Demand involves the
particular ways in which users define their needs, a concept more nuanced than
the simple notion of requirements.
The demand environment for electronic
medical record services, for example, may necessitate some features of the services to be “turned off” to
meet local policy constraints. This is a quality attribute that aligns the services with hospital policy variability, not a functional requirement of electronic medical records, per se.
Demand can be seen as symmetric or asymmetric. Symmetric demand describes
an expectation by a systems supplier that a proportionate and stable
relationship exists between the user’s needs and the understanding of those
needs as expressed in the services it is prepared to provide.
In other
words, a systems supplier offers a product or solution that is in its interests
to provide and which it expects will fit stated (or unstated) demands of users (i.e., product or
solution drives the use).
Asymmetric
demand embodies the idea that a systems
supplier must shape its services dynamically to meet changing demands in ways that
may or may not fit its interests as it currently defines them. In responding to
asymmetric demand, a systems supplier is accepting that its interests are
served when the needs of the service user drive its understanding and interest.
The
user’s demand is specific to
its experience of a particular context-of-use and that demand can rapidly evolve as the user’s context and
understanding changes.
To meet
such a rapidly evolving demand, a
systems supplier must also become flexible and adaptable. Satisfying asymmetric demand is a
continual process of a systems supplier that defines its interest in terms of
its users’ interests — interests that will be associated with continually changing responses
to the users’ dynamically evolving demands.
Beyond a
characterization of demand as
symmetric or asymmetric, there are other nuances that affect complex systems.
For instance, demand, whether symmetric or asymmetric, can also be
predictable or unpredictable; its rate of change can be fast or slow. However,
it is the distinction between symmetric and asymmetric demand that matters most, because in the context of complex systems, demand is largely asymmetric. Any
asymmetric demand requires a dynamic responsiveness on the part of the organization.
It is important, therefore, to make clear how asymmetric demand will be present in different and dynamic ways, how demands may interact in a given context-of-use, and how organizations can find dynamic ways to meet those demands.
It is important, therefore, to make clear how asymmetric demand will be present in different and dynamic ways, how demands may interact in a given context-of-use, and how organizations can find dynamic ways to meet those demands.
The Gap Between Supply and Demand
A gap between supply and demand emerges from the lack of direct connection between the users and the systems that are provided by suppliers. Complicating this separation and making it progressively more difficult to fully understand complex systems is that users’ needs and the socio-technical contexts in which those needs arise are themselves constantly evolving, usually independently, with their future states largely unknown.
As a result, if users’ needs are sufficiently urgent but the systems and tools available to the organization are inadequate to satisfy the needs of the task at hand, the organization must find alternative ways to make do, by developing workarounds, modifying and adapting existing systems and tools, or finding other sources beyond the system suppliers they have used in the past.
The modifications and adaptations that result from this scenario tend to be ad hoc. Thus, a doctor without emergency backup may make use of kitchen utensils and adapt the kitchen table to approximate sterile working conditions in order to meet the needs of patients presenting with medical symptoms.
For an organization where there is a considerable gap between supply and demand, such workarounds tend to become very expensive; the resultant drain on resources will ultimately constrain the ability of that organization to continually respond and adapt to new forms of demand.
Conclusion
The purpose of these distinctions of user needs and how well they are supported is to make transparent: (1) The variety of forms of demand that the organization might be expected to respond to; and (2) The corresponding variety of use configurations that the systems supplied by the organization must be able to support. With this transparency, the organization can make decisions about what variety of demand situations it can and will participate in.
