Defining IT system: a philosophical exploration
Defining IT system: a philosophical exploration, by NightCafé

Defining IT system: a philosophical exploration

In the world of IT, our primary focus is on designing, building, running, and supporting systems. But when you stop to think about it, what exactly is an "IT system"? Is it defined by its functionality, the technology it uses, or something else entirely? Here are some hopefully not too random ramblings on the topic.

Let’s start with a simple example. Imagine you have a customer relationship management (CRM) system coded in C++. Now, suppose you convert this system into Java without the user noticing any difference—except for the new defects that inevitably crop up. Would you still consider it the same system? I would argue it’s not. But if you only converted a small module to Java, it still feels like the same system.

What if you add new functionality? If it’s related to customer relationship management, I’d say yes, it’s still the same system. However, if you add marketing functionalities, then it starts to feel like a different system.

Consider a more complex scenario: an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system with interconnected subsystems for finance, HR, sales, inventory, and so on. Here, we have systems within systems. The degree of granularity matters—a high-level view might not distinguish between various versions, but a detailed perspective might see each version as a separate system, much like Borges' character, Funes, who perceives each evolving form of a cloud as a distinct cloud.

This phenomenon raises a question similar to when a mound becomes a hill, and a hill becomes a mountain. It also parallels the philosophical thought experiment of the Ship of Theseus, where a ship has all its decaying parts replaced with new timber over time. Is it still the same ship? Similarly, human bodies renew most of their cells over time, and our personalities evolve—what defines our identity?

So, are there objective criteria for what constitutes an IT system, or is it merely a social construct? Perhaps an IT system is simply what we collectively agree it to be. Or is that a cheap post-modernist get-out-of-jail card, avoiding the need for concrete definitions?

Note: Funes the Memorious is a short story by Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges. It tells the tale of Ireneo Funes, who, after a horseback riding accident, acquires the remarkable ability—or curse—of remembering absolutely everything.

Malcolm Ryder

Divergent Thinking, Communications in KM, Change R&D, Art

9 个月

The only reason to ever call something is "system" is to point at two things - (1) a single overall operation, and (2) the "fact" that the operation requires the interactions of designated "components" (not "elements"). Any time you cannot identify the first and the second is not true, then you can't call what you are observing a system. The purpose of "information technology" is to be a tool for processing information. Functionally addressing the purpose is processing. The processing is the operation. The operation is a system only when it is meeting its purpose through depending structurally on the interactions of certain components. Any given process has a scope and scale. When you have identified the process you have also declared a scope and scale. Scope and scale are both logical (conceptual) and actual (ACTual). Conceptually, Locomotion is bigger than transportation. Transportation is bigger than shipping. Shipping is bigger than delivery. Delivery is bigger than... What's going on? It's taxonomy. Similarly. a motor is a system; no separate part of a motor accomplishes what a motor does. A truck is a system. An interstate highway is a system. Global trade is a system. Law. Economy. (cont'd in reply to this reply)

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Mark Smalley的更多文章

  • Why it's hard to market – and how to do better

    Why it's hard to market – and how to do better

    Marketing a product or service effectively is a challenge many people face. Too often, the focus is on the offering…

  • Digital philosophical intersectionality

    Digital philosophical intersectionality

    This is probably my most pretentiously-titled framework yet. Its aim is to help understand digital products and…

    10 条评论
  • Putting a man on the moon

    Putting a man on the moon

    The story is well-known: In 1962, when President Kennedy visited NASA, he asked a janitor what he was doing. The…

    1 条评论
  • Project health check

    Project health check

    Last year I had occasion to suggest that an organization should reflect on the health of a project. I gave them these…

    5 条评论
  • Employing digital

    Employing digital

    The modern workplace is increasingly shaped by digital technology. Whether employees are engaging with enterprise…

    2 条评论
  • Design doubts

    Design doubts

    My most recent book is IT service by design, written with Catherine Zuim Florentino. It’s a lovely book.

    9 条评论
  • Two IT tribes – bridging the differences

    Two IT tribes – bridging the differences

    This article applies Core Quality International's useful Core Quadrant model for personal growth to examine how teams…

    10 条评论
  • Experience revisited, again

    Experience revisited, again

    Just as I keep revisiting "service" and becoming increasingly ignorant of what it actually is, I have now revisited…

    1 条评论
  • Selling XLA to C-level – practical steps

    Selling XLA to C-level – practical steps

    I recently gave a talk about my Selling XLA to C-level book for one of my favourite ITSM communities, ITSMF Belgium…

    4 条评论
  • Product is not the solution

    Product is not the solution

    Over the past decade, software providers have made significant strides in shifting from a "project" to a "product"…

    14 条评论

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了