This document discusses two people's encounters with socio-technical systems approaches over many years. It describes David's introduction to STS in the 2000s through a new director and Fiddy's work with STS since the 1970s. It also discusses various applications of STS thinking through process mapping training, action research with a shipping company, and developing an understanding of STS design and boundaries.

1. Interpretations of Socio-Technical
Systems:
two stories and the narrative of an
organisation
Frances Abraham and David Drabble

2. Our encounters
David – Beginning late 2000s, with a new Director who attempted
to bring together evaluation and consultancy
Fiddy – Beginning late 1970s with Jebson’s, worked with STS for
35 years
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

3. First encounter
Beginning late 2000s, new Director, attempt to bring together evaluation
and consultancy
Discussing TIHR with my Masters supervisor before accepting role
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

4. Second encounter
Running a reading group, encouraged to learn about Socio-Technical systems
“The very term "socio-technical," used to characterize work systems,
implies that there has been a process of splitting which needs to be
rectified. Splitting is a process of psychic economy whereby people tend to
simplify a complex situation by attributing all its X characteristics to one of
a pair and all its Y characteristics to the other. The goodies are all-good
and wear white hats, and the baddies are all-bad and wear black hats and
possibly also black moustaches. Splitting means that one is most unlikely
to be presented with a black moustache under a white hat.”
Lisl Klein, 1989, ‘On the Collaboration Between Social Scientists and
Engineers: Dynamics and Models’
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

5. Third encounter
Training at Vanguard on process mapping – a memorable event
Encouraged to do so at a LM meeting with Fiddy
Found the trainers a bit OTT but found the content engaging
nonetheless
Purpose of process mapping:
Configure systems so they are doing their core activity in the
best possible way for the customer
Minimize the amount of (unnecessary) support for that
activity.
Process mapping alters systems to improve performance for the
customer.
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

6. Vanguard method for process
checking
1. What is the purpose of the system (in customer terms)?
6. Thinking
Points of interaction
C
U 5. System conditions
S
T
O 4. Flow: value work + waste
M
E
R
S
3. Capability of response
2. Demand: what matters to the customers
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

7. Encounter …4?
STS Roundtable preparation
Abstract writing and discovering different ways of understanding
STS
Getting into the archaeology of STS
Attending first STS conference
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

8. My story of Jebsens UK
The company: a bulk carrier, UK subsidiary of Norwegian company (no
UK ports used)
The presenting problem: ships stuck in ports around the world due to
lack of crew: problem of recruitment?
Diagnostic stage: 2 sequential lines of enquiry:
• Analysis of recruitment, numbers involved etc, is there a problem
there? Yes and No
• What happens to staff once through the door: enquiry through ship-
based studies revealed a range of issues: lack of community on
long (9 month voyages) through segmented social life and spaces:
AR and Culture change
• Getting to know Emery’s 9 step model through Michael Foster
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

9. Action research to improve
shipboard life: main features
• Steering Group of Jebsens SMT, NUS, MNAOA, action researchers
(PQ, ES, FA)
• Large scale simulation of issues leading to
• Piloting a shipboard community: ship’s company (selected by CEO)
+ SG conference start-up
• Developing ownership through the fleet
• Redesigning back-office functions
• Re-designing ships’ social spaces
• Whole systems conference for industry
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

10. Definitions and issues for practice
Socio-technical systems design: takes work processes as its starting
point, maps how work crosses organizational and departmental
boundaries, expects to design/redesign boundaries around the
social and technical requirements of work processes eg team
working – can be used as an expert practice, can get stuck at the
lower levels, can be captured by Taylorists
Action research: deploys a cycle of planning, taking action, collecting
data about that action to support: can emphasize research or can
emphasize action
Participatory action research: involves the actors in the enquiry
participating as enquirers, can lose intended focus, dissipate into
terms and conditions
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

11. ‘Open Systems’ Model as Basic
Tool for STS Design
Near Environment
Conversion or
Transformation
Input Output
Feedback Loop
Far Environment
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems

12. My notions of STS Approach:
STS and the psycho-social
(based on Miller & Rice, via Michael Foster)
• Three types of organisation are required for conversion or
transformation of input to output
– Perform and manage primary task
– Meet sentient needs of belonging and identity
– Regulate the balance between task and sentient needs
• STS boundaries are drawn at points of discontinuity (interfaces)
– Within the boundaries are continuities
• Operating, managing, controlling, servicing the primary task
• This is a first order differentiation
– In relation to the first order, there is a second order
differentiation
• Operating, managing, controlling, servicing those who are in
first order
– A manager can only be held accountable for what happens
within the boundaries of their differentiated part of the
organisation

13. Questions
Does a concern for the psycho-social bring humanity to designing
work?
What other approaches do that?
How do your starting points shape your understanding of STS and
how has that changed through your experience of it?
Interpretations of Socio-Technical Systems