Karim Baïna (ENSIAS) invited keynote at ISKO-Maghreb'2012

Rationalism in scientific
management :
the dialectic between formal and
informal

Prof. Karim Baïna

Responsible of Alqualsadi research team
on Enterprise Architecture
ENSIAS, Mohammed V Souissi University, Rabat, Morocco

(CC) Prof. Karim Baïna, ENSIAS at ISKO-Maghreb'2012, Hammamet, Tunisia, Nov. 3rd-4th, 2012

Alqualsadi research team
Enterprise Architecture, Quality of their Development and Integration

Alqualsadi* research team stands for : Enterprise Architecture, Quality of their Development and Integration

Gap

GAP

* is Abou Al Hassan ibn Ali ibn Muhammad Alqualsadi (1412-1486) : Arithmetics, Algebra, Astronomy (father of X and √ symbols)

2/40


Outline
1. Introduction
2. Definitions
3. Formalisation from different point of views
4. Duality of Formal - Informal
5. Properties of Formal - Informal
6. Continuum between Formal - Informal
7. Balance between Formal - Informal
8. Patterns and anti-patterns of Formal – Informal
9. Conclusion
3/40


Introduction : Man evolution, and formalisation

● Human always used more or less explicit formalisation for his needs
of survival, communication, memory, friendliness, trade, war ...
– Sharing ideas by gestures & sounds
– Transcription ideas to writing
– Evolving writing system and tools for these writing systems
– Delegating writing reproduction to machines (invention of printing)
– Mastering energy by inventing the steam engine then the electric motor
– Remarkable scientific progress in theoretical and experimental sciences
(physics, chemistry, biology, economics, psychology, sociology, ...).
– Delegating rationalised duties by programming machines to reproduce
them faithfully (automation, computer science, robotics, ...)
– Formalising and delegating decision making and learning mechanisms
to machine or at least decision support
4/40


Introduction : Man evolution, and formalisation

Human evolution continues
and with it the evolution of ideas
formalisation process

5/40


Definitions
● to formalise is (Oxford dictionaries) :
– (i) to give (something) legal or formal status (eg. the marriage is formalised)
– (ii) to give a definite structure or shape to (eg. we formalise our thoughts)

● Formalisation, for Husserl, is : « the relationship of a matter to form »

● Ostrom (2009) distinguishes between
– rules-in-form (dead letters)
– and rules-in-use (rules which are actually followed)

● Formalisation, for Meijer (2008), means « a reduction in personal and relational
elements of coordination and an emphasis on objectively documenting
decisions, discussions, and work processes »
6/40


Definitions
● Fraser et al. (1994); Junior (1997) distinguish between :
i. simple informal language not having a complete set of rules to
restrict construction
● (e.g. "unstructured" text in natural language)
ii. standardized informal language with structure, format and rules for
the composition of a building (e.g. "structured" text in natural language)
● professional e-mail (informal formalisation Meijer (2008)))
iii.semi-formal language having a syntax/structure defined to specify
the conditions on which the constructions are permitted
iv.formal language which syntax and semantics are defined strictly to
validate any construction.

● Formalisation process may be direct (informal/formel transition) or transitional
(informal/semi-formal transition then semi-formal/formal transition)
7/40


Formalisation from different point of views –
Example of Human and implicit Formalisation
● According to Serres et al. (2004), what can be a hammer
else than a fist with a forearm, which fells to our arm ?
● The technique was invented by outsourcing a bodily
factulty.
● There exists a mechanism that produces continuous
despecialisation of human organs.
– Human being is unique in his capacity to lose a
faculty and to develop others.
– In instrumenting, and transforming his body, the
human is involved in a endless loop of
transsubstantiation that is transmitted by
using technical objects Serres (2001)
8/40


Example of Human and implicit Formalisation

Bodily faculties externalisation includes,
among others, a continuous
formalisation mechanism of defining
shapes to objects, tools, and processes
necessary to achieve human tasks

9/40


Example of Human and explicit Formalisation

● All writing systems followed the same general progression :
– first actual writing was pictographic (or iconographic) where a
simple picture designated a real object : pictograms.
– pictures were gradually formalised/used to represent
relationships and ideas as well as objects. This is called
ideographic writing : ideogram or logograms.
– Also, the sounds corresponding to pictograms are combined to
form a word reducing the number of symbols required for a full
writing system : phonograms.

● Tools adapted for writing systems have also evolved (reed and clay
tablet, papyrus, paper, storage systems)

10/40

Wilson (2005) (CC) Prof. Karim Baïna, ENSIAS at ISKO-Maghreb'2012, Hammamet, Tunisia, Nov. 3rd-4th, 2012

Example of Human and explicit Formalisation

informal, semi-formal and formal
notations and languages, used to
represent systems, are only results of
this continuous process of writing
system formalisation based of
pictograms, ideograms, and
phonograms
11/40


Examples of artifacts evolution at human
level and their formalisation process

12/40


Enterprise, and Formalisation –
analogy with human evolution
● Businesses evolution is not operating through
i. improving oral culture and visual internal and external
communication ?
ii. developing written culture either formalised or informal ?
iii.capitalising memory, standardising their interactions, and
controlling the quality of their products and services ?
iv.cartographying knowledge, strategic know-how, and their
operational systems in a semi-formal style based on
pictograms and ideograms ?
v. projecting system into more formal electronic and computer
frames in order to be automated, measurable and
therefore improvable ?
13/40


Examples of formal-informal dualities in
entreprise and informal contribution

14/40


Formal-Informal : Duality

● The contibution of informal is undeniable for the enterprise,
it complements the formal. Renaud (1995) calls the formal
and informal a "notional couple" where one does not
combine without the other.
● In Renaud (1995), informal (badly named) is not a
"complementary" resource that should be "formalised and
rationalised", the form hits the formlessness which makes
it live.
– e.g. the informal communication channels
complement the formal communication channels
when they are no longer sufficient or are no
longer adequate Amosse et al. (2010).
15/40


● Foudriat (2007) studied informality in three views:
– Scientific management (Taylorism) has a single rational point of
view :
● The informal is considered as a temporary residual rationality
deficit that new formal rules will reduce or to remove.
– Human relations school (eg. in surveys of Elton Mayo) : Informal and
formal are two opposite and irreducible sides of the the organisational
phenomenon :
● The informal includes goals and psychological needs of
individuals which can neither be filled, nor reduced, nor
manipulated by rational logics, and which are in shift with the
local order that the formal organisation seeks to impose.
– Systemic and strategic analysis (Crozier & Friedberg (1977) surveys) :
the informal is not limited to the psychological needs of individuals
● The inform includes the interests centered power games that
individuals find in the formal organisation. Informal behaviors
are seen as strategies. 16/40


Formal-Informal : Duality -
Iceberg metaphor
● Some theorists proposed a metaphor comparing the organisation to
an iceberg, where
– the emergent part corresponds to the formal aspects
(behavior related to the organisations scientific approach).
– while the submerged part, consists of individuals strategies,
affective ties, coalitions of groups, power relations.
Herman (1970) Siakas and Georgiadou (1999)

17/40



each formal system, has and depends on a dual informal
system (complementary image) more important (duality
or dichotomy).
Both systems evolve in parallel and interact continously.

18/40


Examples of formal-informal dualities

19/40


Formalisation and power of informal within
organsations

● Organizations have never been only formal, functional,
impersonal.
● Any organization contains within itself diverse
communities, micro-cultures and is a place to live not
just a workplace.
● Even in the most rigid bureaucracies, there exist
informal relations, groups based on elected affinities,
on the work necessity, on the circumvention of rules,
or collective defense. Enriquez (1990), Renaud (1995)

20/40


Formal versus Informal Systems

● The formal is best used for predictable and
repeatable work that needs to be done
efficiently and with little variance.
– The predictability and repeatability of the
work warrants the effort to develop the
infrastructure of the formal organisation,
which can be documented and
constantly improved upon to improve
efficiency and remove variation.
21/40



● The informal is best applied against
unpredictable events. Issued that arise
outside the scope of the formal organisation are
often surprises that need to be sensed and
solved.
– Increasingly, pepole who need to do the
solving need to be motivated outside the
reward system, collaborate across
organisational boundaries.
22/40


– example of Information Systems
● Formal information systems consist of policies, rules
and procedures. Howarth (2005). Many of formal
processes and tasks can be and have been
computerised over the years.

● Informal information systems relies on common
practices and common sens of the organsiation's
employees. Informal information systems usually arises
from restraints or inadequacies of the formal system.
They are more spontaneous and provide flexibility and
adaptation to the way organisation functions.

23/40


Examples of formal-informal dualities in
entreprise and purpose of formalisation

24/40


Examples of deformalisation processes in
enterprise and purpose of deformalisation

25/40


Properties – degree of
formalisation/defomalisation
● The formalisation (resp. defomalisation) degree of a system :
– is a qualitative value that evaluates on a discrete scale
its level of formalisation (resp. deformalisation).
– alias : "degree/level of standardisation"
(resp.deformalisation) Delzescaux (2002), Hughes et
al.(2005); Ross et al. (2006).

● The degree of formalisation of an organisation depends on its
size and nature of work Hughes et al. (2005)
– eg. a Prod. and a R&D units cannot have the same
degree of formalisation
26/40


Properties – gap between formal
and informal
● The formal-informal gap is the difference between the degree of
formalisation and deformalisation of a system peak-to-peak (ptp) at a
given time.
– Delzescaux (2002) calls this gap"synchronic" (as opposed to
"dyachronic gap" which measures the difference between
formal and informal at two different instants in time).

● The larger the gap in society, the greater the distinction between social
classe (one could project this gap on the depth of a hierarchy in an
organization, that Hughes et al. (2005) called vertical complexity of an
organizational structure).
● The reduction of this gap indicates a shift in the balance of power (which
we will define later as the center of gravity of the couple formal /
informal).
27/40


Properties – centre of gravity of
formal-informal couple
● The center of gravity of formal-informal system couple is a
point representing the balance of power between formal
and informal.
● The center of gravity of formal-informal couple follows the
metaphor of the formal / informal iceberg.
● Moving the center of gravity of an iceberg is sufficent for
the iceberg to capsize or roll on itself.
● Shifting the center of gravity of the couple formal / informal
is a characteristic of a regulation (search for the balance of
forces governing them).

28/40


Formal-Informal : Continuum
● Complementarity and dynamics acting between formal and
informal supports a continuum which ensures the move from
one to the other in a continuous way.
– If the transition from informal to formal is insured by
formalisation
– the dual transition from formal to informal is provided
by deformalisation.

● Formalising process is not a choice but an evolution. One
can deduce that if we generalise that deformalising a formal
system returns to formalise its dual informal system (negative
correlation).
29/40


Formal-Informal : Continuum -
Example
● Knowledge deformalisation, is to defer the weight of
problems and conflicts resolution mainly on participating
parties Volckrick and Deliège (2001), Deliège (2010).
– Knowledge deformalisation is also reflected in the
fact that the patient become himself well informed
about his illness, or on the fact that all the actors
involved in a problematic claim as legitimate their
point of view and "experience know how" on
some situation).
– Justice procedures deformalisation is easing rules
by the players or the law itself Cadiet (2008).
30/40


Formal-Informal : Continuum

continuum between formal-informal systems finds
its balance through regulation cycles of those
systems (series of oscillations formalisation-
deformalisation until an equilibrium position).

31/40


Informal - Formal : Balance
● Ideally, informal & formal systems should complement one another. Flatau
(1988), Lucey (2005). However, where to draw the line between the formal and
informal systems and continually to monitor the dividing line ?
● Interactions between formal tools and informal practices are fragile, unstable,
characterised by never-ending frictions, loose ends, and unforeseen
consequences. This regulation respects the formal/informal iceberg metaphor.

● How companies balance between their formal and informal organisations ?
– They retain the efficiency and clarity of the well-defined structures that
define the formal organisation and predicatble work while also
capitalising on the flexibility and speed of the social networks and
unpredicatble work Katzenbach and Khan (2010)
– They monitor the interaction between two formal & informal systems to
ensure that they are working together effectively, else wahre, there is
a danger in having the two systems Howarth (2005).
32/40


Informal - Formal :
patterns & anti-patterns –
(1) formal/informal stable equilibrium
● Ring and van de Ven (1994) denotes the formal/informal
equilibrium state as a situation of organizational cooperation.

● The center of gravity of the formal/informal couple remains stable.

● Formal/informal stable equilibrium deformalisation of a formal
system leads to a logical and normal deformalisation of dual
informal system and vice versa without neither important gap nor
overlap

33/40


Informal - Formal :
(2) formal/informal instable equilibria

● There are two kinds of instable formal/informal equilibria
– (i) Successive system formalisations that may yield, if
repeated, an over-formalisation of the formal system.

– (i) A deformalisation of a formal system meets the
formalisation of an informal dual system and we no
longer distinguish the two dual systems (zero
formal/informal gap)

34/40


Informal - Formal :
(3) over-deformalisation

● deformalisation of formal information system
drops below the minimum informal limits for
formal system for this system
– This leads to a formalisation of the dual informal system
beyond the maximum formal limits for informal system
(over-formalisation of informal system)

● State of over-deformalisation is an anti-pattern.

35/40


Informal - Formal :
(4) over-formalisation

● Formal system follow a succession of formalisations more
and more complex without any regulation.
– This leads to deformalising the dual informal system
in the same pace (over-deformalisation of
informal system). But, the causality may be
reversed.
● This state is characterised by an abnormal growth of
formal/informal gap.
● State of deformalisation is an anti-pattern.
● Alias : over-institutionalisation

36/40


Informal - Formal :
patterns & anti-patterns – synthesis

37/40


Informal - Formal :
patterns & anti-patterns – synthesis

38/40


Our recent research related
to the formal & the informal
● Aligning between informal business strategies and formal IT
organisation
– Karim Doumi, Salah Baïna, Karim Baïna : Strategic Business and IT alignment:
Representation and Evaluation. Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Information Technology 2012, (JATIT'2012)

● Bridging between end user informality and systems formality
– Meriem Benhaddi, Karim Baïna, Abdelwahed El Hassan, A user-centric
Mashuped SOA. Int. J. of Web Science 2012, (IJWS'2012)

● Maintaining formal process models with informal human practices in-
use
– Walid Gaaloul, Karim Baïna, Claude Godart: Fouille de workflow. Technique et
Science Informatiques 29(10): 1207-1236 (TSI'2010)
39/40


Conclusion
● We will never over emphasis on the power of informal
style to provide a good knowledge description, sharing,
sustainability, implementation and operation.
● Companies should know more their formal and informal
organisations.
● Instead of destructuring effects by which the informal
organisation, companies should monitor the balance
between their formal and informal organisations
● Systems and their rules in-form should take into account
innovative informal ideas and individual strategies
represented by rules-in use
40/40


Merci pour votre attention
avez-vous des questions ?

Prof. Karim Baïna
baina@ensias.ma

@kbaina

www.slideshare.net/kbaina/
made with :

41/40


Karim Baïna (ENSIAS) invited keynote at ISKO-Maghreb'2012

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Mehr von Karim Baïna

Mehr von Karim Baïna (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Karim Baïna (ENSIAS) invited keynote at ISKO-Maghreb'2012