SITUATION PERCEIVED TABILIT Y DEFINITION DESIGN VS MIS DEFI NITION , ANALYSIS V MIS DEFI NITION ANALYSIS IMPLEMEN- DESIGN OF ELEMENTS TATION WIDER ^ . SYSTEM
task depending on the role of the MIS designer in the pro cess of identifying the MIS. For example in Chapter Two
(p.34-35) it was stated that IRAP was named by the client as the MIS to be introduced into the organisation. In a case like the IRAP where the client claims to know the MIS that has to be designed and insists that the named MIS be developed, the MIS designer either has to accept the MIS as defined by the client or abandon the project. If the MIS designer accepts the MIS as defined by the client one may say that from the designer's perspective the task of naming the MIS was a simple one.
There may be cases in which people are aware that they are in a problematic situation but they are not cer tain what the problem is or how it should be resolved. An example of such a situation is a sudden increase in the number of people in a hospital's waiting list. Many factors such as lack of funds, a consultant spending more time on his private work and less on the hospital's patients, poor management of available facilities or lack of a proper update of the waiting list may give rise to such a problem. A problem of this nature which is "original ... or has not been solved previously" by the management is known as an "ill-structured" problem (Gigch, 1978, p.377). We refer to a situation in which there is an ill-structured problem as an ill-structured situation. People in an ill-structured situation may have different interpretations and defini tions of the problem and how it should be resolved. It is our contention that, for the MIS designer, the first step
towards resolving the ill-structured problem is to define or name the MIS (i.e. purposeful system) which when de signed will alleviate the problem. The first part of the MIS design framework (Figure 4) is aimed at providing prin ciples for identifying the MIS that has to be designed to alleviate a problematic situation. The first part of the framework is depicted in Figure 4 as boxes 1a and 1b.
The purpose of the activity represented by box 1a is to understand the problematic situation. Based on this understanding a notional MIS is named and expressed in box 1b. The process of understanding the situation and identi fying the MIS to be designed can be very problematic. This is due to the basic problem of epistemology. That is, how are we to ensure that the knowledge acquired about a situa tion (1a) has been adequate and correct? How are we to guarantee that the MIS definition (1b) is a true represen tation or expression of the situation (1a)? There is ob viously no simple answer to the problem of error in human inquiry.
In an excellent discussion on the problem of error Casserley (1965, p.126-127) states: "the problem of error is always with us ... Error occurs only in a real world. Man may misconceive the real, but he is never capable of perceiving the positively and completely unreal. If I say that I see a pink elephant flying about in front of me, I can say so only because I live in a world in which there really are pink things, there really are elephants, and there really are birds that fly". We accept Casserley's position on the problem of error, and shall proceed with
our discussion on the basis that "the fact that error occurs, ... is not very relevant to the subtleties of epistemological theory".
Figure 5 will be used to discuss the conduct of the first part of the MIS design framework. The perception and description of a problem by the people in a problematic situation is represented in Figure 5 as the management intentions. It is possible that the description of a pro blem as given by those in the problematic situation is not an adequate description of the problem. Following Casserley it is argued that the description of a problem by those in a problematic situation must have some relevance to the real problem since they are not capable of perceiving the positively and completely unreal problem. Like the case of a "pink flying elephant" stated by Casserley the designer has to accept the client's description of the problem and then seek to understand the type of environment and the things in that environment that must have made the client present a particular picture of the problem. The environ ment in which the client operates is represented in Figure 5 as the internal and external context of the management intentions. The data gathered from the internal and exter nal context of the management intentions is presented to those in the problem situation with the aim of ascertaining whether they will amend their picture or description of the problem based on this data. For example the management of a hospital may perceive a long waiting list of patients as a major problem. The internal context of this problem include