Peter Checkland Soft Systems Methodology Ebook Torrents
Peter ChecklandPeter Checkland (1930- ) is emeritus professor of systems at Lancaster University and a noted systems thinker. Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) evolved as a response to the models developed by earlier systems thinkers such as von Bertalanffy and Beer. These theorists had used biological systems and engineering/cybernetics as a way of trying to model human-activity systems. Checkland recognised that such human activity systems are too ‘messy’ to be modelled in this simple fashion:a key feature of messes and difficult policy issues is that there are valid different perspectives on the issue or situation, which interpret information quite differently.Chapman 2002Checkland’s own experience as a consultant to the British Aircraft Corporation’s Concorde project showed the problem with what he termed ‘hard systems’ approaches: thinking like a systems engineer at the time (What is the system?
What are its objectives?) he failed ‘to think of it as anything other than an engineering project’. The project was running late and was over-budget and thus failing against its originally stated objectives.However, there was a larger, political set of objectives at work which were more concerned with demonstrating British sincerity towards Anglo-French joint ventures than delivering the first supersonic passenger airliner. This was at a time when the UK was applying for membership of the European Community in the face of the then French President De Gaulle’s veto (Ramage and Shipp 2009 p150).
This experience led Checkland to realise that there would always be a number of models and worldviews (he used the German term Weltanschauungen) in play when studying a system which described the multiple views of reality as perceived by the various participants within that system.In fact, a better version of systems thinking needed to be developed which could incorporate the greater degrees of complexity Checkland recognised in larger, human activity systems. He started from the presumption that ‘systems are in the eyes of the beholder’ and decided to construct a model that could recognise and work with the ambiguities inherent in a situation.
A way of demonstrating this distinction between Checkland and his predecessors can be shown by looking at the degrees of complexity shown respectively by an insect’s digestive system, or a computer’s operating system, or that of the workings of HM prisons service.
This article explains the concept of the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), developed by George P贸lya in a practical way. After reading it, you will understand the basics of this powerful Problem Solving tool. What is the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)?The British system thinker developed the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) on the basis of 10 years of research.
It’s a way to model business processes and can be used for general problem solving and managing changes in the organisation. The primary use of SSM revolves around the analysis of complex situations, with differing views on the definition of the problem. SSM can intervene in such situations by making discussion between all parties involved possible. This makes it possible to reach a consensus, in which can please all parties involved.Peter Checkland developed this method in the nineties of the last century. He came to the conclusion that ideas from developers and users did not always match. The problem was that opinions often differed widely and developers had a tendency to use complicated jargon.
With Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), Peter Checkland focused on stimulating a collective approach within an organization. This makes it possible to discuss multiple ideas and insights with one another and to take new steps in further development from here. ConsensusSoft Systems Methodology (SSM) is a method to structure complex problems and to develop desirable and feasible changes within a differentiated group of people.
Such a heterogeneous group can consist of employees, developers, users and customers, whereby everyone sheds a different light on a problem. It is often difficult to align all these different thinking styles. That is why Peter Checkland has explicitly designed Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) to lead a heterogeneous group through such a process, so that each participant gets the chance to structure a complex problem. In this way it is possible to implement feasible change (s).It’s not always easy to please everyone involved with a desired solution to a problematic situation. By talking to each other, they will come to adjustments that are desirable and feasible. SSM is not a substantive organisational theory, but does lead to faster decision-making based on consensus.
SSM also does not provide any framework for how a design should look; it is a search process for the best solution. It makes use of the knowledge and expertise of all who are closely involved in the problem. The core of SSM is to bridge the gap between the ‘real’ world and the conceptual world of thought of those involved. 7 stepsCheckland describes SSM as a method that can be followed in 7 steps. It should be noted that it is far from decisive to actually follow each of the 7 steps. If it turns out that a proper solution has already been found after step 4, then that is fine.
Catwoe Analysis Peter Checkland
It is about the basis of discussion between those involved, so that different interests can be included in the concept:Step 1 – recognising a problematic situationIn order to define the problem, it’s important to first gather a lot of information. This can be done, for example, by interviewing the people involved and finding and studying a great deal of documentation about the problem. Highlighting possible factors that influence the situation is also part of this step. Finally, it is advisable to gather all information about organisational structure and control processes and to see this in the light of the problem. Step 2 – describing the problematic situationBased on all information obtained from step 1, the problem situation can then be properly described and defined.
Within SSM, use is often made of so-called ‘rich pictures’. These are sketches of the problematic situation, which literally creates an image. The role of the customer, the role of the problem owner (the organisation or department) and the problem solver(s) must also be examined. In addition, it is good to look at power structures within the organisation and the way in which stakeholders interact with each other and are dependent on each other. Step 3 – formulating basic definitionsThe emphasis lies on describing the ideal way in which the system should function.
These so-called ‘root definitions’ give an ideal picture of relevant systems. This can be drawn from the elements, which have also been developed by David Smyth: CustomersThe customers of an organisation; users and stakeholders of a system. ActorsThe employees within an organisation who ensure that a transformation process occurs.
TransformationThe process in which input is transformed by an organisation into an output, including problem solving. Weltanschauung / WorldviewThis is the ‘bigger picture’ and considers the various stakeholders and interested parties from the environment around an organisation and the influence they can exert. OwnersThe people within an organisation who are able to make changes and decide whether a project should be started or ended. Environmental constraintsFactual elements from the environment which can have an influence on the organisation and can impede or limit the system. Step 4 – composing conceptual modelsConceptual models are created for each activity from the ‘root definition’ from step 3, with a briefly defined objective. Step 5 – Comparing models and realityThe conceptual models are based on theory, but that can be a far cry from reality.
That’s why it’s wise to see how much it corresponds with the ‘real’ world. A gap analysis offers the solution whether or not there is a gap between the models and reality.
In the group process, moreover, all the different views on reality can become clear. Step 6 – defining changesIt’s not always necessary to implement changes in the solution. If this is the case, then these changes must be defined and checked whether or not they are feasible. Step 7 – taking actionIt’s necessary to take action to improve the problematic situation. The changes from step 6 will be implemented in the organisation. If problems occur, the cycle starts again at the first stage.
Thus, SSM has an iterative cycle. FacilitatorIn order to manage Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) in the right direction, it is important that the entire process is controlled by someone. Usually this participatory role is carried out by the so-called facilitator. He is not only responsible for bringing the heterogeneous group members into contact with each other. He must also be familiar with Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) and be able to encourage all participants to share their knowledge with the others. In addition, it is his role to ensure a good space, where one can enter into discussions in a session. The use of flipcharts is desirable.
Checkland Soft Systems Methodology
It is also the task of the facilitator to prepare a plan in advance for going through (all) steps. Depending on the problem, a few hours to a few days can be reserved for this. In addition, time must be reserved to carry out the practical implementation of each step. Ultimately it is all about a feasible and realistic result, with which all participants are satisfied. It’s Your TurnWhat do you think?
Is the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) applicable in your personal or professional environment? Do you recognize the practical explanation or do you have more suggestions? What are your success factors for solving problemsShare your experience and knowledge in the comments box below.If you liked this article, then please subscribe to our Free Newsletter for the latest posts on Management models and methods. You can also find us on, and.More information. Checkland, P., & Poulter, J.
Learning for action: a short definitive account of soft systems methodology and its use, for practitioners, teachers and students. Checkland, P. Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective. Systems research and behavioral science, 17(S1), S11-S58. Checkland, P., Scholes, J., & Checkland, P.
Soft systems methodology in action (Vol. Chichester:.How to cite this article:Mulder, P. Soft Systems Methodology (SSM). Retrieved insert date from ToolsHero: a link to this page on your website:ToolsHero: Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)Did you find this article interesting?Your rating is more than welcome or share this article via Social media! First of all, we consider that your article explains very well in general the SSM (Soft Systems Methodology). However, by reviewing in detail we were able to find some mistakes, which we will mention below:1.
The whole article talks about problems and their solution, but in the SSM there are no problems, but problematic situations in a human activity system (HAS). By saying that there are problems, it is accepted that there is a solution to these and finding this solution would make the problem disappear. But in a problematic situation there are no problems and there is nothing to solve, but the goal is to learn the situation in order to propose feasible and desirable changes.2. In the explanation of step 1 of the methodology, nothing is mentioned about action research.
Which mentions that not only should the situation be observed outside of it (only as an observer), since it will not help us to understand the situation in its entirety, but that the situation should be studied as part of it (interacting in the situation). Something very important was also not mentioned, which is to describe the situation without any prejudice and respecting the point of view (Weltanschauung) of each of those involved.3. In step 4 it is not mentioned that the conceptual models will lead us to a reflection about the situation, which will generate a debate.4. In step 6 it is not mentioned that in order to define the feasible and desirable changes a previous debate is necessary, which generates a reflection on the situation which will lead to the changes.Finally, we would like to mention that SSM is a learning system since after implementing the defined changes SSM can start again since the situation will not be the same as before (The HAS are constantly changing).