Scribd
Upload
41 views4 pages

Action, A Recent Definitive Account of SSM (See Further Reading' Below)

Soft systems methodology (SSM) was developed in the 1970s as a problem-solving approach for complex, problematic situations with no clear problems or solutions. SSM is a cyclical, reflective process involving 7 main stages: 1) identifying the problematic situation, 2) researching and creating a "rich picture" representation, 3) selecting perspectives and defining key processes, 4) developing a conceptual model, 5) comparing the model to reality, 6) defining changes, and 7) taking action. More recently, SSM has been summarized as a 4-stage process incorporating the original stages with further refinements. The stages involve finding out about the situation, modeling desired transformation processes, comparing models to reality, and taking action.

Uploaded by

Fiezze Abu Garcia
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
41 views4 pages

Action, A Recent Definitive Account of SSM (See Further Reading' Below)

Soft systems methodology (SSM) was developed in the 1970s as a problem-solving approach for complex, problematic situations with no clear problems or solutions. SSM is a cyclical, reflective process involving 7 main stages: 1) identifying the problematic situation, 2) researching and creating a "rich picture" representation, 3) selecting perspectives and defining key processes, 4) developing a conceptual model, 5) comparing the model to reality, 6) defining changes, and 7) taking action. More recently, SSM has been summarized as a 4-stage process incorporating the original stages with further refinements. The stages involve finding out about the situation, modeling desired transformation processes, comparing models to reality, and taking action.

Uploaded by

Fiezze Abu Garcia
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Introduction

Soft systems methodology (SSM) was developed by Peter Checkland and his colleagues at
Lancaster University in the 1970s. It is designed to shape interventions in the problematic
situations
encountered in management, organizational and policy contexts, where there are often no
straightforward ‘problems’ or easy ‘solutions.’ Though informed by systems engineering
approaches,
it breaks with them by recognizing the central importance of perspective or world-view in social
situations. It differs significantly from the ‘systems science’ approaches developed in the 1960s,
and is more reflective of action research in its philosophy and approach.

SSM is widely described as a seven stage process, as follows: Identifying the problematic
situation that it is desired to intervene in, Researching the situation and building a 'rich picture'
(interpretive representation) of it, Selecting perspectives and building 'root definitions' (key
processes that need to take place within the desired system), Developing a conceptual model of
the change system, Comparing the model with the real-world situation, Defining the changes to
be implemented, Taking action.

This can be applied as a one-off intervention, or it can be treated as an ongoing cycle or action
research project, returning to stage 1 or 2 after the intervention has had time to take effect. More
recently a four-stage representation of SSM has emerged that incorporates the above stages and
adds some further refinements. The description below more-or-less follows that in Learning for
Action, a recent definitive account of SSM (see ‘further reading’ below).
Step Of Soft System Methodology

Stage 1: finding out

The first part of this stage is concerned with identifying and providing a brief description of the
situation it is desired to intervene in. This is normally done by those involved in or affected by
the issues coming to a broad agreement about the situation that needs attention. Care should be
taken not to formulate the issue as a problem to be solved, as that can lead to too narrow an
approach at too early a stage.

The second part involves developing the ‘rich picture’. The purpose here is to build up a deep
representation of the situation in which intervention is desired. Part of this will involve
information about and views on issues that have suggested an intervention, but the ‘rich picture’
should be much wider than this and describe the overall situation.

The third part consists of three analyses of the people dimension of the situation:
1. Who are the key players in the situation and what worldviews or perspectives do they bring to
bear on it? This should identify the ‘client’ who will cause the intervention/s to happen, the
‘practitioner’ who will use or guide the SSM process, and the ‘owners’ of the issues addressed.
These may be the same people.
2. What is the cultural environment of the situation? In particular what roles, norms and values
help shape the situation?
3. How is the situation affected by politics or power relations? What sources of power are
important in the situation? How is power obtained, used, challenged, defended, passed on, given
up etc? These analyses, particularly 2 and 3, are likely to develop further as the project
progresses. It’s important not to treat them purely as constraints, as anything other than
straightforward technical interventions are likely to change aspects of power relations and
possibly the culture as well. It’s equally important not to work across them as they can act as
powerful levers for maintaining or reestablishing
the status quo.
Stage 2: modelling

This stage is concerned with producing definitions of transformation processes that should
achieve the desired intervention. The first step is to agree what the change needs to be. This
inevitably involves a perspective or perspectives from which it is desirable At this point it can be
useful to carry out a ‘CATWOE’ analysis, which will draw in part on the Stage 1
analysis. CATWOE is a mnemonic for:

- Customers (and other stakeholders), i.e. people who are affected by the transformation
- Actors, i.e. the people who perform the activities in the transformation
- Transformation process, stating what is changed and to what
- World view or perspective from which the transformation is meaningful
- Owner(s), i.e. the person or people who control the transformation
- Environmental / external factor, i.e. anything that constrains the transformation.

Most change projects consist of more than one transforming process, and the above analyses can
be applied both at the level of the overall change and (where it differs) for each process. In SSM
each process is normally described in the form of a ‘root definition’ a short paragraph or long
sentence in the format “Do action P (what), using method Q (how), to (help) achieve result R
(why).”Having identified key transformation processes they should then be checked for
workability and appropriateness. Checkland et al use the ‘three Es’ criteria:
- Efficiency
- Efficacy (will it produce the desired result?)
- Effectiveness (at an overall level, does it achieve what’s needed)?

The final steps are to put the processes together into an overall conceptual model of the change
‘system,’ identify any meta-processes needed to manage the overall transition, and develop them
into project plans. I normally prefer to start with the overall model and develop individual
processes iteratively.

You might also like