# Difference between revisions of "Completeness Theorem of Information Precedence"

(→Discussion) |
|||

(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||

Line 4: | Line 4: | ||

== Preface == | == Preface == | ||

− | + | Wiki transcription of original with editing of grammar up to the Analysis §. | |

== Overview == | == Overview == | ||

Line 34: | Line 34: | ||

== Discussion == | == Discussion == | ||

− | Notice that the theorem states only that each relevant information [element] ''can'' be determined by precedence analysis starting at some operating station. There is no guarantee that it ''will'' be determined because the individual precedence analysis steps are intuitive procedures, or search procedures, which cannot be guaranteed to be complete. | + | Notice that the theorem states only that each relevant information [element] ''can'' be determined by precedence analysis starting at some operating station. There is no guarantee that it ''will'' be determined because the individual precedence analysis steps are intuitive procedures, or search procedures, which cannot be guaranteed to be complete. In other words the method has been prove[n] to be complete in the weak sense that any information that ''can be found by some means can also be found by the precedence analysis as described.'' Whether it actually ''will'' be found depends on ''how'' the precedence analysis is performed. Nevertheless, the likelihood that an information [element] which is relevant will actually be found seems higher when precedence analysis is used because it allows a concentrated effort on one [element] and its precedents at a time. It also allows a more systematic documentation, which can also be processed on a computer. |

+ | |||

+ | == Analysis == | ||

+ | |||

+ | In a modern context, current technology as well as the advancement of experience and perspective with info sytems allows us to fill in the gaps and give a solid foundation to the above with technology such as Haskell, Prolog, RDF, etc. | ||

== Notes == | == Notes == | ||

<references/> | <references/> |

## Latest revision as of 19:36, 7 August 2009

## Preface

Wiki transcription of original with editing of grammar up to the Analysis §.

## Overview

The method of information precedence analysis had a fundamental property which makes it a very efficient tool: it is *complete* in a certain sense. An information system for management control has the purpose of making integrated management possible.

## Theorem

### Propostion 1

Integrated management as as its purpose the obtaining of both "local efficiency" at each operating station in the organization and efficient coordination of the activities of all stations.

#### Corollary

Each management activity must have an influence, direct or indirect, upon at least one operating station.

### Proposition 2

A management activity exercises influence by means of information.

### Theorem 1

Each information set in a management information system must be a precedent (of some order) of at least one operation station.^{[1]}

### Theorem 2

Completeness theorem. *Each and all relevant information sets in a management information system can be determined, and defined, by an information precedence analysis which starts at every operating station*.

## Discussion

Notice that the theorem states only that each relevant information [element] *can* be determined by precedence analysis starting at some operating station. There is no guarantee that it *will* be determined because the individual precedence analysis steps are intuitive procedures, or search procedures, which cannot be guaranteed to be complete. In other words the method has been prove[n] to be complete in the weak sense that any information that *can be found by some means can also be found by the precedence analysis as described.* Whether it actually *will* be found depends on *how* the precedence analysis is performed. Nevertheless, the likelihood that an information [element] which is relevant will actually be found seems higher when precedence analysis is used because it allows a concentrated effort on one [element] and its precedents at a time. It also allows a more systematic documentation, which can also be processed on a computer.

## Analysis

In a modern context, current technology as well as the advancement of experience and perspective with info sytems allows us to fill in the gaps and give a solid foundation to the above with technology such as Haskell, Prolog, RDF, etc.

## Notes

- ↑ We are talking here of
*operations*management. Strategic[al] planning systems, for instance, do not satisfy Proposition 1. Hence the theorems 1 and 2 do not hold for such systems.