Choice of Systems Method

SYSTEMS THINKING AND ACTION RESEARCH

2.2 Systems Thinking

2.2.9 Choice of Systems Method

solution. Another technique for deciding on change would be to derive affinity diagrams in order to identify the main causes of a problem. Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing (SAST) (Flood & Jackson, 1991) can be used to decide on a strategy or solution to a problem.

There are a number of tools available to project managers that are useful to help unpack aspects of the environment. These include: SWOT, STEPS, 5Ws and H, and Stakeholder identification (Martin, 2002). These decision making tools can be used to widen one's perception of various aspects of an organisational environment and also to develop a strategy for managing uncertainty (Spear& Martin, 2001).

2.2.8.7 Archetypes

Archetypes are diagrams that show typical combinations of balancing and feedback loops that often occur in organisations. They are qualitative maps that are essentially simplified casual loop diagrams from the field of system dynamic (Senge, 1990). They explain common patterns of behaviour that allow organisation to compare their own situations to those that have been classified in order to apply some solutions that are appropriate to it.

One particular archetype particularly relevant to this study is that of the Shifting the Burden where the capability to solve problems is shifted from where it belongs to a different place.

From the 1980's, there was a concentration on ways of combining these methods in order to address all aspects of a problem situation with a single overarching approach (C1arke, 2001). This led to the development of mixed mode methodologies including:

• The Systems Of Systems Methodologies (SOSM)

•

A Pragmatic Approach

•

Total Systems Intervention (TSI)

•

The Creative Design Of Methods

•

Diversity Management

•

Critical Systems Practice

•

Critical Pluralism, and

•

Pragmatic Pluralism.

The above methods have the aim of addressing diverse (or 'pluralistic') problem contexts with a diversity of methods in common.

Critical Systems Heuristics (CSH) (Ulrich, cited in Brocklesby) extends SSM by

considering the perspective of those who are normally excluded, but who are affected by the outcome of the problem resolution and prohibits the will of those stakeholders with power being imposed upon the weak. CSH cannot be considered a truly critical

methodology. However, it proposed the System of Systems Methodologies (SOSM) where there is a commitment to an integration of the various hard, soft, and critical methodologies and to provide guidance for deploying these in appropriate situations.

SOSM is now seen as an instrument of Critical Systems Thinking and a central component of Total Systems Intervention.

Critical systems thinking (CST) based on work by Jackson and others (cited in

Daellenbach, undated) resulted in an awareness of the deficiencies of various hard and soft systems approaches, and emerged as a new integrative systems perspective in the late 1980s and early 1990s. CST is in itself not a methodology. Its intention is to foster systemic debate on power relationships and on the relationships and complementarity between various systems approaches thereby assessing their applicability for various problem situations and guide their use. This has led to the recognition of methodological

pluralism (a critical awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of different methods and methodologies so that the most appropriate ones can be selected to address a wider range of problem situations than a single method can. Pluralism is defined by Jackson (1999) as

"the use of different methodologies in combination." Characteristics of plurism are that there is a respect the differences of the approaches and a development of a meta-

methodology to guide practitioners to the best approaches. Similarly, multimethodology allows for various methods and methodologies to be used in combination for different aspects of an intervention for more effective results. Inan attempt to operationalise the main principles ofCST, Flood and Jackson (1991) developed TSI, representing a new approach to planning, designing, problem solving and evaluation.

Daellenbach (undated) cites Jackson and Keys as classifying problem situations along two dimensions: complexity and divergence of values and interests. A third dimension related to human complexity is added by Daellenbach. This is indicated in figure 2.1 below and can be used as a guide to selecting appropriate methodologies.

Unitary S

i m

p I e

C o m p

I e x

Technical complexity

Pluralist Conflicting/coercive

Diversity of views/interests

Human complexity

Figure 2.1: Problem situation classification and systems approaches

Table 2.3 provides more detail of the three approaches together with their areas of application and associated methodologies.

Approach Ch aracteristic Applicable area Methodologies

Functionalist Assume that systems are Problem situations that have technical

•

Traditional Management Science or systems 'objective' aspects of reality, complexity, but can only cope with low Operations Research,

approaches largely independent of the human complexity and low to medium

•

RAND type systems analysis,

observer. divergence of interests.

•

Systems engineering,

•

System dynamics,

•

Organizational cybernetics (e.g. Viable Systems Model),

•

Complexity theory Interpretive Adopt a subjectivist approach to Problem situations with human complexity

•

Hypergame analysis, systems systems thinking. and diversity of interests and values, but not

•

Metagame analysis,

approaches much technical complexity.

•

Interactive management,

•

Operational gaming,

•

Robustness analysis,

•

Soft systems methodology,

•

Strategic assumption surfacing and testing, strategic choice approach,

•

Strategic options development and analysis, drama theory,

•

Theory of constraints.

Emancipatory Adopt a subjectivist approach to Problem situations where stakeholders see

•

Methodologies such as Total Systems systems systems thinking. radically different relevant systems with Integration and SOSM (emanating from approaches different values and boundary judgments. Critical Systems Heuristics / Critical Systems

Identifies inequalities and neglect and Thinking) promotes radical change to emancipate and

liberate the deprived majority and create a civil society.

Table 2.3: Three primary systems approaches

- 40 -