The Role of Technology in Supporting Soft Systems Optimization

Posted on 2024-11-05

Technology’s Impact on Decision-Making

One of the most significant ways technology enhances soft systems is by improving the quality and speed of decision-making. In industrial settings, decisions need to be made quickly, often in response to complex and rapidly changing conditions. This is where technology, particularly AI and data analytics, comes into play. AI-driven decision support systems have revolutionized the way managers and teams approach problem-solving in industrial environments. By analyzing vast amounts of data in real-time, these systems provide actionable insights that would be impossible for humans to gather at the same speed (Lepri et al., 2021). AI algorithms can predict equipment failures, optimize production schedules, or even suggest operational changes based on patterns in data (Giugliano et al., 2023). This allows decision-makers to rely not only on their intuition but also on precise, data-backed insights, leading to more informed and confident decisions (Shneiderman, 2022).

Moreover, automation tools allow for real-time monitoring of operations, identifying bottlenecks or inefficiencies, and providing instant feedback to decision-makers (Xie, 2023). This reduces the cognitive load on leaders and managers, who can focus on higher-level strategic decisions while trusting that the technology is managing operational details effectively (Fantini et al., 2020). In this way, technology supports both tactical and strategic decision-making, allowing for smoother operations and improved outcomes (Villani et al., 2018). The integration of human-centered design principles into these technologies ensures that they complement rather than replace human judgment, thereby fostering a more effective decision-making environment (Sigfrids et al., 2023).

Enhancing Communication with Collaboration Tools

Communication lies at the heart of any successful industrial operation, and the rise of collaboration tools has significantly improved the way teams communicate and coordinate within industrial environments. Platforms like Slack, Microsoft Teams, and other industry-specific tools have transformed how teams share information, collaborate on projects, and resolve issues in real-time (Shaffiei, 2019). These platforms not only streamline communication but also provide a centralized location for important information, making it accessible to all team members regardless of location (Joshi et al., 2017). For industrial settings where teams are often spread across multiple sites or working on different shifts, having a unified communication platform ensures that everyone stays on the same page (Maurice et al., 2018).

For example, during a production crisis or an equipment failure, collaboration tools allow team members to instantly share critical updates, access necessary documentation, and communicate directly with leadership to ensure a coordinated response (Renata, 2023). By minimizing delays in communication, these platforms reduce downtime and enhance operational efficiency (Huetten et al., 2019). Additionally, many collaboration tools integrate with other software platforms used in industrial systems, such as project management tools, data analytics dashboards, and maintenance systems (Cochran & Rayo, 2023). This integration allows teams to seamlessly switch between communication and task management, ensuring that information flows smoothly between departments, and decisions are made based on the latest available data (Cho et al., 2021).

AI and Automation in Leadership Support

Leadership in industrial systems is another area where technology plays an increasingly supportive role, particularly through AI and automation. Effective leadership relies not only on decision-making and communication but also on the ability to monitor, guide, and improve team performance (Kumar et al., 2019). AI tools and advanced data analytics provide leaders with deep insights into both the technical and human sides of their operations, enabling more informed leadership decisions (Diggelen et al., 2017). For instance, AI-powered analytics can help leaders track team productivity, identify patterns in employee behavior, and anticipate challenges that may arise within teams (Kadir & Broberg, 2021). With these insights, leaders can intervene proactively to address potential issues before they escalate, ensuring a more harmonious and efficient working environment (Wang et al., 2016).

Moreover, automation tools can handle routine leadership tasks, such as performance tracking, scheduling, and resource allocation (Arshaduzzaman, 2016). This frees leaders to focus on higher-level strategic thinking and innovation, enhancing their capacity to drive organizational growth and adaptability (Angelis et al., 2017). By integrating technology into leadership roles, industries can build more dynamic and responsive leadership frameworks well-suited to the demands of modern industrial environments (Liang et al., 2021). The balance between human oversight and technological support is crucial, as it allows leaders to leverage the strengths of both human intuition and machine efficiency (Zamansky et al., 2019).

Balancing Human-Centered Systems with Technology

While technology offers powerful tools for optimizing soft systems, it’s important to maintain a balance between human-centered processes and technological solutions. Technology should enhance, not replace, human judgment, creativity, and interpersonal dynamics (Ferencikova, 2023). In industrial settings, where the nuances of human behavior, decision-making, and leadership are vital to success, it’s critical to ensure that the human elements of soft systems remain a priority (Boy, 2017). Technological tools like AI, automation, and collaboration platforms can optimize processes and provide valuable insights, but they must be integrated thoughtfully (Nelson & Shih, 2017). For example, relying too heavily on AI-driven decision-making without considering the input and experience of human managers can lead to decisions that overlook important contexts or long-term implications (Lai, 2017).

Similarly, while automation can improve efficiency, it should not replace the human elements of leadership that inspire teams, foster collaboration, and drive innovation (Du et al., 2015). The key to the successful optimization of soft systems lies in combining the strengths of both human-centered and technology-driven approaches (Dhuheir et al., 2021). Organizations must create environments where technology supports human roles without diminishing their importance (Maglio, 2015). By using technology to enhance communication, improve decision-making, and support leadership, industries can create a balanced, efficient, and adaptable system that leverages the best of both worlds (Chai, 2022).

The integration of technology into soft systems within industrial environments presents a significant opportunity for enhancing decision-making, communication, and leadership. By leveraging AI, automation, and collaboration tools, organizations can optimize their operations while maintaining a strong focus on the human-centered aspects that are critical to success. The challenge lies in ensuring that technology complements rather than replaces the invaluable contributions of human judgment and creativity, fostering a collaborative and efficient industrial ecosystem.

References:

  • Angelis, A., Carbone, P., Dionigi, M., Giacomo, E., Stoppini, A., Radicioni, F., … & Tombesi, E. (2017). An interactive system for exhibitions in a science and technology center.. https://doi.org/10.1109/syseng.2017.8088271
  • Arshaduzzaman, M. (2016). Fuzzy management on human centered systems. Journal of Ultra Scientist of Physical Sciences Section B, 28(07), 155-157. https://doi.org/10.22147/jusps-b/280701
    Boy, G. (2017). Human-centered design of complex systems: an experience-based approach. Design Science, 3. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2017.8
  • Chai, M. (2022). Design of rural human resource management platform integrating iot and cloud computing. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4133048
    Cho, Y., Lim, H., & Park, H. (2021). Human-computer interaction in education: keyword and discipline network in 20 years., 50-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78462-1_4
  • Cochran, A. and Rayo, M. (2023). Toward joint activity design: augmenting user-centered design with heuristics for supporting joint activity. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care, 12(1), 19-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/2327857923121006
  • Dhuheir, M., Albaseer, A., Baccour, E., Erbad, A., Abdallah, M., & Hamdi, M. (2021). Emotion recognition for healthcare surveillance systems using neural networks: a survey.. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2107.05989
  • Diggelen, J., Broek, H., Schraagen, J., & Waa, J. (2017). An intelligent operator support system for dynamic positioning., 48-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60204-2_6
  • Du, J., Xiong, F., Yu, T., & Li, J. (2015). The mobile internet-based explosion-proof led lamp intelligent lighting system. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 743, 728-733. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.743.728
  • Fantini, P., Pinzone, M., & Taisch, M. (2020). Placing the operator at the centre of industry 4.0 design: modelling and assessing human activities within cyber-physical systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 139, 105058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2018.01.025
  • Ferencikova, S. (2023). Reverse knowledge transfer: examples of three business centers in slovakia.. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/009/lef-2023-25
  • Giugliano, G., Laudante, E., Formati, F., & Buono, M. (2023). Approaches and technologies for the human-centered industry 5.0.. Proyecta56 an Industrial Design Journal, (3). https://doi.org/10.25267/p56-idj.2023.i3.05
  • Huetten, A., Antons, D., Breidbach, C., Piening, E., & Salge, T. (2019). The impact of occupational stereotypes in human-centered service systems. Journal of Service Management, 30(1), 132-155. https://doi.org/10.1108/josm-12-2016-0324
  • Joshi, A., Amadi, C., Katz, B., Kulkarni, S., & Nash, D. (2017). A human-centered platform for hiv infection reduction in new york: development and usage analysis of the ending the epidemic (ete) dashboard. Jmir Public Health and Surveillance, 3(4), e95. https://doi.org/10.2196/publichealth.8312
  • Kadir, B. and Broberg, O. (2021). Human-centered design of work systems in the transition to industry 4.0. Applied Ergonomics, 92, 103334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2020.103334
  • Kumar, D., Parashar, A., Sharma, S., Malhotra, B., Amadi, C., Grover, A., … & Joshi, A. (2019). Designing and evaluating a personalized, human-centered dietary decision support system for use among people with diabetes in an indian setting: protocol for a quasi-experimental study (preprint).. https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.13635
  • Lai, P. (2017). The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 14(1), 21-38. https://doi.org/10.4301/s1807-17752017000100002
  • Lepri, B., Oliver, N., & Pentland, A. (2021). Ethical machines: the human-centric use of artificial intelligence. Iscience, 24(3), 102249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.102249
  • Liang, R., Chiumento, A., Zuniga, M., Pawelczak, P., Funk, M., Chuang, Y., … & Frens, J. (2021). Chiiot 2: 2nd workshop on computer human interaction in iot applications.. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459926.3464759
  • Maglio, P. (2015). Editorial—smart service systems, human-centered service systems, and the mission of service science. Service Science, 7(2), ii-iii. https://doi.org/10.1287/serv.2015.0100
  • Maurice, P., Allienne, L., Malaisé, A., & Ivaldi, S. (2018). Ethical and social considerations for the introduction of human-centered technologies at work.. https://doi.org/10.1109/arso.2018.8625830
  • Nelson, J. and Shih, P. (2017). Companionviz: mediated platform for gauging canine health and enhancing human–pet interactions. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 98, 169-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.04.002
  • Renata, V. (2023). Trading degrees of freedom: user control in pens, gpt, and automated vehicles. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 67(1), 2472-2477. https://doi.org/10.1177/21695067231192270
  • Shaffiei, Z. (2019). Addressing factors towards human-centered technology. International Journal of Advanced Trends in Computer Science and Engineering, 8(1.6), 368-376. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijatcse/2019/5481.62019
  • Shneiderman, B. (2022). Human-centered ai.. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192845290.001.0001
  • Sigfrids, A., Leikas, J., Salo-Pöntinen, H., & Koskimies, E. (2023). Human-centricity in ai governance: a systemic approach. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.976887
  • Villani, V., Czerniak, J., Mertens, A., & Fantuzzi, C. (2018). Mate robots simplifying my work: the benefits and socioethical implications. Ieee Robotics & Automation Magazine, 25(1), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1109/mra.2017.2781308
  • Wang, Q., Egelandsdal, B., Amdam, G., Almli, V., & Oostindjer, M. (2016). Diet and physical activity apps: perceived effectiveness by app users. Jmir Mhealth and Uhealth, 4(2), e33. https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.5114
  • Xie, T. (2023). Smart logistics warehouse moving-object tracking based on yolov5 and deepsort. Applied Sciences, 13(17), 9895. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13179895
  • Zamansky, A., Linden, D., Hadar, I., & Bleuer-Elsner, S. (2019). Log my dog: perceived impact of dog activity tracking. Computer, 52(9), 35-43. https://doi.org/10.1109/mc.2018.2889637