Рефлексивные процессы и управление. Сборник материалов XI Международного симпозиума 16-17 октября 2017 г., Москва. Коллектив авторов
Чтение книги онлайн.
Читать онлайн книгу Рефлексивные процессы и управление. Сборник материалов XI Международного симпозиума 16-17 октября 2017 г., Москва - Коллектив авторов страница 6
Figure 2. The Viplan methodology (adaptation of Espejo, 1993)
3.1 BDA redefines the data sharing, objectives insights and knowledge concepts. Controlled sharing of data, objectives insights and knowledge between peers, sub-systems, organisation – even the competing ones, elevates the understanding of the whole system, and provides a higher viability probability comparing to the others. (Perko, Primec, & Horvat, 2015) for instance elaborate the business, law and ethical perspectives of sharing business partners‘ behaviour data.
3.2 The generation and use of tacit knowledge is redefined:
• Thenumber of issues analysed is dramatically increased: from maybe hundreds, analysed by an individual, to millions, analysed with the wisdom of the crowds.
• Theamount of data analysed per issue is increased, compared to standard statistical analysis, even when experts suggest that the variety of data they analyse in a situation, cannot be analysed with an algorithm.
• Theissue analysis can clearly explain the reasoning behind the outcome prediction, the risk of ignoring important attributes is reduced.
• The prescriptive analytics can support or even replace, within limits, the expert decision taking. In the decision situations, where the Big Data based reasoning capacity matches the complexity of the environmental situations. A clear example of such development are the traffic/ routing/ logistics management systems, where drivers are relying on the navigation systems.
3.3 The generation and use of theoretic knowledge is redefined:
• The theoretic knowledge generation can become data driven. Instead of confronting tacit knowledge of multiple experts, the models of behaviour can be extrapolated directly from the data of the issues themselves. Standardisation and the relevance of the issues would no longer be matter of expert perception, but data based. An example: in financial institutions operational risk management directives are based on the risk probability and consequences perception of the risk management experts. Based on the experiences in the financial sector, it is easy to conclude, that they often put emphasis on the wrong risks.
• Storing the theoretic knowledge: the big data theoretic knowledge is stored in the form of predictive or prescriptive models or is based upon reports, produced by the models. It upgrades and complements the existing theoretic body of knowledge.
• The theoretic knowledge use is instance based. The experience, stored in models is applied upon the instance data. The elaborations, predictions and prescriptions are used to support decision taking, communication and automation. The main advantage of using big data based models is, that users do not need to analyse the complete theoretic backgrounds, but can focus on instances.
The backdraft of implementing BDA is, that it cannot imply all of the knowledge on complex issues, especially if the data quality or the number of cases recorded is not sufficient to provide reliable models. Therefore Big Data stored knowledge should be focussed on supporting processes, related to relatively simple instances, with multiple repetitions.
3.4 The mechanisms to manage the representation of the complexity are redefined. The main goal of an organisation is to coordinate individual capabilities to achieve itsindividually defined goals. The knowledge of an organisation is a complex combination of structured rules and shared tacit knowledge on multiple levels, gained from previous experiences – gained through previous activities or acquired from the environment.
Figure 3. Learning by observation
BDA tools use a different approach than Business intelligence. Instead of reducing variety and focusing solely on financial business outcomes, they provide the option to understand, predict or even propose activities on the detailed data, provided by the organisation.
3.5 The inter and trans team learning and experience sharing is redefined.
Figure 4. Sharing experience across teams
The experiences of multiple teams in similar situations can be successfully identified, understood, and learned upon with the help of BDA. For example, the effects of using multiple communication marketing campaigns in multiple markets can be compared.
There is though a limitation of using BDA to support learning between the teams. It works well in a highly repetitive processes, where data on similar situations are easily obtainable, as for instance sales, or mass production. If there are not enough similar cases, or if the data variety to explain a cases is too high, BDA cannot adequately provide insight.
3.6 BDA support the interhierarchical learning processes and reduce the number of the hierarchical recursion levels.
Figure 5. Understanding the drivers
The BDA is used by the higher levels in two ways: First, by elaborating the feedbacks of the lower structural recursion levels, it can fine-tune the activities, guiding to the desired results. Secondly, it can use BDA to better understand the needs, processes and relations at lower levels to propose solutions that provide value added for all the subjects, affected by the organizations. The higher capacity to manage variety also reduces the need for hierarchy and allows structural recursion. In some cases, the automated guiding systems can entirely eliminate the need for intermediaries between the consumer and provider on a global scale.
1. Addo-Tenkorang, R., & Helo, P. T. (2016). Big data applications in operations/supply-chain management: A literature review. [Review]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 101, 528–543. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2016.09.023.
2. Akter, S., Wamba, S. F., Gunasekaran, A., Dubey, R., & Childe, S. J. (2016). How to improve firm performance using big data analytics capability and business strategy alignment? [Article]. International Journal of Production Economics, 182, 113–131. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.08.018.
3. Argote, L., & Miron-Spektor, E. (2011). Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge. [Article]. Organization Science, 22(5), 1123–1137. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0621.
4. Ashby, W. R. (1964). An Introduction to Cybernetics. London: Methuen & Co Ltd.
5. Beer, S. (1979). The Heart of Enterprise. Chichester: Willey.
6. Beer, S. (1981). Brain of the Firm (2nd ed.). Chichester: Wiley.
7. Beer,