SSM.

doc

Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)

Many systems are of the type where very precisely defined information will solve
particular problems. DFDs can be useful in such situations to indicate the aims of the
organisation and how the information is going to be used.

But many problems in organisations are not of this type, An awareness that an
organisation has problems may not be enough to produce an agreed definition of what
those problems are. Useful change may have as much to do with altering
organisational objectives or culture as with obtaining ever more detailed information
requirements. Take John Harvey-Jones’s view of the problems of one of the last
remaining British computer companies:
“Roger Foster is convinced that going all out for growth is Apricot’s only
hope of survival, and to do this the company must expand overseas. He sees
opportunities provided by 1992 and the opening up of European markets as
his best hope of achieving this aim. Apricot wants my advice on how to
achieve this, but I soon discover that before expansion can even be
contemplated, the company’s directors need to take a good hard look at
their existing business and where it is heading.” Harvey-Jones, 1990, p74,
Troubleshooter.

“I am now hopeful for Apricot. It is making the all-important cultural

change from seeing itself as a computer manufacturer, and a failing one at
that, to a hopefully highly successful computer software and services
company.” (ibid, p98)

Objectives and culture are relatively fuzzy issues which are difficult to define
precisely. It has become a common worry in the fields of systems analysis,
management science and operational research that there should be some way of
drawing some conclusions about them, even if it is difficult to get an agreed
consensus about them.

SSM is one of a number of approaches which are used to give some order to these
fuzzier problems, or ‘messes’. Its relevance is that it is a technique which has
attracted the most academic debate and because attempts have made to link it to the
creation of information systems.

Unstructured Problems And Soft Systems.

SSM was developed at Lancaster University during the 1970s by research teams who
had originally been trying to develop hard solutions to problem-solving in
organisations. Their aim was to model human activities in such a way that problems
could be taken from the social sphere and strictly defined in terms of clear,
unambiguous objectives. This approach was found to be too mechanical a way of
looking at human activities systems. For one thing, it was often found that single,
precise problems could not be found: "... the starting point for the systems engineering
process is often only a feeling of unease, an awareness that things could be better than
they are." (Checkland, 1981, p. 132). Conventional, hard systems approaches depend
for their effect of clear objectives being defined so that it is possible to end up with a
set of information requirements which can form the basis of a computer program. If
the problem owner doesn't appear to have such a clearly bounded problem, then

Page 1 of 12
SSM.doc

further investigation of the situation is needed. Even then, the Lancaster research
teams would uncover no single definition, agreed by all people in an organisation, of
its objectives and problems. Rather more common were disagreements which might
arise from:
 misunderstandings, people having different views of goes on in an
organisation because they happen to see things differently
 conflicts of interest, peoples' views being shaped by their desire to retain
power for themselves or preserved their jobs and leading them into conflict
with others.
Whatever the case, disagreements and multiple viewpoints are common in
organisations because organisations are made up of human beings who find it difficult
to say exactly what their needs or problems are. Brian Wilson: as an example which
is relevant to Information Systems:
In 1983 we were asked to undertake the project for the Prison Department of
The Home Office in the UK. The project may be summarised as follows:
 the concern: do we get value for money from our prison service?
 The expectation: Information Systems to answer this question on a
continual basis.
 Our problem: costs can be accurately evaluated but value requires an
answer to the question: what is prison for?
The prison service consists of a variety of establishments, each operating a
regime determined by the particular governor. Discussions with a number of
governors and other prison officials indicated a variety of answers to the above
question. The "hard liners" believed that inmates were there to settle a debt to
society while the more liberal minded saw it as a process of education and
rehabilitation. The situation is complicated by the fact that no one individual is
ever 100% committed to a single perception. Thus the "punishment"-oriented
Governor operates educational processes while the "education"-oriented
Governor operates punishment routines. Hence each individual has a spectrum
of perceptions related to the situation with which they are concerned. This
rather extreme example illustrates the added complexity arising from a
consideration of multiple perceptions and it is this feature which makes the
situation unique because its effect is determined by the particular group of
managers concerned. (Wilson, 1990 p. 91, Systems).

Note the implications:

 human activities systems are not like technical or natural systems. They are
affected by the perceptions and the values of those involved in them.
 Perceptions and values cannot be pinned down to precise, definable formulae.
 Each situation is therefore unique. Taking a standard "solution" e.g. an information
system for stock control or monitoring performance and applying it in the same
way to a number of situations leaves out important features of organisational
behaviour. People use the same data in different ways.
 Information is not simply a resource with a given meaning. The meaning that we
give to data will often vary.

The two fundamental ideas used in developing soft systems models are the
transformation process and the world view or Weltanschauung.

Page 2 of 12
SSM.doc

a) The transformation is the purpose of a system: what it exists to do. It is expressed

in the form: input transformed into output
something (noun or noun-phrase) becomes the same thing in a transformed state
(another noun or noun-phrase).
The importance of thinking about purpose in human activities systems is precisely
that it is not a given, discoverable thing but can be seen in different ways. Checkland
gives a number of examples for a library:
a local population to that population better informed
books to dog-eared books
local need for to that need met
information and
entertainment from
books, records, etc

b) Weltanschauung are assumptions which are to be made if the system whose

purpose is to perform the transformation is to be useful or worthwhile. This is
most easily expressed in the form of a sentence which makes an affirmation to
explain why the transformation is worth doing. For example, with the different
views of a prison the transformation could be maladjusted offenders to educated
reformed citizens and Weltanschauung would be offenders are likely to respond
well to being presented with opportunities to better themselves and perform
constructive work. Note that the Weltanschauung statement is questionable: not
everyone will agree and there is no need that they should. If there is
disagreement, as there is all the time about this type of organisation, the analyst
needs to draw up other examples of transformations and Weltanschauungs to
reflect the conflicting viewpoints.

The starting point for SSM is that these different, subjective, views affect the way in
which an organisation is run. From the point of view of Information Systems this
means that the information requirements of people who work in these organisations
will vary with view of the organisation. SSM is concerned with trying to model these
subjective viewpoints. This might be useful because:
 it will assess the information needs of problem owners in the light of their own
individual assumptions
 all humans have subjective viewpoints. Taking these into account might serve the
process of defining more exactly the information that they need to do their jobs.
 However if you were taking subjective views into account there is no guarantee
that you will be able to define a single set of information needs. The nature of
subjective views is that they are "soft". It is often impossible to say for certain that
they are right or wrong.
 Clarifying a messy problem situation in which members of an organisation may
have no clear idea of specific difficulties. This may help to work out structured,
bounded problems from messy, unstructured ones.
 May help to clarify the direction in which an organisation should heading by
investigating its culture in a discursive way. The strategy of an organisation can
rarely be determined without some subjective judgments about the future of the
environment and the appropriate atmosphere within which its employees work.
 Help learn about the situation of the organisation. Ultimately this is what
Checkland regards as success. The use of SSM is not necessarily about producing
a set solution which expert analysts impose on uncommitted users. Its intention is

Page 3 of 12
SSM.doc

to produce debate among the participants in a situation so that they work out for
themselves what changes are necessary and possible. SSM models are intended to
aid that learning process.

The difference between hard and soft systems thinking is in their treatment of
differences of opinion. A hard systems view will see the organisation as having
certain interests which must be satisfied if it is to survive. The IS specialist is
therefore a designer of the means of satisfying information requirements, whether by
direction or consultation. Thus, the idea of systems as transforming input to output is
implicit in SSADM but world views do not have a place; they are considered political
and therefore outside the remit of the analyst. A soft systems analyst will tend to be
more of a facilitator than a designer, encouraging people to explore their own and
other peoples' views in order to generate ideas about change. Under these
circumstances it becomes extremely relevant to model different views of a situation
rather than looking for a single correct version.

Hypothetical example:
The London Ambulance Service lost several millions on a computerised routing
system which was intended to provide a faster response to emergency calls. The
project took place against a background of horrendous industrial relations,
problems which do not seem to have been taken into consideration during the
project. Soft systems analysts might have produced a number of systems
definitions:
 a system to transform a slower to a faster response service (T) on the
assumption that greater speed is necessary and that automation will provide
it (W).
 a system to transform the structure of command to one in which decisions
are made by receivers of emergency calls, based on the assumptions that
new technology requires individuals to work more responsibly.

Basic Principles:
SSM can be considered a set of activities linked together in a rough sequence:
 problem situation considered problematic
 problem situation expressed
 root definitions of relevant purposeful activity systems
 conceptual models of the systems named in the root definitions
 comparison of models and real world
 changes: systematically desirable, culturally feasible
 action to improve the problem situation

It is not important that all activities are done in order. It is important to distinguish
between analysis of the real world and the use of ideas within the world of systems
thinking: they have different purposes; there is a constant interaction between the two
(a combination of cultural stream and logic-based stream). There is a constant to and
fro between the real world of human activities, statements, feelings and perceptions
and systems thinking about the real world. Systems thinking means thinking of
organisations as if they were systems to achieve a particular purpose. The results are
then compared with the organisation in the real world (from creative use of real world
evidence).

Page 4 of 12
SSM.doc

Techniques for investigating the problem situation

It is an important principle of SSM that analysts or observers should try not impose
their own definitions of the nature of problems on people within a particular situation.
In messy situations especially, a number of issues, human or technical, will affect
each other in ways which will be most readily appreciated by those who are directly
involved. An important first step for an analyst is therefore to learn as much as
possible about what is going on in an organisation with no preconceptions about how
relevant the findings are to producing change. A number of modelling techniques
have been developed to express this process:
 Rich picture: has no formal conventions unlike a context diagram. There is no
restriction of subject-matter. The purpose of the model is to give an overall
impression of the state of an organisation and its situation, so anything may be
illustrated, whether formal structures or informal communications and
attitudes. The principle is that many issues will affect definitions of problems,
so a wide-ranging pictorial illustration will convey the variety of the issues
more strongly that a textual description.
 The Multi-view diagram: is not found in the orthodox SSM literature but has
been found to be useful for describing the stated views of members of an
organisation and highlighting areas of agreement and disagreement. The
modelling convention is simply the stated opinions of people who are
concerned with an organisation. A focus is identified and around it are placed
statements about the various problems within it. There are therefore slightly
more formal rules than for the rich picture, but there is no restriction as to the
content of the statements.

Root definitions and conceptual models

Once the variety of influences in a human activity system have been collected in a
rich picture or a multi-view diagram, the next stage is to give some order to them.
This ordering takes place within the area of systems thinking rather than real world
investigation. The situation is examined by defining systems (inputs-transformations-
outputs) which are relevant to it and working out the activities that will be necessary
for such a system to function. There are two related models used in this process:
 root definitions are used to identify what the system's purpose is, who the
interested parties are
 conceptual models are used to say how the system would function i.e. what
activities are necessary for it to take place.
For both of these models it is vital to bear in mind that they are not meant to be
designs of a new system or to be the right answer to the exclusion of all other
possibilities.

Root definitions start from different views of what a system is there to do. Once a
relevant system is named, the point of the root definitions is to say a bit more about
the purpose which it is fulfilling by identifying certain elements within it. This
usually takes the form of a sentence, describing the interested parties and the
constraints under which it works followed by a list of the crucial details:

C "customers" the victims or beneficiaries of the transformation process

A "actors" the people who performed the transformation

Page 5 of 12
SSM.doc

T "transformation process"the conversion of input to output which illustrates the basic

objective of the system
W "Weltanschauung" the assumptions or world of view which, if true, make the
system workable
O "owners" those who could stop the transformation and to whom the actors are
responsible
E "environment" the wider constraints on the working of the system.

There is no particular reason why the elements are listed in this order except that
CATWOE is relatively easier to remember. If anything, the best starting point is to
think first of the output of the transformation, the thing that the system is there to do,
working out the transformation from that and then moving on to the Weltanschauung,
such as:
Who (A) is doing what (T) for whom (C), having someone to whom they are
answerable (O) and working within certain assumptions (W) and within wider
constraints in the environment (E).

The important point about root definitions is that they are notional descriptions of the
purposes of systems: they look at an organisation or situation from different points of
view. It is therefore perfectly possible for there to be several views of the same
situation. Take the following definition of the work of UWE as being that of
producing graduates in vocational subjects to satisfy the needs of industry and
commerce:
1. The university is a system in which academic departments are responsive
to the needs of industry and has its performance judged by industry and the
funding council (HEFCE). The assumptions are that it is possible and
necessary to define the requirements of industry for qualified graduates in
particular subjects.
C employers of graduates and students on university courses
A university administration and teaching staff
T unqualified students to graduates qualified inappropriate subjects
W it is economically beneficial to plan the output of graduates in particular subjects
and professions
O HEFCE and graduate employers (through governing body representatives)
E graduate recruiters' policies; economic trends.

Note that students in this definition are simply treated as outputs, rather than as actors
or owners. They are "customers" only in the sense that they are affected by the
workings of the system along with graduate employers. This is clearly a very
contentious way of looking at the functions of the university. It is not "wrong", since
responding to the demand for graduates in particular fields is an important part of the
university's work. But it is only a part. To get a fuller view we should work on other
root definitions, such as:
2. The university is a system in which lecturers give courses from which
students can choose the course of study which suit their own interests, with
funding determined by student demand as measured by the HEFCE. The
assumption is that students are better placed than anyone else to decide on
their own educational needs.

Page 6 of 12
SSM.doc

3. The university is a system for the research and transmission of ideas to a

wider constituency, of academics, and advanced students and industry.
Work is undertaken by research and teaching staff within a world-wide
academic community on the assumption that contributing to the
development of knowledge is inherently worthwhile and encourages better
teaching.

Why are these root definitions relevant systems? There is no structured way of
determining what makes a relevant system relevant beyond some serious thought
about each situation. Root definitions 1-3 were used as part of a study of university
strategy-making because they all have some bearing on the problem of planning in
higher education. There are pressures within the higher education sector to pay more
attention to the needs of industry, to respond more flexibly to the demands of students
and to produce more high-quality research. No one of these systems will capture the
whole reality of the university's work. If the purpose of the university were defined in
a certain way, then certain activities would have to take place for that objective to be
accomplished. One way of depicting these required activities is to draw a conceptual
model.

Conceptual models
These take the form of conventional activity models. Activities are placed in
numbered bubbles and linked together by arrows to show which activity follows from
which. A normal activity model, however, will attempt to describe what takes place in
the real world. A conceptual model describes activities that might take place if the
relevant root definition was to be an accurate representation of the work of a system.
The relationship between a root definition and its conceptual model can be illustrated
with reference to a simple example of painting a fence (from Checkland & Scholes,
1990). The activities in the conceptual model are those which are necessary to
perform the transformation of an unpainted to a painted fence:
A householder-owned and manned system to paint a garden fence by
conventional hand painting. In keeping with the overall decoration scheme
of the property in order to enhance the visual appearance of the property.

C householder
A householder
T unpainted fence painted fence meeting criterion in the definition
W amateur painting can enhance the appearance
O householder
E hand painting

Required activities are in the arena of systemic thinking, not real world investigation,
so we are not trying to answer the question "What activities take place in the
organisation". We are investigating purposes and objectives for the purpose of
stimulating discussion about what might happen to improve the problem situation.

Page 7 of 12
SSM.doc

1. Appreciate colour
scheme of the property 2. Decide the scope of
the fence-painting task
to be undertaken

3. Decide colour 4. Obtain materials:

to paint the fence paint, brushes etc

5. Paint the fence

8. Take control action

7. Monitor 1-5
6. Define measures
of performance

The drawing of a conceptual model is therefore not the end of the process of SSM.
The ideas generated by the work on root definitions and conceptual models may be:
 fed back into the understanding of the problem situation, enhancing a rich picture
 used to generate further root definitions. New ideas about the objectives of an
organisation may well be thrown up at any stage of an investigation and the
consideration of the activities necessary to achieve one purpose might suggest
new ideas.
 used to unpack the activities in a conceptual model. In the bubble "obtain
materials" could be activities like GoToShops, ComparePrices, SelectMaterials
fromCheapestShop, PayforMaterials.
 compare with activities that currently take place to see what should be done.
Judgement could be made about whether an objective will satisfy the criterion of
effectiveness ('doing the right business') and whether the necessary activities are
currently performed. If those activities are not currently performed then a

Page 8 of 12
SSM.doc

judgement could be made about whether they can be, given the nature of the
organisation.

A conceptual model should be kept conceptual i.e. not describe what is going on in an
organisation, like a DFD does. It is a view of what activities would be necessary if
the transformation process in the root definition were to be implemented. You
therefore work out the necessary activities in your head: don't look for them in the
outside world. A guide to do this is available from the "Formal Systems Model": any
system, if it is to fulfil its purpose, requires a number of different types of activity to
be present:
i. operational activity: which does the business of producing the output
ii. decision-making activity: choosing between alternatives, assessing priorities and
making plans
iii. awareness of the environment: scanning the outside world
iv. monitoring and control: looking to see how well the activity is being performed
and taking action to rectify any problems if performance is below par.

Good conceptual models should contain all 4 types of activity.

Types of Root Definition: Issue-based and Primary Task

It is an important point about SSM that in principle there might be many relevant root
definitions and conceptual models for a problem situation, because of the common
lack of agreement which people usually show when considering soft issues. Where
several different views of the situation are possible we may describe the root
definitions as being ‘issue-based’, because they deal with arguments which are
permanent. It is possible there is a consensus about the overall objectives of the
organisation to agree a conceptual model and a ‘Primary Task’ root definition (e.g. car
manufacturer is in the business of transforming parts and raw materials into motor
vehicles) but whether its priorities are making profits for shareholders, preserving
employees jobs etc would then be a matter for issue-based analysis.

Achieving change from soft systems thinking

The purpose of constructing notional systems is to stimulate ideas about what may be
changed in the organisation that is being studied. The essential philosophy of SSM is
that change should be conducted as much as possible on terms that are familiar to the
participants in the problem situation. Whatever else is done with root definitions and
conceptual models, the point of producing them is to stimulate debate about the state
of the organisation and about possible future directions.

Comparisons of systems models and the real world

Comparisons should stimulate questions:
 Are necessary activities being carried out?
o Conceptual models describe activities that would be necessary if
particular purposes were to be carried out. If those purposes match the
actual objectives of the organisation, are the necessary activities
currently performed? If not, can it be obtained?
 Does the organisation understand its main purpose?
o If a primary task model has been drawn up, does the organisation
actually achieve that purpose? Does the organisation have a clear idea

Page 9 of 12
SSM.doc

of its basic transformation process? Does it give proper support to the

actors carrying it out?
 How should the organisation balance its objectives?
o Different root definitions may illustrate different objectives, not all of
which are currently given enough importance. The task of soft systems
analyst is to highlight the variety of views of the objectives of the
organisation.
 Is the structure of the organisation appropriate to the aims it sets itself?
o In order to achieve success with the primary task more radical change
other than reallocating responsibility might be necessary.

Systematically desirable and culturally feasible change

SSM is a methodology which attempts to link systems ideas to the cultural reality of
organisations. Changes resulting from the use of SSM should therefore be linked to:
 The needs of the organisation as a system
 The ways in which people within that organisation work and think about each
other

These aspects of problems can be discussed under the banners of systemically

desirable change and culturally feasible change. The former is change which satisfies
needs which have been identified in the systems thinking stages of analysts. We
might think of the systemic needs of organisations in terms of:
i. Awareness of the environment
ii. Monitoring of efficiency
iii. Fulfilment of a purpose
iv. Judgement of the effectiveness of an organisation.

Any of these could be discussed within the area of systems thinking with the aid of
root definitions and conceptual models. This in turn could lead to recommendations
for changes which could be necessary for the health of the organisation as a system.
Culturally feasible change is change which fits the way the organisation currently
works. Cultural factors set limits on how the systemically desirable changes can
actually be implemented. If there is widespread hostility to new technology in an
organisation, there is little point in trying to make communication more efficient just
by installing a computer system because the existing culture will not allow it.
Analysis of culturally feasible change needs to precede implementation of a new
formal IS. Making changes that are both systemically desirable and culturally
feasible means developing an organisation in ways that help it to be a more adaptable
and efficient system and with culture, structure and objectives that are suited to each
other.

Carrying out the comparison

Comparing models and the real world can be done in a number of ways. In general,
the important idea is to assess both the systemic desirability and the cultural
feasibility of particular proposals. Checkland argues that a hard systems approach,
such as SSADM, concentrates on systemic desirability at the expense of the cultural
feasibility.

A common way of performing a comparison is to draw up a grid for each conceptual

model in which the activities are listed and assessed.

Page 10 of 12
SSM.doc

ACTIVITIES IN REAL WORLD WHAT DSS COULD DO

MODEL

Identify external issues Decision makers do based on Knowledge base of exper-

Likely to affect past experience of events.
company Intuitive. Comparison with
others’. Weakness: heavily
reliant on knowledge of
individuals’/group memory.
Not formalised. Past exper-
iences may not be valid?
ience. Actual facts not
memory. Modelling of
organisation in its environ-
ment. Express comparisons
with others in directly use-
able form(a history of com-
parisons) i.e. knowledge of
What others have done in
comparable situations.

Define key issues Limited by practicality of Highlight dependencies and

(external) to be what can easily be done. bring out key issues.
monitored Does not differentiate
Between key and dependent
issues.

Identify source of Personal contact. Library. Hold knowledge of external

relevant information. Commission research, etc. sources of information - a
Information suppliers, register.
Adverts etc. Experience.
Consultancy. Trade –
Business bodies etc.

Tap into and monitor Set up subscriptions. Pay
relevant information. For / do research. Employ
staff to do. Read tomes of
information. Set up educa-
tion / training seminars.
Directly interface with info
suppliers. Could cut out
superfluous / noise info.
Focus on key changes
rather than ongoing info
or non-changes. Pull in
info automatically. Speed
up processing – availability
of info. Compare info and
highlight inconsistencies.

Such an approach can clarify the organisation’s role but also subsidiary effects are that
information needs are discussed so that the development of the IS to support human
activities could proceed with a deeper awareness of the current needs.

SSM as a continuing process:

The purpose of using SSM is to encourage debate and learning. For this reason there
is no set end to the process of applying it. Changing an organisation means that there
are new problems which will arise which should be investigated and debated. These
might be cultural – the attitudes of employees to a changed organisation – or
procedural – the detailed workings of a new IS – or be a mixture from any source.

Page 11 of 12
SSM.doc

SSM was developed as a response to the realisation that problem situations are
inherently complex. It would not be within the spirit of the approach to assume that
problems come to a definite end with the achievement of particular changes. New
problems will arise which should be discussed in the light of ideas which have
previously arisen through the development of root definitions and conceptual models.
Ideally, there should be no reason why professional analysts should be required for
this. SSM is not a necessary set of stages but is more a pattern of thinking which
directs attention to the understanding of complex human situations. Maintaining the
process is one way of developing a continued commitment to discussion and learning
within organisations.

Page 12 of 12