With the optner biography

System analysis for solving business and industrial problems. Chapter 1. Description of the problems of the business world. The table of contents of the solution to the problems of the business world using systems the purpose of this book is to consider the process of solving the problems of the business world from all sides, at all levels and from various points of view, together with the reader.

At the same time, I accept the following coercive connections: the consideration should contain elements of the methodology for solving problems for example, contain the principles of procedures. Problem solutions should be internally linked. Problem solutions should be equally applied to simple and difficult problems. The procedures should allow you to combine or divide the elements of problems.

To achieve this goal, I turned to the idea of ​​considering the business world as a system. There are four considerations that made me do it. Firstly, the system concept makes it possible to establish both general and special qualities of the problem. Responsible leaders usually do not apply the idea of ​​a system in solving the problem 1. As a rule, they find a utilitarian solution to the problem for a particular case.

Problems arise in continuously changing circumstances. Two typical situations may arise in the process of finding a decision used by the responsible leader: either the problem can be the same as the previous one, but the circumstances in which it arose may be different; Or it may be that the circumstances in which the problem arose was the same, but the problem itself has changed.

In each of these cases, the following main issues arise: is the responsible leader prepared to apply the method of solving problems? Or, relying on his intuition, is he going to apply an old, proven decision to a new problem facing him? Is an old, proven solution applicable to the conditions in which a new problem arose and exists? How did the responsible leader conclude that the old decision is common enough to be suitable for this case?

Is there a measure of risk that will establish the presence of risk in solving the problem? Is there a measure of potential income to determine the preferred or “better” solution to this problem? If the similarity between the problems was only superficial, the success that the head will be able to achieve when applying a proven decision will be somewhat limited. We know from experience that many new problems can be resolved with the help of old solutions, despite a change in circumstances.

The responsible leader must in the process of solving the problem assess the degree of similarity of the new problem with the old. The result of the assessment will determine whether a new or old solution should be applied. However, at our disposal there are few means to determine the similarity of problems in the business world. Sometimes it is difficult to correlate problems and solutions.

This can happen due to the fact that the same problems are divided by time, or due to the pressure of the circumstances in which decisions are made. The solution to the problem in the business world is significantly dependent on the thorough, detailed consideration of influencing factors. These factors are not always directly related to the problem as a whole. Let us now consider the second consideration in favor of using a systemic methodology.

Decisions, in the conditions of the business world, tend to determine the final outcome. Decisions that determine the final outcome describe the final results regardless of intermediate outcomes and alternatives. The opposite of the solution that determines the final outcome is a solution that can be characterized as a solution that defines the process. When using a solution that defines the process, the problem is represented as internally complex to its apparent simplicity.

The determination of the process requires that the problem be divided into its components, sequentially connected parts. Such a breakdown of the problem into meaningful parts provides a formal restructuring of its structure, which allows you to find a solution. The solution to the problem that determines the final outcome is useful because in many cases responsible managers are forced to make countless decisions under pressure from the requirements of the situation “on request” 2.

Since the development of decisions that determine the process requires more time, there is a tendency to use them only for those problems that do not require solutions “on request”. Solutions that determine the process need to study using a formal apparatus, are expensive and require more time than solutions that determine the final outcome. Thus, they are most valuable in the appendix to large -scale, complex problems, where the bet is great and where the management is to invest only after receiving a carefully reasonable conclusion.

There is also another argument in favor of applying two types of solutions - solving system 3 and process solutions.From the further sections of the book, the reader will become obvious that decisions are compiled from several parts that precede each other in the order of their necessary priority. In order to practically apply these components of the solution, the solution to the problem should be presented as a set of detailed processes properly related to avoiding logical inconsistency.

The third consideration in favor of using the idea of ​​the system is that a systematic approach makes it possible to build an objective standard that allows you to organize problems to solve them. The objective standard is a non -utility tool that allows you to determine in terms of the established criterion, including specific rules or principles, what relations should be. The objective standard makes it possible to penetrate deeply into the content of the problem and thereby allows you to summarize the phenomena of the business world 4.

From the point of view of a physicist, the objective standard should make sense and be demonstrated anywhere. Moreover, he must withstand the test of time and repeated checks conducted by other persons. The objective standard is useful due to the fact that it is based on the demonstrated fact. If the instability of the solution cannot be proved by experimental verification 5, then the construction of a solution as a design from truths becomes justified; On each of which the researcher can rely within certain limits.

These truths can ultimately be called laws or axioms. In the business world or industry, in the activities of military or government institutions, laws of this type are not enough, if they are at all. If there are such laws, then it is difficult to single out them. If something similar to the “law” has been found, its application is limited by any separate area: only by industry, only by some geographical area or some process.

The lack of effective generalizations reflecting the phenomena of the business world makes you focus on means that allow you to objectively organize these phenomena. Operations that are not based on generalizations become diverging nearby inputs, processes and outputs that are never repeated twice, chaos of causes, results, coincidences, accidents and successes or failures. The idea of ​​the system is not intended for studying individual phenomena, but to study the full complex of phenomena, which generates the environment surrounding this process and its condition.

Business activity, considered through the prism of an objectively established set of systemic rules, will take the type of system. A specialist in the analysis of systems that studies the tasks of the business world will see the objective structure of the process of business activity. Its goal will be to find out the characteristics of the system and compare certain qualities with them.

These characteristics will be called system parameters. The parameters are arbitrary constant, which gives a quantitative assessment of a particular system or component for each quality. The quality of the parameter is a specific value attributed to the parameter in this operating situation. Let us now consider the fourth argument in favor of the use of systemic ideas in the business world.

Many of the identified problems of industry are quantitative-quality problems. Quantitative problems are those for which solutions are obtained by using predetermined ways of manipulating numbers. Quality problems are not numerical and are associated with a detailed enumeration of future or poorly defined resources and their properties or characteristics. As you improve understanding of problems with quantitative and qualitative aspects, their quantitative sides are more easily fixed and accurate quantitative decisions become more possible.

The study of operations has already done a lot of useful things, using mathematics to solve the problems of the business world, defense and government. However, in order to solve those problems of the business world that have not yet come out of a qualitative state, quantitative methods have limited use. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce other methods that allow you to reasonably solve qualitative problems.

Problems with both qualitative and quantitative sides will be called mixed. System analysis is the latest method that allows you to cope with such mixed problems. The hardest thing is to work with qualitative problems, since they are incompletely structured. In addition, qualitative problems cannot be easily expressed in their logical components. It is not surprising that in this wide area, judgment, intuition, experience, and sometimes just caution or recklessness play the main role.

The appointment of a systemic methodology is to create a working structure to solve these difficult problems.It follows that the methodology for solving the problems of the business world and industry should allow: prescribe a system that functionally organizes the general process of solving the problem; determine the parameters of the system that give the structure necessary to solve the problem; Describe the models of the system and its capabilities, which allows you to carry out alternatives of the outputs of the solution to the problem 6.

General scheme of solving the problem of scientists is to study nature. The fulfillment of this task becomes possible thanks to the use of scientific knowledge and professional methods. For example, a physicist explores the connection of the cause and investigation, using his special, preparation for observation and measurement 7. Suppose that in some situation the relationship between the cause and the investigation cannot be easily established.

Then the experimenter gives the experiment the structure of a working model of a phenomenon in which he himself plays the role of an observer. It fulfills the conditions necessary for the experiment, ensuring the supply of some inputs using processing devices, tools that support the synchronism of processing, and devices for recording results. Considering the result, the experimenter establishes what happened in the studied process, and connects this with his understanding of the physical world.

Depending on whether luck or failure took place, he can repeat his experiment. First of all, he seeks to determine whether the results of the experiment can be reproduced. However, the experimenter is equally interested in changing the procedures and experimental methods in order to observe deviations and changes as a result. Watching the results, he can learn something more about the world and something more about his own initial results.

In the end, the experimenter may be able to influence the hidden properties of the subject being studied. The explanation of the data is nothing so appropriate as an example of the above process, as the work of the cap, when formulating equations for the planet Mars. Kepler set himself the task of explaining the data of direct observations made quietly to Brage 8, with the help of a hypothesis, consisting in the fact that the orbit of Mars is an accurate circle.

This hypothesis corresponded to the views of astronomers of the 16th century. The Kepler's task was to take data of the Brage and determine whether the simplest curve of the orbit form contains all these data. This setting of the problem is presented in the diagram of Fig. We now reformulate the problem in terms of the initial Kepler 9 hypothesis. In this case, the setting of the problem can be represented, as is done in the scheme of Fig.

It turned out that the orbit equation and data contradict each other. The discrepancies were discovered by Kepler, and it can be assumed that his first reaction was a doubt in the accuracy of the observations of the Brage.