Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
a holistic view?
Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) was Stage 1 The problem situation unstructured tool for describing and teaching the process
originally developed by Peter Checkland and Stage 2 The problem situation expressed of the logic-driven stream of enquiry within
colleagues (working in the department of (the stage at which, traditionally, SSM. In reality, this supposedly outmoded
systems at Lancaster University in the UK) rich pictures are developed) version of the methodology is still widely
in order to bring a systematic approach to Stage 3 Root definitions of relevant systems used, particularly because first-time users feel
the solution of ill-defined management-type Stage 4 Development of conceptual models the need to follow a prescribed process (for
problems. The methodology requires Stage 5 Comparison of conceptual models example, Akers-Smith, 2004).
that the analyst enters what is referred with the real-world problem Figure 1 provides a generalised account
to as the ‘problem situation’ and that, situation of activities in each of the seven stages in
as a consequence of this intervention, Stage 6 Identification of feasible, desirable order to contextualise the specific role that rich
‘systemically desirable and culturally changes pictures play within an SSM investigation.
feasible’ changes can ensue (Checkland and Stage 7 Taking action to improve the
Scholes, 1990). problem situation. FIGURE 1: SEVEN-STAGE MODEL (AFTER
One of the techniques most commonly CHECKLAND, 1981)
associated with SSM, and sometimes Although the model suggests a linear
mistakenly assumed to be SSM, is that progression from stage to stage, this is not
of developing rich pictures. Davies and how many SSM studies usually progress:
Ledington (1991) describe rich pictures ‘…the most important thing about the stages
as ‘…an aide-mémoire for gaining an taken together is the relationship between
appreciation of the problem situation… them, rather than their order, and as long as
[which] are intrinsically individualistic in that relationship is remembered the work done
their expressive style’. However, there is does not have to start at Stage 1 and proceed
more to rich pictures than this aspect alone. to Stage 7… work can, in fact, start at any
Indeed, rich picture development drives the intermediate stage’ (Checkland, 1981).
subsequent stages of SSM. If pictures are The seven-stage model represents a
not focused correctly, then the output from Mode 1 application of the methodology, in
subsequent stages is likely to be flawed or that the usage of SSM is sequential and
unusable: ‘…any view of the situation will prescribed by the methodology rather than
both shape and restrict subsequent action by the specific situation (Checkland, 1999).
[so] it is essential that all those involved In other words, the methodology drives the
in an SSM study have a broadly similar process. However, Checkland suggests that
appreciation of the present situation and a Mode 2 usage is more likely to be fruitful,
expectation of what the intervention will where the situation drives the process of
achieve’ (Lewis, 1994). SSM use. In a Mode 2 analysis, the analyst Stage 1
In this respect, a rich picture brings shared will have become proficient in using SSM by The analyst enters the problem situation and
appreciation of the problem situation. Without having internalised the methodology. Typically, interacts with the other actors involved to
this shared appreciation it is probable that the once internalised, several stages are likely to begin to understand the problem situation.
rich picture will drive subsequent investigation run in parallel, with iteration both between
in an unintended and potentially useless and within stages, and with no specific need Stage 2
direction. to follow through all the stages if the situation Rich pictures are then drawn to express the
suggests that not all are needed (Checkland, problem situation and to provide the basis
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SSM 1999; Checkland and Scholes, 1990). The for a discussion designed to engender shared
The ‘classic’ model of SSM consists of seven Mode 1 model, despite a (supposed) paucity appreciation of the problem situation and the
stages: of use in the real world, remains the best drawing out of pertinent issues.
FIGURE 2: THE SEVEN-STAGE MODEL in Figure 3 on page 69) should and should texts critiquing or explaining SSM tend
EXPLICITLY SHOWING THE CULTURAL, not be used. Checkland (1999) suggests to convey little or no meaning to an
POLITICAL, AND ETHICAL STRAND OF that hand-drawn pictures are clearly views intelligent audience because they mix poorly
ANALYSIS of subjective rather than objective realities: thought out computer-generated pictures,
‘The more organic style of …rich pictures …is incomprehensible pictograms, a lack of key,
meant to indicate that the status of all these or any combination of these. It is no wonder,
artefacts is that they are working models, given many of the poor examples in print, that
currently relevant now in this study, not a mystique lies over rich picture development
claiming permanent ontological status.’ and use, and that potential users cannot see
This said, Checkland and Scholes how, if at all, the printed example could have
(1990) use both hand-drawn and helped shape appreciation of a complex,
computer-generated examples – the inference real-world situation.
being that fitness for use is the baseline Lewis suggests that rich pictures can
justification for choice of medium. Lewis incorporate hypertext links to enable a focus
(1994) argues that using sources such as on more detailed descriptions of the problem
clip-art (or other formalised pictograms), in situation. Similarly, Avison and Wood-Harper
rich pictures can affect perception: ‘…there (in Lewis, 1994) suggest that rich pictures
will always be the danger of trying to express can be decomposed (in much the same way
subtle and complex aspects of the situation as activity diagrams and other traditional
in an over-simplistic manner. If all clashes systems analysis techniques), with lower
of appreciation must be signalled by crossed level diagrams showing individual areas in
swords then mildly differing opinions may greater detail.
be indistinguishable from wildly antagonistic Although this approach is potentially
beliefs.’ useful, it can prevent the user considering
It is interesting that Lewis should choose the problem situation as a whole. As
crossed swords as an example, as there is just Checkland (1999) says: ‘Pictures can be
‘RULES’ AND CONVENTIONS FOR RICH such a rich picture in Checkland and Scholes taken in as a whole and help to encourage
PICTURE DEVELOPMENT (1990) made up of computer-generated holistic rather than reductionist thinking
According to Lewis (1994) there are ‘…no images, where crossed swords and about a situation.’
strict rules…’ for developing rich pictures, handshakes (the latter signifying agreement, or This is where a fundamental dichotomy
although there are some guidelines to ensure perhaps merely denoting compromise?) appear exists between the holistic and reductionist
that those within the problem situation can with startling regularity and where the context intentions for rich pictures: if a rich picture
easily understand a rich picture’s meaning. (not helped by the lack of a key) seems to is rich enough to be of use, it will probably
Rich pictures are tools to generate discussion, differ from instance to instance. be too detailed to be taken in completely in
both in order to reach an understanding of the Another problem of using a ubiquitous overview (even if it does succeed in
problem situation and to tease out relevant source of pictogram, such as clip-art, is that portraying complex situations without
issues for systematic investigation. The people often already associate specific pieces having to resort to lengthy prose), which
requirement, therefore, is that the drawing of clip-art (such as the image of a duck contradicts Checkland’s raison d’être for rich
should do just that, rather than the analyst holding an axe over a computer) with specific picture creation.
create something of artistic merit just for the situations or emotions. It may be difficult Critics agree, however, that rich
sake of it. It is also suggested that the rich to appreciate that an analyst may want to pictures should show those structures and
picture should include a key so that the various illustrate a very different point when using a processes considered important to those
actors can see what the various pictograms well-known image. within the problem situation (Davies and
used represent, although if a picture is Also note that if rich pictures are Ledington, 1991). As Flood and Jackson
self-explanatory in context, and promotes computer-generated the result will be reliant (1991) comment: ‘…the rich picture …is a
useful discussion, this is not strictly a on, and constrained by, the technological model of processes and structures and their
requirement. proficiency of the user and the limitations of relationships’. This is to give a recognisable
the software used (such pictures also take context to what might otherwise remain a
COMPUTER-GENERATED RICH PICTURES considerably longer to produce than a very abstract perceived reality about which
Various authorities suggest reasons why hand-drawn equivalent). Indeed, many the various actors have to come to some
computer-generated rich pictures (as shown of the so-called rich pictures present in consensus of agreement.
earlier point, without including recognisable will be found amusing or offensive by those because they alter existing power structures,
structures and processes, the problem within any given problem situation. Humour or because they will cause unemployment
situation as represented in a rich picture might is subjective and culturally bound and what of long-term loyal staff, and so on. Indeed,
only make sense to the person drawing it. may appear as a humorous approach or rich pictures often illustrate actors’ different
remark in one organisation might be viewed perceptions of previous IT solutions, thus
Surfacing the informal organisation as an unwarranted attack against widely-held giving the analyst clues as to what IT
Allied to the above, rich picture development cultural beliefs in another. development projects or approaches are likely
can surface not only the formal but also the to lead to acceptance or rejection in the future.
informal organisation. When analysing the Surfacing the real problem instead of Often, the analyst is presented with
problem situation, official documentation attempting to cure the symptoms a ‘solution’ at the outset of an SSM
should give good coverage of what processes SSM is not, as is often mistakenly stated, investigation, such as the observation from
and information flows should be present, but a systems development methodology in its the client that, for example, a new e-mail
the reality is often far removed, with people own right, but it can be used to good effect in system is required because users don’t like
finding different ways to do things, for example feasibility, analysis, and requirements elicitation the current e-mail system. Through the
by circumventing ‘difficult’ or unpopular (as well as subsequent) stages to discover if drawing of rich pictures, and the subsequent
procedures. Without these informal methods, potential technical ‘solutions’ are likely to be discussion they generate, it may become
most organisations would find it difficult to culturally, politically, and ethically acceptable to obvious that e-mail system usage is not the
work, because the informal way of doing those within the problem situation. problem, but rather the visible symptom of a
things modifies and eventually subsumes the Many technically-sound IT projects fail more subtle (set of) problem(s). For example,
formal way (if not controlled). If a ‘solution’ to because they do not fit the culture of the users may have had inadequate training
a problem situation does not take into account organisation in which they are introduced, or on the e-mail system, or may operate in a
the informal organisation then it is likely to be
rejected.
FIGURE 4: EXCERPT FROM A RICH PICTURE DEVELOPED AS PART OF AN SSM ANALYSIS
Adding a humorous element INTO OUTSOURCING ISSUES
An emergent property of drawing rich pictures
is that, being cartoon-like, a humorous
element can be introduced (sometimes
unconsciously) by the analyst. The benefit
of introducing humour into rich pictures is
that difficult situations can be presented
in a non-threatening way. For example,
if a discussion between widely differing
viewpoints within the problem situation might
become acrimonious, a humorous pictorial
representation of these differing viewpoints
can diffuse a potentially explosive situation:
‘…[the] intentionally light-hearted depiction
of the situation focused attention upon
a contentious issue in a non-threatening
manner, and useful discussions resulted that
might not otherwise have occurred… an
understanding of the politics of the situation
(from the stream of cultural enquiry) and the
context in which the diagram would be used,
justified making a joke of a very serious issue’
(Lewis, 1994).
Care has to be taken when adding a
humorous element, however, because it
is easy, especially in the early stages of
analysis, to misjudge whether ‘humour’