Management information systems encompass a broad and complex topic. To make this topic
more manageable, boundaries will be defined. First, because of the vast number of activities
relating to management information systems, a total review is not possible. Those discussed here
is only a partial sampling of activities, reflecting the author's viewpoint of the more common and
interesting developments. Likewise where there were multiple effects in a similar area of
development, only selected ones will be used to illustrate concepts. This is not to imply one
effort is more important than another. Also, the main focus of this paper will be on information
systems for use at the farm level and to some lesser extent systems used to support researchers
addressing farm level problems (e.g., simulation or optimization models, geographic information
systems, etc.) and those used to support agribusiness firms that supply goods and services to
agricultural producers and the supply chain beyond the production phase.
Secondly, there are several frameworks that can be used to define and describe management
information systems. More than one will be used to discuss important concepts. Because more
than one is used, it indicates the difficult of capturing the key concepts of what is a management
information system. Indeed, what is viewed as an effective and useful management information
system is one environment may not be of use or value in another.
Lastly, the historical perspective of management information systems cannot be ignored. This
perspective gives a sense of how these systems have evolved, been refined and adapted as new
technologies have emerged, and how changing economic conditions and other factors have
influenced the use of information systems.
Before discussing management information systems, some time-tested concepts should be
reviewed. Davis offers a commonly used concept in his distinction between data and
information. Davis defines data as raw facts, figures, objects, etc. Information is used to make
decisions. To transform data into information, processing is needed and it must be done while
considering the context of a decision. We are often awash in data but lacking good information.
However, the success achieved in supplying information to decision makers is highly variable.
Barabba, expands this concept by also adding inference, knowledge and wisdom in his
modification of Haechel's hierarchy which places wisdom at the highest level and data at the
lowest. As one moves up the hierarchy, the value is increased and volume decreased. Thus, as
one acquires knowledge and wisdom the decision making process is refined. Management
information systems attempt to address all levels of Haechel's hierarchy as well as converting
2
data into information for the decision maker. As both Barabba and Haechel argue, however, just
supplying more data and information may actually be making the decision making process more
difficult. Emphasis should be placed on increasing the value of information by moving up
Haechel's hierarchy.
Another important concept from Davis and Olsen is the value if information. They note that “in
general, the value of information is the value of the change in decision behavior caused by the
information, less the cost of the information.” This statement implies that information is
normally not a free good. Furthermore, if it does not change decisions to the better, it may have
no value. Many assume that investing in a “better” management information system is a sound
economic decision. Since it is possible that the better system may not change decisions or the
cost of implementing the better system is high to the actual realized benefits, it could be a bad
investment. Also, since before the investment is made, it is hard to predict the benefits and costs
of the better system, the investment should be viewed as one with risk associated with it.
Comments
Post a Comment