1 part b
1
Name:
Instructor:
Course:
Date:
Part B
An approach to system thinking known as “hard systems methodology” tries to conceive
many scenarios and understand the nature and complexity of the problem facing the business.
As a consequence, a scientific approach to a clearly defined problem is emphasized in this
strategy. In order to arrive at a final solution using the hard systems method, one must take a
traditional approach to a real-world problem (Keating, C. et.al 2014, p.39). However, there
are a number of downsides to using the hard system method to study the Walmart case. We’ll
look at how Coast La Costa Online System’s shortcomings are mirrored in the use of the hard
system in this section.
Hard system technique, in contrast to less structured approaches, is characterized by
a lack of ambition. The hard system method begins with the identification of a problem and
then follows a clearly defined strategy to resolve it. Hard systems thinking relies heavily on
past processes, hence a system thinker may lack the will to solve the challenge. One stage in
the process of working out the issue may not go according to plan, which may result in a
disappointment (Flood, R.L. 2017, p. 276). In addition, the system practitioner has very little
opportunity for critical thought. Rigid problem-solving methods limit the system thinker’s
ability to be creative and innovative. This means that the system thinking process is ad hoc
and lacks ambition. If the issue analysis is done correctly, the hard system technique is
always effective. A system thinker, on the other hand, may be ineffectual if he or she does
2
not comprehend the nature of the problem to be addressed, and management’s demands
may not be satisfied. In addition, the rigidity of hard system technique may make it
ineffective in certain cases. Using a process to examine an issue and come up with a Hard
system methodology solution, scientists call this technique “Hard system thinking. Partially
compliant parts may lead to a failure of the hard system method’s implementation. As a
result, since not all relevant parties are involved in the problem solving process, this system
thinking method will only partly address the issue (Keating, C. et.al 2014, p.39).
Furthermore, partial compliance of the factors involved in issue solutions may prevent longterm solution to the problem.
Using hard system thinking, a system thinker may create suggestions for how to keep
Coast La Costa Online System growing sustainably. According to a system thinking
paradigm and organizational readiness to adapt, hard systems are more likely to succeed than
soft systems.
CATWOE analysis
The root definition provided by a CATWOE analysis explains how a system converts inputs
to outputs. The use of CATWOE analysis to various organizations’ problems is critical
(Basden A. et.al 2016, p.70). CATWOE analysis will be useful in figuring out the various
stakeholder interests at Coast La Costa Online System. The CATWOE research will also shed
light on Coast La Costa Online System’s ethical reaction to the incident. Thus, CATWOE
analysis will give empirical knowledge of diverse perspectives owing to the variety of
perceptions across various stakeholders. Consequently, the system thinker will be able to
better comprehend the problem. Because it guarantees the interests of all stakeholders are
taken into account, CATWOE analysis may help prevent problems from developing in the
future. The abbreviation CATWOE stands for a variety of things:
3
•
The term “customers” or “clients” refers to those who benefit from a company’s
products or services.
•
Actors: It’s important to identify the people who will be accountable for executing
the change in this analysis.
•
Transformation: The process of transforming inputs into desired outputs is referred
to as “transformation.”
•
World view: Analysis of key distinctions between stakeholders and their significance
to a given circumstance is a critical stage in the process of developing a worldview.
•
Owner: To be an owner, one must be a business owner with the authority to
implement new ideas and strategies.
•
Environmental constraints: This alludes to the system’s ability to function in the face
of external obstacles.
CATWOE ELEMENT
APPLICATION TO THE SITUATION
Actors
Managers, personnel in the ICT, human
resources, sales, and marketing teams, as well
as contractors and consultants
Transformation process
Services geared on providing assistance to
clients
Technological advancements ( like creation
of Coast La Costa Online System booking
app)
Reduced product costs
4
The ease with which a service is provided
Operational expenses may be reduced.
Innovated marketing techniques.
Worldview
Customers will use E-commerce to schedule
services in the future as technology improves.
As a result of the greater number of clients
attracted by lower pricing, sales volumes
have increased. As a result, the expansion of
Coast La Costa Online System is directly
linked to the ease and cheap costs of online
service purchases.
Owner
Shareholders own Coast La Costa Online
System.
Environmental constraints
Rivalry from an established business
Therefore, changes in manufacturing costs
impact the cheap pricing of their services.
As more businesses enter the retail market,
the level of competition rises.
Customers and employees are diverse. The
Coast La Costa Online System’s expansion
has been restricted by government laws.
5
The CATWOE study of Coast La Costa Online System’s plays a significant role in combining
the interests of many stakeholders. It includes a short checklist which is utilized in identifying
a solution.
6
references
Basden, A. and Wood‐Harper, A.T., 2016. A philosophical discussion of the root definition in
soft systems thinking: an enrichment of CATWOE. Systems Research and Behavioral
Science: The Official Journal of the International Federation for Systems Research,
23(1), pp.61-87.
Bergvall-Kåreborn, B., Mirijamdotter, A. and Basden, A., 2014. Basic principles of SSM
modeling: an examination of CATWOE from a soft perspective. Systemic Practice
and Action Research, 17(2), pp.55-73.
Flood, R.L., 2017. The relationship of ‘systems thinking’to action research. Systemic Practice
and Action Research, 23(4), pp.269-284.
Keating, C., Rogers, R., Unal, R., Dryer, D., Sousa-Poza, A., Safford, R., Peterson, W. and
Rabadi, G., 2014. System of systems engineering. Engineering Management Journal,
15(3), pp.36-45.
…
