Dear colleagues,
Yes following these recent postings I was aware of the under-pinning from
Peter Checkland and others of the soft systems perspective.
I certainly have/do use the Checkland methodologies (and modifications of
it). I find it works well until your client demands AN answer. Then there
problems arise! [Soft projects are, in my view, largely unbounded, without
an apparent answer (although the outcome might be route to an answer, free
of resource (and other) constraints, etc.]
For those who want to follow up on this the classic text is Peter Checkland
"Systems Thinking, Systems Practice" which was re-issued, with additions, in
1999. Publisher: John Wiley. In the UK the Open University ahs been one of
the main sources of research/teaching in systems for 30 years
now(Checkland's department at Lancaster is, of course, another.) If you
have OU materials in a library then look for T301 which has an excellent
"taught" unit on Checkland's soft systems methodology.
On product/component question the systems key would be to consider the
weltanschauung (loosely perspective) of the person who is asking/answering.
To some people a car is a complex product to another it is just a component
of a transport system. A spoon might be simple to some but to others (the
material technologist, for example) highly complex.
regards
Mic Porter
School of Design, University of Northumbria
|