From 'Adequate' Systems Design to 'Smart' Systems Design: Evaluation Criteria and Risks

Abstract

A current issue in information and service design, is what it means to design an process and its support systems. Adequacy can be measured with respect to the goals of the stakeholders of the business process. Typical goals that are named in connection with business process (support) design are productivity, quality, efficiency, flexibility and conformance with formal and legal rules such as ISO 20000 or SOX. Are they the only ones? In this paper, we raise the stakes by highlighting that:i. in a competitive environment, will not be enough as there will be demands from system users asking for distinctive or additional features to the formal specifications and conformance criteriaii. and, in parallel, alternative systems suppliers will want to offer distinctive competitive features both in system features and in specification/design/testing processes So that adequacy at the technical level must in effect be supplemented by at the technical and business levels. In effect the decision to purchase/license a system is no longer dependent only on stated performances, quality and conformance to stated standards or frameworks. It is more and more frequently incorporating with growing emphasis assessments of the internal processes and communication schemes whereby these adequacy goals and others are met by the system supplier(s). The research question addressed in this paper is thus:How will a system procurement function assess the smartness of a vendor supplied systems design (architecture and risks) beyond adequate fulfillment of technical system specifications (as defined above)?