Regularities of the feasibility of systems
The problem of feasibility of systems is the least investigated. Let's consider some of the patterns that help to understand this problem and take it into account when defining the principles of designing and organizing the functioning of control systems.
Equivalence . This pattern characterizes, as it were, the limiting possibilities of the system. L. von Bertalanffy, who proposed this term, defined equifinality as "the ability, unlike the state of equilibrium in closed systems completely determined by the initial conditions, ... to reach a time-independent state that does not depend on its initial conditions and is determined solely by the parameters of the system & quot;.
According to Bertalanffy, one can speak about the level of development of the crocodile, the monkey and characterize them with extreme possibilities, the maximum possible state to which this or that species can strive, and accordingly, the desire for this ultimate state from any initial conditions, even if the individual appeared to the light before the due time or spent, like Mowgli, some initial period of life in an environment unusual for him.
Living organisms become more complex as they evolve, and at different periods of their life, different states of equifinality can be observed. This is manifested most of all in humans, which is the subject of study of many researchers - biologists, philosophers, engineers, who allocate approximately the following levels (called in different ways): material, emotional, family-social, socio-social, intellectual etc.
In this regard, particular interest is the research of possible levels of the existence of socio-social systems, which is important to consider when determining the objectives of the system. Like man, social systems can exist at different levels.
The need for the introduction of the concept of equifinality arises, starting with a certain level of complexity of systems. Bertalanffy did not receive answers to the questions: what exactly are the parameters under specific conditions that ensure equifinality and how is the regularity of equifinality manifested in communities, in organizational systems? However, the regularity makes one think about the limiting possibilities of the created enterprises, organizational management systems for industries, regions, the state.
The law of "necessary diversity"
The necessity of taking into account the limiting feasibility of the system when it was created was first noticed in the theory of systems by WR Ashby. He formulated a pattern known as "the law of the necessary diversity."
For decision-making tasks, the most important is one of the consequences of this pattern, which can be simplified by the following example.
When the researcher (the person making the decision, the observer)
Ashby proved the theorem, on the basis of which he formulated the following conclusion: If D is given a constant value, then D-VN can be reduced only at the expense of the corresponding growth VN ... Speaking more figuratively, only the variety in
This means that by creating a system that can cope with a solution to a problem with a certain known diversity, it is necessary to ensure that the system has even greater variety (knowledge of solution methods) than the variety of the problem being solved, or was able to create in itself this diversity (would own a methodology, could develop a methodology, suggest new methods of solving the problem).
Applicable to control systems the law of "necessary diversity" can be formulated as follows: the variety of the control system V su must be greater (or at least equal) to the variety of the managed object V ou:
V su & gt; V ou. (3.14)
The use of this law when developing and improving the management systems of enterprises and organizations helps to see the causes of the shortcomings in them and to find ways to improve management effectiveness.
For example, In. I. Tereshchenko suggested the following ways to improve management in the face of increasing complexity of production processes:
1) an increase in V su that can be achieved by increasing the number of administrative staff, upgrading its skills, mechanization and automation of management work (this path was proposed in the 1960s and by the 1980s he has exhausted himself);
2) decrease in V ou due to the establishment of clearer and more specific rules for the behavior of the components of the system: unification, standardization, typing, introduction of in-line production, reduction of the nomenclature of parts, components, tooling, etc.
This is what they tried to do in the 1970s. XX century, up to the typification of the development of complex technical complexes, ACS and organizational structures of enterprises, which is in contradiction with the characteristics that ensure the existence of the object as a developing system - such as uniqueness, the need to develop an active beginning, negentropic tendencies for the realization of adaptability, adaptability to changing conditions, developing solutions for the solution, and even transforming the structure, if necessary, etc .;
3) reduction in the level of management requirements, i.e. reducing the number of permanently controlled and controlled parameters of the managed system.
Such a path can be realized by limiting the controlled parameters, which is far from always desirable in terms of product quality and production discipline, unless other control methods are provided along with the control principle;
4) self-organization of management objects.
Creation of self-regulating units: workshops, sections with a closed production cycle, with relative independence and restriction of interference by centralized management bodies of the enterprise, etc.
By the mid-70's. XX century. The first three ways have been exhausted and the main development has received the fourth way on the basis of its wider interpretation - introduction of self-financing, self-financing, self-sufficiency, etc. However, the habit of strict control and directive instructions did not allow the implementation of the planned reforms: there appeared regulated forms of cost accounting, regulatory documents that hampered the development of enterprise independence and the implementation of the management principles adopted at that time.
Regularity Potential performance . Developing the idea In. A. Kotelnikov on the potential noise immunity of systems, BS Fleishman related the complexity of the structure of the system to the complexity of this behavior. He proposed quantitative expressions of the limiting laws of reliability, noise immunity, controllability and other qualities of systems and showed that they can be used to derive quantitative estimates of the feasibility of systems from the point of view of a certain quality - marginal assessments of viability and potential efficiency of complex systems.
These assessments have been researched in relation to technical and environmental systems and are still little used for production systems. The need for such assessments is increasingly felt in practice. For example, it is necessary to determine when the potential capabilities of the existing organizational structure are exhausted and there is a need for its transformation, when production complexes, equipment, etc. become obsolete and require updating. The possibilities of applying the pattern of potential efficiency to the task of determining the "feasibility threshold" The organizational system investigated V. I. Samofalov .
Using the patterns of construction, functioning and development of systems helps to clarify the idea of the object being studied or projected, allows us to develop recommendations for improving organizational systems, methods of system analysis.
How to ...
We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)