turn, reducing our ability to create new thoughts, ideas, and solutions; reduces the clarity with which we can convert our nonverbal thoughts, ideas, and solutions, into verbal format; and can prevent us from clearly expressing all thoughts, ideas, and solutions. We can express some things without using verbal format, feelings for example, but not thoughts, ideas, or solutions.
Indefinite, indistinct, incomplete, and incorrect definitions, rules of grammar, and use of language will yield indefinite, indistinct, incomplete, and incorrect solutions to problems, many times prohibiting a problem from being defined. Obviously if a problem cannot be defined, it cannot be solved and indefinite, indistinct, incomplete, and incorrect solutions will not be effective and never efficient.
People cannot create anything one hundred per cent definite, distinct, complete, and correct so we must continuously dact definitions, descriptions, and ways of thinking to ensure our ideas, solutions, and systems are effective and efficient.
This is one reason why I stress education, in the hope that more people will learn how to create new ways of thinking and new solutions and learn how to convert their nonverbal solutions into verbal format so those solutions can be shared. It is also a source of discomfort because our verbal format, our language and its use is sloppy, inconsistent, confusing, inefficient, and ineffective and I'm not aware of any conscious effort to improve our verbal format. Most people and institutions prevent improvements in our verbal format, in fact many of them force the change in the opposite direction. Evolutionary changes in our language and changes caused by changes in fashion seem to be the only way changes in our verbal format are made, an extremely slow and haphazard way.
If an instruction does not point to the goal it should be eliminated. Many of the rules (instructions) of our language do not point to the goal of communication. Obviously, I would like to dact our language so it is easier to use, especially for students and nonverbal people like me, and the rest of the world needs to learn our language. Why our language? Expediency. Because most scientists and a large number of educated people know and use our language and the large bulk of the world's knowledge is written in our language.
As the world population approaches eight billion, the need to disseminate new knowledge about the biosphere will become critical. The whole world will have to participate. We will need to convince people to change their life styles rapidly as we learn more about the biosphere in which we live. We wouldn't have the time to convert to a common language if we wait much longer. We will need all the brain power we can recruit to learn the directions of our biosphere and to solve our coming problems and to convince people to change rapidly. We don't have another century. Most people do not understand the urgency.
A major obstacle to our attempt to discover, describe, define, and understand the world in which we live, is that we are inside the system and cannot see the entire system. We don't know the directions of the system and we have great difficulty learning the directions.
If a higher level system ceases to be active (dies) so do all lower level systems. Only if we keep this in mind will we be aware of the peril we place ourselves when we pollute or attempt to dact the biosphere, the higher level system in which we live. If we knew the directions of the biosphere our probability of success would be much greater, we may be able to avoid pollution and we may be able to dact the biosphere without destroying it.
Even though the systems approach and all its definitions are arbitrary, the systems approach describes the situation far more accurately than much espoused economic, management, and political theories. We need to incorporate the conclusions from the systems approach into our thinking and correct some of the errors of incomplete and inaccurate theories.
Obviously such a small book can not contain All there is about the systems approach, nor does it contain All I have to say about the systems approach, but it does contain All I will say at this time. I intentionally did not extrapolate some ramifications thoroughly, such as economics, politics, history, freedom, etc., and some I avoided completely, such as, religion, truth, beauty, pain, pleasure, etc. My goal was to introduce you to the systems approach and to share some of my thoughts it brought about for me, not to make you proficient in any of its activities or to extrapolate thoroughly any of its ramifications.
I chose to present the systems approach as slowly as I could and recursively hoping you would be able to accept some of the ideas. Use the systems approach on the systems approach until it meets your needs. I hope the view from the systems approach branch will help you see, describe, define, and understand more of the world in which we live and to use and create systems more effectively and efficiently.

Return to Thoughts Table of Content

 B12 GLOSSARY

Please do not use until you have answered the questions, thank you.

Assignment is using the attributes of one resource to represent the attributes of something else

Activity is one or more operations Bit is a singularity, a unique attribute of a resource, it is scalar

Carrier is a resource that is capable of transporting resources from one location to another

CDP is the acronym for computer data processing

Channel is an environment used to contain a carrier, to protect resources during transportation, and to limit the
              number of resources requiring recognition

Communication is a message and a reply transaction, responding and verification

Compare is a user defined operation whose output indicates the attributes of two resources are equal or not equal

Dact is all the steps required to create and maintain a goal

Data is one or more bits whose value is assigned

Dependent system is deficient, one or more operations or operands are missing

Directions are one or more instructions

Effective is achieving a goal

Efficient is conserving or optimizing desired resources

Environment contains and protects the resources, directions, and activities of a system

Evaluate is to determine the significance of the compare output

External is to be outside a given system

Field is a space large enough to contain a given data element

Format is one or more fields

Goal is a condition a user wants to achieve and maintain

Identification see recognition

Independent system is a sufficient system

Information is the output of the intelligence activity

Input is a resource to be operated on by an operand

Instruction is a data resource indicating the location of the input, the operand to operate on the input, the operator
                 to operate the operand, when and where the operation will take place, where to place the output, and
                 what to do next

Intelligence is an operand that can create information from data and data from information

Internal is to be inside a given system

Management is to regulate, evaluate, and dact operators, operands, and instructions to achieve and maintain a
                    goal for a user

Obstacle restricts or prevents goal attainment

Operand operates on one or more attributes of input

Operator follows directions and can start and stop an operation

Operation is an operator operating an operand from input to output

Output is a useful resource

Problem is how to proceed from the present condition to a goal

Processing produces the output that will achieve a goal

Protection is preventing degradation or loss of value

Receiving is recognizing a resource outside the system, accepting or taking the resource, transporting the 
                resource across the system boundary, and placing the resource in storage

Recognition is comparing bits of a resource to bits of a reference point and the output indicating equal (true)

Reference point is a data resource that indicates the attributes of another resource as defined by the user

Regulation is to compare and to select the appropriate directions as indicated by the output of the compare

Resource is user defined, can be anything that can be used by a system

Sending is transporting a resource or waste from storage across the system boundary out of the system

Standard is a reference point agreed upon by two or more users

Solution is how to achieve a goal

Storing is placing a resource at a known location within a system and protecting the resource

Subsystem supplies one or more operators and or one or more operands

System is directed activities using resources within an environment to achieve a  goal for a user

Transaction is the sending of a resource across a system boundary and the receiving of the resource by another
                  system

Transporting is moving a resource from one known location to another known location without lose of value

Use is defined by the user

User is a community or a system that gains satisfaction from goal achievement

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Articles

The Management of computer programming projects, Charles P Leckt, American Management Association, 1967

Making Program Management Work, Dr Joseph A Maciariello, Journal for Systems Management, June and July
            1974

A Basic Philosophy of Project Management, Thomas M Bobwaski, Journal for Systems Management, April 1975

Sound Systems Renew Hope for Education, Dr Donald L Mays, Journal for System Management, November 1975

Reports Management Through Systems, Robert L Shuttis, Journal for Systems Management, July 1974

MIS or Mirror Image, Dr Hart J Will, Journal for System Management September 1973

A Self Taught Management Training Program, Dr Nicolai Siemens, Journal for Systems Management, October
          1973

The Skills Inventory Put-on, Richard H Fahline, Journal for Systems Management, April 1974

Basic Psychology for a System Change, Dr Donald L Caruth, Journal for Systems Management, February 1974

Data and Information Are They Synonyms?, Richard R Riker, Journal for Systems Management, September 1979

Is Communication a Two Way Street?, Richard R Riker, Journal for Systems Management, August 1980

What makes a Manager Unique?, Richard R Riker, Journal for Systems Management, August 1984

Books

Management, Peter Drucker, Harper & Row, 1974

The Practice of Management, Peter Drucker, Harper & Row 1954

Managing for Results, Peter Drucker, Harper & Row, 1964

The Systems Approach, C West Churchman, Delacorte, 1968

The Human Side of Enterprise, Douglas McGregor, Mcgraw, 1960

The Peter Principle, Peter and Hull, Morrow, 1976

The Competent Objective, Laurence J Peter

Recommended Reading for Systems Analysts

Parent Effectiveness Training, Dr Thomas Gorden, Wyden, 1973

I'm OK, Your OK, Thomas A Harris MD, Avon, 1973

Up The Organization, Robert Townsend, Knopf, 1970

The Hawthore and Western Electric, George Elton Mayo

The Principles of Efficiency, Harrington Emerson

The Principles of Scientific Management, Fredric Winslow Taylor

The General Principles of Management, Henri Fayol

Effective Managerial Leadership, James J Cribbin

An Introduction to General Systems Thinking, Gerald M Weinberg, Wiley 1975

The Mythical Man-Month, Fredrick P Brooks, Datamation, December 1974

Language in Thought and Action, S I Hayakawa

Articles and books on listening by S I Hayakawa and Nichols

Return to Thoughts Table of Content