请选择 进入手机版 | 继续访问电脑版

CCOSE论坛

 找回密码
 立即注册
查看: 143|回复: 2

科普分享:软系统方法论

[复制链接]

385

主题

551

帖子

2048

积分

论坛元老

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

积分
2048
发表于 2019-2-5 07:27:16 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
软系统方法论 软系统方法论(SSM,Soft Systems Methodology)是一项运用系统思考解决非系统问题的定性研究技术。 它主要用以解决那些包含有大量社会的、政治的以及人为因素的问题。


中文名软系统方法论外文名Soft Systems Methodology简    称SSM性    质定性研究技术
目录



概序[url=]编辑[/url]
软系统方法论(SSM,Soft Systems Methodology)是一项运用系统思考解决非系统问题的定性研究技术。 它主要用以解决那些包含有大量社会的、政治的以及人为因素的问题。 显然,SSM与那些以专业技术手段为特征解决各类“硬”问题的方法有很大的差别。
SSM将系统思考运用于人类社会真实的实践活动, 与此同时,它亦认识到人类的社会组织是一个复杂的系统。 因此,可以说,SSM是一个非常有效的办法,来探寻复杂的人类社会,解决其自身所面临的各种凌乱的“非技术”问题。

SSM的起源[url=]编辑[/url]
是与其相对的“硬”系统思考方法,如运营系统管理技术等等,但是对于更大型的、更为复杂的组织问题,此类硬系统方法论往往就显得无能为力了。 有鉴于此,Peter Checkland教授研究开发了SSM。 在这以前,Peter Checkland有过多年与传统的硬系统方法论打交道的工作经验, 他目睹了此类方法技术在处理复杂问题尤其是包含有社会因素的问题时,是如何的捉襟见肘。 因此,上个世纪六十年代他在英国的兰卡斯特大学(University of Lancaster)开始了SSM研究,致力于寻找解决复杂的社会性问题的有效解决办法。 通过在企业界实地进行的一系列研究项目和长达数年的应用分析,他最终提出了软系统方法论, 并于1981年公开了软系统方法论的完整理论体系,也即我们今天所了解的SSM。 Checkland已经完全离开了企业界,全身心地投入在高校的教学和研究中,现在,他是兰卡斯特大学管理学院的教授和研究人员,讲授软件工程以及他的SSM理论。

应用领域:[url=]编辑[/url]
任何复杂的、组织化的情境和问题,并包含有大量的社会、政治以及人为活动因素。

步骤[url=]编辑[/url]
软系统方法论通常采取以下步骤(部分步骤在需要的情况下能够重复):
1、调查非结构化问题。 运用“丰富图”(Rich Pictures)来表述问题。 丰富图要能够尽可能多地捕捉到跟问题相关的信息。 一张较好的丰富图能够揭示问题的边界、结构、信息流以及沟通渠道,等等。 最为关键的是,通过信息图,能够发现与问题相关的完整的人类活动系统。 它是一个不为传统方法如: 数据流程图、层次模型所包含的,但对SSM来说却非常重要的成分。
2、对相关系统进行根定义(Root Definition)。
即我们可以从那些不同视角审视这个问题? 根定义通常用一句话来表述系统转变过程, 并包含有六个基本成分,使之做到非常结构化和标准化。 这六个成分的英文首字母缩写为CATWOE,简述如下:
顾客(Customer)。 任何能够通过系统获益的人都被视为系统的顾客。 与此同时,如果因系统问题如系统中断而遭受损失的人,也应被视为系统的顾客。
执行者(Actor)。 执行者负责设定好的系统输入和输出。
转变过程(Transformation Process)。 这一过程展示从输入到输出的系统变化。
世界观(Weltanschauung)。 Weltanschauung是德语世界观的意思, 此处表示转变流程要具有综合意义。
所有者(Owner)。 系统的拥有者,有权决定系统启动和系统关闭的人。
环境限制(Environmental Constraints)。 必须要考虑到的外部因素, 包括组织政策以及司法、伦理方面的制约。
3、评估是否是可行的、理想的系统变革。
4、系统执行,解决问题。 允许组织运用组织化、结构化的手段,解决复杂的组织难题。

特点[url=]编辑[/url]
较之解决问题的技术,SSM更关注解决问题的方法。
相对于社会化的凌乱问题,SSM所用的解决工具较为严谨、有效。
方法独特。 SSM要求应用者必须采取综合一般手段。
有可能过早地将问题范围缩小。
在没有特别结构和问题方案不明的前提下,“丰富图”制作不易。
人们不习惯或者说难于以不精确的“软”方法去阐释问题、解决问题。 人们经常表现出迫于解决问题、立即行动的热望。 假定大多数的组织问题或管理问题,不能够被视作纯“系统问题”,因为系统太过复杂,难于分析。
但是,运用系统的办法去解决非系统得问题却是可行的。

来源:百度百科  https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E8 ... 9%E6%B3%95%E8%AE%BA

回复

使用道具 举报

385

主题

551

帖子

2048

积分

论坛元老

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

积分
2048
 楼主| 发表于 2019-2-5 07:30:24 | 显示全部楼层
Soft systems methodology[size=0.875em]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Soft systems methodology (SSM) is an approach to organizational process modeling (business process modeling) and it can be used both for general problem solving and in the management of change. It was developed in England by academics at the University of Lancaster Systems Department through a ten-year action research program.[1]
Contents


Overview[edit]
The methodology was developed from earlier systems engineering approaches, primarily by Peter Checkland and colleagues such as Brian Wilson. 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 "system" 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 human activity systems 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 ecology, 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 UK government's SSADM system development methodology.
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.[citation needed]
SSM remains the most widely used and practical application of systems thinking,[citation needed] and other systems approaches such as critical systems thinking have incorporated many of its ideas.
The 7-stage description[edit]
7-stage representation of SSM:
  • Enter situation considered problematical
  • Express the problem situation
  • Formulate root definitions of relevant systems of purposeful activity
  • Build conceptual models of the systems named in the root definitions
  • Compare models with real world situations
  • Define possible changes which are both possible and feasible
  • Take action to improve the problem situation
CATWOE[edit]
In 1975, David Smyth, a researcher in Checkland's department, observed that SSM was most successful when the Root Definition included certain elements. These elements, captured in the mnemonic CATWOE, identified the people, processes and environment that contribute to a situation, issue or problem that required analyzing.[2]
This is used to prompt thinking about what the business is trying to achieve. Business Perspectives help the Business Analyst to consider the impact of any proposed solution on the people involved. There are six elements of CATWOE[3]
Customers - Who are the beneficiaries of the highest level business process and how does the issue affect them?Actors - Who is involved in the situation, who will be involved in implementing solutions and what will impact their success?Transformation Process - What is the transformation that lies at the heart of the system - transforming grapes into wine, transforming unsold goods into sold goods, transforming a societal need into a societal need met?Weltanschauung (or Worldview) - What is the big picture and what are the wider impacts of the issue?Owner - Who owns the process or situation being investigated and what role will they play in the solution?Environmental Constraints - What are the constraints and limitations that will impact the solution and its success?Human activity system[edit]
A human activity system can be defined as 'notional system (i.e. not existing in any tangible form) where human beings are undertaking some activities that achieve some purpose' (Patching, 1990).[4]
See also[edit]
References[edit]
  • ^ 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. B. (1976). "Using a systems approach: the structure of root definitions". Journal of applied systems analysis. 5 (1): 75–83.
  • ^ "Business Open Learning Archive". Chris Jarvis for the BOLA Project. Retrieved 2009-04-09.
  • ^ Patching, D. (1990) Practical soft systems analysis, Pitman


Further reading[edit]Books[edit]
  • 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. ISBN 978-1-137-43268-1.
  • Checkland, P.B. and J. 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, Wiley, Chichester. ISBN 0-470-02554-9
  • Checkland, P.B. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1981, 1998. ISBN 0-471-98606-2
  • Checkland, P.B. and S. Holwell Information, Systems and Information Systems, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1998. ISBN 0-471-95820-4
  • Wilson, B. Systems: Concepts, Methodologies and Applications, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1984, 1990. ISBN 0-471-92716-3
  • Wilson, B. Soft Systems Methodology, John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 2001. ISBN 0-471-89489-3
Articles[edit]External links

Categories:



回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

385

主题

551

帖子

2048

积分

论坛元老

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

积分
2048
 楼主| 发表于 2019-2-5 07:37:20 | 显示全部楼层
Professor Peter Checkland
Emeritus Professor
Prof.Checkland.jpg
Profile
Peter Checkland gained a First in Chemistry at St. John’s College, Oxford, where he was Casberd Scholar, before leaving to join what was then a new science-based industry: making wholly synthetic fibres – nylon, polyester and polypropylene. He joined ICI, then the UK’s largest industrial company, and spent 15 year there, working in Research and Development. When he left the company he was manager of a 100 strong group engaged in process and product development.
He joined the new university at Lancaster in 1969, appointed second Professor in the postgraduate Department of Systems Engineering, started by the statistician Professor Gwilym Jenkins. Jenkins asked Checkland to establish a research programme for the Department. They both believed strongly in practical ‘action research’ in real world situations outside the University, and Checkland led the research programme which ran for 30 years at Lancaster. The programme capitalised on the fact that the average age of students on the one year masters course was around 30, making possible work in outside organisations which could not have been done with fresh graduates.
The research programme sought a new way of tackling the kind of problem situations which managers of all kinds, at all levels, face from day to day in their professional lives: ‘wicked problems’ which are never static and are subject to multiple interpretations. The outcome was the approach known as Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), a systemic process of inquiry into problematical situations in order to define and take ‘action to improve’. SSM is now taught and used around the world and is the source of the paradigm shift from ‘hard’ to ‘soft’ systems thinking. In the latter it is the process of inquiry which is created as a learning system. The human situation addressed is not assumed to be ‘a system’. The inquiry is structured by questioning the situation using models of purposeful activity built according to declared relevant world views.
Peter Checkland’s work developing SSM is described in many papers and in five books, all of which have been reprinted on average every 18 months since the first one, the classic Systems Thinking, Systems Practice was published in 1981.
The body of work has attracted many external honours. These include, among others, four honorary doctorates (from City University, The Open University, Erasmus University in the Netherlands, and the Prague University of Economics), the Beale Medal of the Operational Research Society, the Gold Medal of the UK Systems Society, and the Pioneer Award of the International Committee on Systems Engineering (INCOSE). Peter is also one of the first four Fellows appointed by the Omega Alpha Society, so named to advocate thinking about the end before thinking about the beginning.
Peter Checkland has retired from full-time employment at Lancaster University but continues his research and write.





回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

QQ|京ICP备17005959号|IAC-16|Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|CCOSE论坛

GMT+8, 2019-2-24 01:12 , Processed in 0.427183 second(s), 23 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表