Soft System Methodology in Construction
Introduction: This document investigates Soft Systems Methodology, which is a way of dealing with problem situations in which there is a high social, political and human activity component. SSM varies from other methodologies as it does not deal with the HARD problems that are more technically oriented but instead it deals with SOFT problems as will be discussed in detail later on in this report.
SOFT SYSTEM METHODOLOGY:
Soft System Methodology is the brainwave of Professor Peter Checkland. The methodology was devised as a result of “consultancy work” (Platt, 1995). Hutchings (2006) explains this development as an approach which can be accessed in the situation where Hard System Methodologies are fruitless. He writes,
“When confronted with complex real world problems which cannot be defined solely in the scientific terms, Checkland was forced to abandon the classic system engineering thinking which could not describe fully the situation he faces. This led to a fundamental reappraisal of the classics “hard” approach and the subsequent development of the Soft Methodology”.
Hence, SSM is classified as “a generic methodology” (Wilson, 1992) which should be adapted to any given situation. It deals with “fuzzy” problem situations – situations where people are viewed not as passive objects, but as active subjects, where objectives are unclear or where multiple objectives may exist (Rosenhead, 1989). This is explained as human activity system (HAS) - a collection of activities, in which people are purposefully engaged, and the relationships between the activities (Platt, 1995). Hence SSM is a qualitative technique that can be used for applying System Thinking to non-systematic situations. It follows its progression in seven stages as laid down by Checkland in seven stage model “which is considered by most people to be the SSM” (Platt, 1995). The seven stages are incorporated into two parts:
SOFT SYSTEM METHODOLOGY:
Soft System Methodology is the brainwave of Professor Peter Checkland. The methodology was devised as a result of “consultancy work” (Platt, 1995). Hutchings (2006) explains this development as an approach which can be accessed in the situation where Hard System Methodologies are fruitless. He writes,
“When confronted with complex real world problems which cannot be defined solely in the scientific terms, Checkland was forced to abandon the classic system engineering thinking which could not describe fully the situation he faces. This led to a fundamental reappraisal of the classics “hard” approach and the subsequent development of the Soft Methodology”.
Hence, SSM is classified as “a generic methodology” (Wilson, 1992) which should be adapted to any given situation. It deals with “fuzzy” problem situations – situations where people are viewed not as passive objects, but as active subjects, where objectives are unclear or where multiple objectives may exist (Rosenhead, 1989). This is explained as human activity system (HAS) - a collection of activities, in which people are purposefully engaged, and the relationships between the activities (Platt, 1995). Hence SSM is a qualitative technique that can be used for applying System Thinking to non-systematic situations. It follows its progression in seven stages as laid down by Checkland in seven stage model “which is considered by most people to be the SSM” (Platt, 1995). The seven stages are incorporated into two parts:
Bibliography: Michael. F. Dallas (2006)- Value and Risk Management- A guide to best practise N.J Jackson (1999) in Reason, P Checkland, P. (1981), Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley: Chichester Reason, P Khosrow, M. (2000) Management in 21st Century, London: Ideal Group Incorporation