Systems Thinking, Systems Practice 'Whether by design, accident or merely synchronicity, Checkland appears to have developed a habit of writing seminal publications near the start of each decade which establish the basis and framework for systems methodology research for that decade.' Hamish Rennie, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1992 Thirty years ago Peter Checkland set out to test whether the Systems Engineering (SE) approach, highly successful in technical problems, could be used by managers coping with the unfolding complexities of organizational life. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice 'Whether by design, accident or merely synchronicity, Checkland appears to have developed a habit of writing seminal publications near the start of each decade which establish the basis and framework for systems methodology research for that decade.'

1. Checkland's Soft Systems Methodology

Hamish Rennie, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1992 Thirty years ago Peter Checkland set out to test whether the Systems Engineering (SE) approach, highly successful in technical problems, could be used by managers coping with the unfolding complexities of organizational life. The straightforward transfer of SE to the broader situations of management was not possible, but by insisting on a combination of systems thinking strongly linked to real-world practice Checkland and his collaborators developed an alternative approach - Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) - which enables managers of all kinds and at any level to deal with the subtleties and confusions of the situations they face. This work established the now accepted distinction between 'hard' systems thinking, in which parts of the world are taken to be 'systems' which can be 'engineered', and 'soft' systems thinking in which the focus is on making sure the process of inquiry into real-world complexity is itself a system for learning. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice (1981) and Soft Systems Methodology in Action (1990) together with an earlier paper Towards a Systems-based Methodology for Real-World Problem Solving (1972) have long been recognized as classics in the field. Now Peter Checkland has looked back over the three decades of SSM development, brought the account of it up to date, and reflected on the whole evolutionary process which has produced a mature SSM. SSM: A 30-Year Retrospective, here included with Systems Thinking, Systems Practice closes a chapter on what is undoubtedly the most significant single research programme on the use of systems ideas in problem solving. Now retired from full-time university work, Peter Checkland continues his research as a Leverhulme Emeritus Fellow.

The Subject of Systems. SYSTEMS THINKING-THE SYSTEMS MOVEMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF SCIENCE. Science as a Human Activity: Its History and its Method. Science and the Systems Movement. Some Systems Thinking. SYSTEMS PRACTICE-ACTION RESEARCH TO ESTABLISH THE USE OF SYSTEMS CONCEPTS IN PROBLEM-SOLVING.

'Harda Systems Thinking-The Engineersa Contribution. The Development of 'Softa Systems Thinking. The Systems Methodology in Action. Implications of Systems Practice for Systems Thinking.

Contents.Overview The methodology was developed from earlier approaches, primarily by and colleagues such as. The primary use of SSM is in the analysis of complex situations where there are divergent views about the definition of the problem.

These situations are 'soft problems' such as: How to improve health services delivery? How to manage disaster planning? When should mentally disordered offenders be diverted from custody? What to do about homelessness amongst young people?In such situations even the actual problem to be addressed may not be easy to agree upon.To intervene in such situations the soft systems approach uses the notion of a ' as an interrogative device that will enable debate amongst concerned parties. In its 'classic' form the methodology consists of seven steps, with initial appreciation of the problem situation leading to the modelling of several that might be thought relevant to the problem situation. By discussions and exploration of these, the decision makers will arrive at accommodations (or, exceptionally, at consensus) over what kind of changes may be systemically desirable and feasible in the situation. Later explanations of the ideas give a more sophisticated view of this systemic method, and give more attention to locating the methodology in respect to its philosophical underpinnings.

It is the earlier classical view which is most widely used in practice.There are several hundred documented examples of the successful use of SSM in many different fields, ranging from, to business and military logistics. It has been adopted by many organizations and incorporated into other approaches: in the 1990s for example it was the recommended planning tool for the 's.The general applicability of the approach has led to some criticisms that it is functionalist, non-emancipatory or supports the status quo and existing power structures; this is a claim that users would deny, arguing that the methodology itself can be none of these, it is the user of the methodology that may choose to employ it in such a way.The methodology has been described in several books and many academic articles. Checkland, P.B. (2001) Soft Systems Methodology, in J.

Rosenhead and J. Mingers (eds), Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited. Chichester: Wiley. Smyth, D.

S.; Checkland, P. 'Using a systems approach: the structure of root definitions'. Journal of applied systems analysis. 5 (1): 75–83. Chris Jarvis for the BOLA Project.

Retrieved 2009-04-09. Patching, D. (1990) Practical soft systems analysis, PitmanFurther reading Books. Blackmagic disk speed test pc.

Wilson, B. And van Haperen, K. (2015) Soft Systems Thinking, Methodology and the Management of Change (including the history of the systems engineering department at Lancaster University), London: Palgrave MacMillan. Checkland, P.B.

Scholes (2001) Soft Systems Methodology in Action, in J. Rosenhead and J.

Mingers (eds), Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited. Chichester: Wiley. Checkland, P.B. & Poulter, J.

(2006) Learning for Action: A short definitive account of Soft Systems Methodology and its use for Practitioners, teachers and Students, Chichester. Checkland, P.B. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

1981, 1998. Checkland, P.B. Holwell Information, Systems and Information Systems, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1998.

Checkland's Soft Systems Methodology

Wilson, B. Systems: Concepts, Methodologies and Applications, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1984, 1990. Wilson, B.

Soft Systems Methodology, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 2001.Articles.

Dale Couprie et al. (2007) Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary. Mark P. Mobach, Jos J. Van der Werf & F.J. Tromp (2000)., in papers ISSS meeting 2000.

Ian Bailey (2008). White paper.

(1991). In, 18, 39-55.

(ISSN 0308-9541). A review of soft systems methodology as related to critical systems thinking.External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to. homepage. Business Process Transformation, 1996. Action research and evaluation on line, 2007., Business Open Learning Archive 2007.