Soft Systems Thinking – Soft Systems Methodology
The hard system approach, in particular System Dynamics (SD), was, and still is today, very successful in understanding complex problems involving interacting feedback loops. But hard systems thinking, or first-order cybernetics for that matter, is also criticized. Hard systems thinking is about prediction and control. One or more common, shared goals are assumed and by intervening in processes, these goals are achieved as good as possible although trade-offs have to be made in case of conflicting goals. The goals are typically set by those in power. This way of thinking is less suitable for systems in which human’s ideas and feelings matter. Humans differ in ideas about purpose and hold different norms, values and beliefs. Also, the way how to achieve a goal, even if shared, may differ. In short, worldviews may discord or even stronger may be in conflict. SD, or hard systems thinking in general, provide no ways to deal with these issues.
Statement: People differ in worldviews, but nevertheless they typically adhere to aspects of multiple worldviews, which provides room for accommodation.
Aspect: Worldview, Principle: Diversity in opinions, Principle page: Principles and Ground Rules
| Statement page | Statement |
|---|---|
| Model Building - Human Activity Systems | A worldview (Weltanschauung) captures the beliefs, desires and intentions of a person. |
| Model Building - Human Activity Systems | The PQR formula (what, how, why) is pivotal for capturing worldviews. |
| Soft Systems Thinking – Soft Systems Methodology | People differ in worldviews, but nevertheless they typically adhere to aspects of multiple worldviews, which provides room for accommodation. |
Principles, aspects and statements overview
- Co-dependency, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Ethics of Care, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Investigating Identity (Ethics of Care is a retreat to first principles to be part of a group to protect and to provide meaning.)
- Responsible Setting for Social Innovation (Each stakeholder facilitates other stakeholders in addressing a societal challenge.)
- Some-thing from No-thing (We rely on each other and therefore we should care for each other.)
- We got to move, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Reflexive Domain, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Exploring Change (The constant factor in life is movement.)
- Self-Reference in a Three-Valued System (Embrace the paradox, i.e., a difference in what was previously stated and therefore contradicting what was said before. Differences keep setting things in motion. Without differences we cease to exist. Therefore, change is inevitable, in fact, it is a necessity for living.)
- The Autopoietic Turn (Humans and social systems operate autonomously and my react when irritated.)
- Tradition, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Exploring Change (A system has to become what it is not, and yet remain the same.)
- Some-thing from No-thing (The relationship between things, including humans, is what matters. Something or someone cannot stand or be taken on its own.)
- Diversity in opinions, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Worldview, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Model Building - Human Activity Systems (A worldview (Weltanschauung) captures the beliefs, desires and intentions of a person.)
- Model Building - Human Activity Systems (The PQR formula (what, how, why) is pivotal for capturing worldviews.)
- Soft Systems Thinking – Soft Systems Methodology (People differ in worldviews, but nevertheless they typically adhere to aspects of multiple worldviews, which provides room for accommodation.)
- Create room for change, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Systems Thinking, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Hard Systems Thinking – System Dynamics (A system comprised of a number of interacting feedback loops is a complex system whose behavior can surprise us.)
- Systems Thinking (A system as a whole is comprised of parts. Systems thinking is about understanding the interactions between the parts.)
- Critical Reflection, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Determining Boundary Judgements with CSH (A constructive dialog can take place on the basis of first and second order boundary judgments.)
- Self-observation (You need someone else to point out your blind spots to you.)
- Self-observation (Concentrate on how to look, instead of what to see.)
- Determine the right direction, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Cultural Identity, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
- Investigating Identity (Group identity refers to a person’s sense of belonging to a particular group.)
- Research Philosophy and Process (Research approach must be “for you, and with you”, instead of “for you, but not with you”.)
- Right Things, defined in page: Principles and Ground Rules
Peter Checkland recognized the problems with hard systems thinking and established a radical shift to soft systems thinking. The result of his shift is Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) (Peter Checkland and John Poulter, 1 januari 2006), which is one of the most practiced systems approaches today. It marked a shift from modeling a real world situation to how people think about the situation. The real world is messy. By assuming that (most) people act purposefully, thinking about the world entails capturing people ideas about purpose and ways to act accordingly.
SSM turns thinking into a group learning process. The starting point of a SSM investigation is a so-called problematic situation in which everyone involved feels that there is room for improvement, but they are not quite sure what kind of measures should be taken in order to improve the situation. By explicating worldviews of a situation in the form of human activity systems, a detailed insight is established about how people involved in the situation ought to act and for what purpose. The worldviews can then be discussed systematically to find an accommodation for change that is arguably desirable and culturally feasible.
A human activity system is a notional system that is constructed in the head of a person. The envisioned activities do not necessarily occur in reality. Thus the shift form hard systems thinking to soft systems thinking can also be seen as a shift from an ontological stance (e.g., realism) to an epistemological point of view (e.g., interpretivism and constructivism).
Research philosophy: interpretivism, see also Gadamer.
SSM is a methodology, not a method. Methodology in this context should be understood as a framework for investigating problematic situations with clear philosophical and theoretical underpinnings, such as adhering to the philosophy of interpretivism and constructivism. In the course of developing SSM, many novel methods, tools and techniques have been developed, including rich pictures, the PQR formula, CATWOE, and purposeful activity model. These form a coherent set with which possibilities for change can be investigated systematically. However, SSM is an open framework that allows to incorporate elements from, for instance, hard and critical systems thinking.
Geleerde les: PQR-formula
Samenvatting:
The PQR formula (what, how, why) is pivotal for capturing worldviews.
Context:
Stakeholders' worldviews may differ.
- Met de PQR formule kunnen worldviews in kaart worden gebracht;
- Maak een duidelijk onderscheid tussen het wat en het hoe.
Dit is een beveiligde pagina.
