IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v66y2021ics0160791x21001019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managing ethical requirements elicitation of complex socio-technical systems with critical systems thinking: A case of course-timetabling project

Author

Listed:
  • Raza, Syed Arshad

Abstract

Complex socio-technical systems pose considerable challenges to requirements elicitation due to dynamic boundary conditions and conflicting perspectives. Traditional requirements engineering is criticized for its failure in providing a systemic view, overlooking ethical concerns and marginalized social perspectives. It is argued that educational institutions as a part of society need to ethically develop and manage their academic processes and consider such perspectives for emancipation. This critical qualitative research applies the emancipatory systemic methodology of critical systems thinking (CST) for the requirements elicitation of a complex and dynamic university course-timetables management problem. Firstly, the problem is ethically formulated to mitigate Type III errors. Secondly, multiple viewpoints are sought for boundary judgments using a CST-based ethical inquiry of boundary critique to reveal the normative content of the project design, explore imbalances amongst the socio-technical design components, and unveil the underlying ethical issues. The dynamic stakeholder network captures the system's emergence through stakeholder interconnectedness and boundary liquidity by sweeping-in relevant stakeholders through the continuum of various states of the project. This work enlightens requirements engineering by coupling systemic and socio-technical lenses for the elicitation of ethical requirements and the emancipation of marginalized perspectives in complex and dynamic information systems projects in general and timetabling problems, in particular.

Suggested Citation

  • Raza, Syed Arshad, 2021. "Managing ethical requirements elicitation of complex socio-technical systems with critical systems thinking: A case of course-timetabling project," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:66:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21001019
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101626
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X21001019
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101626?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gülcü, Ayla & Akkan, Can, 2020. "Robust university course timetabling problem subject to single and multiple disruptions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(2), pages 630-646.
    2. Thomas, Herbert, 2018. "Powerful knowledge, technology and education in the future-focused good society," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 54-59.
    3. De Cremer, David & Vandekerckhove, Wim, 2017. "Managing unethical behavior in organizations: The need for a behavioral business ethics approach," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 437-455, May.
    4. Jaime Miranda, 2010. "eClasSkeduler: A Course Scheduling System for the Executive Education Unit at the Universidad de Chile," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 196-207, June.
    5. Zhang, Hengli & Zhu, Qin, 2021. "Instructor perceptions of engineering ethics education at Chinese engineering universities: A cross-cultural approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    6. Nelson, Jake & Gorichanaz, Tim, 2019. "Trust as an ethical value in emerging technology governance: The case of drone regulation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    7. Gerald Midgley & Raghav Rajagopalan, 2021. "Critical Systems Thinking, Systemic Intervention, and Beyond," Springer Books, in: Gary S. Metcalf & Kyoichi Kijima & Hiroshi Deguchi (ed.), Handbook of Systems Sciences, chapter 5, pages 107-157, Springer.
    8. Syed Arshad Raza & Atiq W. Siddiqui & Craig Standing, 2019. "Exploring Systemic Problems in IS Adoption Using Critical Systems Heuristics," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 125-153, April.
    9. Herschel, Richard & Miori, Virginia M., 2017. "Ethics & Big Data," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 31-36.
    10. Hämäläinen, Antti & Hirvonen, Helena, 2020. "Electronic Health Records reshaping the socio-technical practices in Long-Term Care of older persons," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. W Ulrich, 2003. "Beyond methodology choice: critical systems thinking as critically systemic discourse," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(4), pages 325-342, April.
    12. Buckley, Jenifer A. & Thompson, Paul B. & Whyte, Kyle Powys, 2017. "Collingridge's dilemma and the early ethical assessment of emerging technology: The case of nanotechnology enabled biosensors," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 54-63.
    13. Smith, Brent, 2019. "Personality facets and ethics positions as directives for self-driving vehicles," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 115-124.
    14. Epting, Shane, 2021. "Ethical requirements for transport systems with automated buses," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    15. Macnish, Kevin & van der Ham, Jeroen, 2020. "Ethics in cybersecurity research and practice," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    16. Zhu, Qin, 2020. "Ethics, society, and technology: A Confucian role ethics perspective," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    17. Jan Stallaert, 1997. "Automated Timetabling Improves Course Scheduling at UCLA," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 67-81, August.
    18. Samuele Lo Piano, 2020. "Ethical principles in machine learning and artificial intelligence: cases from the field and possible ways forward," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, December.
    19. Sony, Michael & Naik, Subhash, 2020. "Industry 4.0 integration with socio-technical systems theory: A systematic review and proposed theoretical model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    20. Edward Freeman, R. & Evan, William M., 1990. "Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 337-359.
    21. Li Da Xu, 2020. "The contribution of systems science to Industry 4.0," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 618-631, July.
    22. Yip, Man Hang & Juhola, Tomi, 2015. "Stakeholder involvement in software system development – Insights into the influence of product-service ratio," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 105-114.
    23. Kutoma J. Wakunuma & Bernd Carsten Stahl, 2014. "Tomorrow’s ethics and today’s response: An investigation into the ways information systems professionals perceive and address emerging ethical issues," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 383-397, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhichang Zhu, 2022. "Paradigm, specialty, pragmatism: Kuhn's legacy to methodological pluralism," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 895-912, September.
    2. Sydelko, Pamela & Midgley, Gerald & Espinosa, Angela, 2021. "Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: Creating a common, cross-agency understanding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 250-263.
    3. Mamak, Kamil & Glanc, Jadwiga, 2022. "Problems with the prospective connected autonomous vehicles regulation: Finding a fair balance versus the instinct for self-preservation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    4. Foecking, Nico & Wang, Mei & Huynh, Toan Luu Duc, 2021. "How do investors react to the data breaches news? Empirical evidence from Facebook Inc. during the years 2016–2019," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    5. Matthew Hutcheson & Alec Morton & Shona Blair, 2024. "Critical Systems Heuristics: a Systematic Review," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 499-514, August.
    6. Cristian D. Palma & Patrick Bornhardt, 2020. "Considering Section Balance in an Integer Optimization Model for the Curriculum-Based Course Timetabling Problem," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-12, October.
    7. Frederiksen, Marianne Harbo & Wolf, Patricia & Klotz, Ute, 2024. "Citizen visions of drone uses and impacts in 2057: Far-future insights for policy decision-makers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    8. Roblek Vasja & Meško Maja & Podbregar Iztok, 2021. "Mapping of the Emergence of Society 5.0: A Bibliometric Analysis," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 54(4), pages 293-305, December.
    9. Kalpokiene, Julija & Kalpokas, Ignas, 2023. "Creative encounters of a posthuman kind – anthropocentric law, artificial intelligence, and art," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/1059 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Ciamac C. Moallemi & Utkarsh Patange, 2024. "Hybrid Scheduling with Mixed-Integer Programming at Columbia Business School," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 54(3), pages 222-240, May.
    12. Cortez, Maria Céu & Andrade, Nuno & Silva, Florinda, 2022. "The environmental and financial performance of green energy investments: European evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    13. Geurts, Amber & Geerdink, Tara & Sprenkeling, Marit, 2022. "Accelerated innovation in crises: The role of collaboration in the development of alternative ventilators during the COVID-19 pandemic," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    14. Sony, Michael & Aithal, Sreeramana, 2020. "Transforming Indian Engineering Industries through Industry 4.0: An Integrative Conceptual Analysis," MPRA Paper 102872, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Nir Halevy & Sora Jun & Eileen Y. Chou, 2020. "Intergroup Conflict is Our Business: CEOs’ Ethical Intergroup Leadership Fuels Stakeholder Support for Corporate Intergroup Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 229-246, February.
    16. Mouna Mrad & Slaheddine Hallara, 2014. "The Relationship Between the Board of Directors and the Performance/Value Creation in a Context of Privatization: The Case of French Companies," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 83-108, March.
    17. Jean Baptiste Habumuremyi & Thomas K Tarus, 2021. "Effect of Stakeholders’ Participation on Sustainability of Community Projects in Ruhango District, Rwanda," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 5(09), pages 429-433, September.
    18. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    19. Andrea Bettinelli & Valentina Cacchiani & Roberto Roberti & Paolo Toth, 2015. "An overview of curriculum-based course timetabling," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 23(2), pages 313-349, July.
    20. Yasemin Torun & Nuri Gökhan Torlak, 2023. "An adaptive use of Soft Systems Methodology with Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing, Critical Systems Heuristics and Interactive Planning in a women's prison," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 671-688, July.
    21. R. Alan Bowman, 2021. "Developing Optimal Student Plans of Study," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 51(6), pages 409-421, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:66:y:2021:i:c:s0160791x21001019. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.