Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Fall semester 2010 2011

The Summary prepared by: Honey Bonny

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

BLOCK 4 Managing sustainable development: Learning with other stakeholders

PART ONE: Introduction Why is sustainable development relevant to T306? The primary interest in sustainable development for the purpose of T306 is that it provides an example of a domain of activity that many have experienced as complex. The term domain is used here in several of its recognized senses as: 1. The area of activity of a person, institution etc; 2. A sphere of thought or operations; 3. The situation where something is applicable; There are 3 particular features of SD that we will focus on: 1. Issues of SD directly or indirectly affect and are affected by everyone. So, it is a domain in which everyone is a stakeholder. 2. This domain provides opportunities to consider how systems theories and methodologies have been and can be used in practice. 3. Many practitioners working in this domain have not explicitly used systems approaches but have - with hindsight- recognized the need to think and act more systematically and to adopt learning approaches, usually when crises on protests at decisions and actions have occurred. PART TWO: Engaging with sustainable development (SD) A. Do you think the concepts of systems level and hierarchy could be used in analyzing sustainable development situations? Fully explain using an example to illustrate your answer Final 2010 Or Discuss why the system practitioner needs to understand the concepts of hierarchy or systems levels. Use an example to discuss this. Final 2009 B. Checkland and Scholes (1999) believe that, Different observers will attach different importance to different hierarchies with the choice of levels always observer dependent. With an example of your own, show clearly what that means and how in the context of hierarchy and levels in system practice. Final May 2010 Or Checkland attributes the functions of what to do, how to do it, and why to do it, to different system levels where choice of level is observer dependent. Using your own example, fully explain the concepts of hierarchy, and level as stated above and explain their importance in systems practice. Midterm 2011 Table1: Hierarchies for structuring sustainable development situations:

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Single organizational: Individual/ group/ team/ company Organizational Community Geographical Spheres Being and consciousness Cultural Personal Multi-organizational: Sector/ bigger sector/ cross sector/ all Individual/ network/ bigger network Local/ regional/ national/ international/ global Physiosphere/biosphere /noosphere/theosphere Matter / life/ mind/ soul/ spirit A hierarchy that ranks collective worldviews A hierarchy that individuals find natural to them, which may be one or more of the above or something quite different. The notions of hierarchy and levels are important in systems practice, useful in structuring and grouping elements when exploring a system of interest. The interdependence of humans and environment means that systems practice in the domain of SD cannot concentrate on human factors alone. It is essential that political, economic, social, biological and physical dimensions be seen as parts of one system. A. The concepts of hierarchies and system levels are central to SD, where individuals actions are relevant to a range of levels. Hierarchies are important to consider because systems possess emergent properties that their sub-systems do not. It is not always possible to predict what properties may emerge at different system levels in different peoples SD systems of interest. But for a system practitioner in this domain, it can be helpful: o To recognize different system levels to work out how to facilitate interaction and; o To realize that these systems will not simply be a sum of their parts. For example: we found it useful to recognize both the whole system (i.e. Education for Sustainable Development) and different sub-systems of interest in drafting advertizing material for workshop. It meant that a broad range of people recognized this material as an invitation to take part in events in which their own system of interest was a part. (SAQ1) B. The caption refer to Checkland point that the main changes can occur through purposeful activity relate to structure, process and outlook or attitude. Checkland recognizes that different observers will attach different importance to different hierarchies, with the choice of level system, sub-system and wider system - always depending on what an observer selects as significant. It is also useful to explore different levels to those originally identified so as to check that action is focused at the right level. (SAQ2)

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

1------2------3------4------5------CATWOE: Customers, Actors, Transformation, Worldview, Owner, Environment CATWOE Came originally from SSM and is used in both Block 2 and Part 5 of this block

System - sub-system - wider system, are relative terms. Choice is made by an observer: If level 3 is system then for that observer 2 is wider system and 4 is sub-system level
o

System Is the level of "T" (transformation). Activities contributing to doing T are then subsystems. The wider system level is that of "O" (Owner) in CATWOE, who could stop T.
o

This systems thinking ensures thinking at three

levels: What? (system) How? (sub-system) Why? (wide system) o Do "P" by "Q" in order to contribute to achieving "R" covers the three levels But the choice of level is always observer-dependant Observer 1 Observer 2 Why (wider System) What (system) How (sub-system) (system) Hand painting system) How (subAchieving a higher price for the property Improving the appearance of the property painting the house Why (wider system)

what

Checkland attributes the functions of What to do.. (P) How to do it (Q) Why do it.(R) to the different system levels (system, sub-system and wider systems respectively) Figure 4: Choice of level is observer dependent (Checkland & Scholes)

There are some aspects of sustainable development that many people experience as complex. State them. 4 June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Some aspects of sustainable development that many people experience as complex: 1. Events may occur over large scale e.g. the effects of CFCs on the ozone layer. 2. Some of the systems of interest in this domain are very big so individuals may lose sight of the effects of their collective actions. 3. Things are always in a state of change and sustainable development is generally not trying to keep things the same, but to co-evolve systems with their environments. 4. There are many, many people involved and it is often not clear who the main stakeholders are in any attempts at purposeful activity. 5. The consequences of actions may be found a long way in the time and place from their multiple causes (e.g. with issues of production and consumption between industrialized and developing countries, or acid rain or pollutants that accumulate in the worlds oceans). Explain the concept of sustainable development. Why are group values as well as individual values considered to be so important for sustainable development? Final 2006 Sustainable development: Sustainable development can be described as bringing environmental and development issues together with the future in mind. Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainable development is also where ecological, economic and social aspects overlap. Sustainable development does not focus only on environmental issues. More broadly, sustainable development policies encompass three general policy areas: economic, environmental and social. There are many types of sustainability - ecological, economic, financial, social, political, and institutional, depending on what is being sustained. SD was selected as the focus for the domain considered in Block 4 rather than sustainability because, the process of SD has a historical tradition which has tried to increase the compatibility of ecological, economic and social sustainability, making each of equal importance in decision making. The situations described here in which a systems practitioner is managing all have some ecological, economic and social dimensions. The main reasons why group values seem to be important to sustainable development is that all individuals operate within social or organizational contexts and group as well as individual values affect peoples actions in relation to sustainable development. Groups of values can be thought of as value systems, which will have some sort of outcome that is greater than the sum of its parts. Group values change albeit slowly according to Steely and Worcester presumably with sustainable development in mind but these changes only seem to occur (according to Hebel) when one set of values is confronted with another.

Ecological Sustainability

Social desirability 5

Sustainable development

Economic viability June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Sustainable development: where ecological, economic and social aspects overlap PART THREE: Discovering and contextualizing your own sustainable development beliefs

and values
Discuss the connections between "values", "beliefs" and "Circumstances". Also discuss how this connection is relevant to sustainable development situation; you may enrich your explanation through suitable illustrations. Final 2008 Or the authors explained different definitions to expand our knowledge and understanding of various dimensions of perspective which includes: values, belief, circumstances, prediction, and contextualizing. Define and explain four of these five concepts and explain the connectivity between each one. Midterm 2011 There are a need for systems practitioners to make their perspectives apparent, in order to meet this need, we will drawing out some different dimensions of perspective Values, Beliefs and Circumstances. This technique can be used to consider different perspectives in many domains of practice, not just sustainable development. Values, beliefs and circumstances: The term value will be used here to refer to meaning something that an individual or group regards as something good or that gives meaning to life. A belief is considered here to be an intellectual starting point for a sequence of reasoning. Circumstances are used here to refer to personal factors, such as experience and role that affect how a situation is perceived. Contextualizing mean from my skills learning through experience how I'm going to deal with the situation. How to put approaches into context (contextualizing) for taking action in the real world. The main skills of system practitioner are in order to contextualize system approaches: 1. To learn through experience. 2. To manage the relationship between approach and real world. 3. Adopting approach. The phrase putting into context describes the process of contextualization involved in the choice of approach. An aware practitioner is able to contextualize a diverse array of methods at their disposal creating an opportunity for a greater range of advantageous changes in the real world situation. The challenge for the system practitioner is to be able to engage in double learning learning about the domain and learning about the approach to the domain as well as juggling the other balls "BECM". For example: Consider the following statement: As a local resident who currently makes purchases in small shops in the town, I think there are environmental, economic and social costs attached to building a new supermarket on an out-of-town site. I am concerned that such a development would reduce the quality of life in the town and put other members of my community out of business. My interpretations: 6 June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

The indication of values the quality of life will mean different things to different people depending on what they regard as good. The indication of beliefs starting point for a chain of reasoning (cost). The indication of personal circumstances the local resident with experience of shopping in small shops in the town. Connections between values, beliefs and circumstances: Values, beliefs and circumstances all determine our perspectives that in turn affect the way that we conceptualize the world (our world views). There are connections between these values, beliefs and circumstances. But as values in particular are often hidden and seen to be more to do with our emotional than intellectual ways of knowing, these connections are not easy to rationalize. Beliefs, on the other hand, as intellectual starting point seem to be more subject to reason. The way in which the term values, beliefs and circumstances are used is not standard in all literature. Appreciating different perspectives, and accordingly recognizing the values, beliefs and circumstances that determine them, is an essential skill for a systems practitioner. Values do not just contribute to beliefs but also to judgments, which unlike beliefs, are formed with reference to certain criteria. As, judgment is something for which we must be prepared to take responsibility and which we must stand ready to defend and therefore a means by which we create our own identities. Values are most appropriately construed as objects of judgment. The values of an individual are not held in isolation but in social or organizational context and the values of the individual may differ from the social or organizational norms.

Please read the answer of activity # 16 page 133 & 134.

State some beliefs about sustainable development that are different of those the authors of this block committed to. Some different beliefs about SD: Different people adopt different values and beliefs and devote their expertise in a different direction:

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Belief 1.

Belief 2. Belief 3. Belief 4.

Belief 5.

Sustainable development is such a vague concept. Its vagueness gives opportunities for people with many different agenda to interpret it to suit their own interests. It seems meaningless in practice. Theres so much we dont know and are uncertain about anyway in this world, what difference does it make to subscribe to sustainable development? Human ingenuity and technology is the key to successful development. The issues are too big. Local level action is much more important than all this global stuff. Its not my problem, nothing I do will make a difference. Governments and international agencies will sort it out. Sustainable developments inherent ethical position is anthropocentric. Humans cant control everything. I can defend a different ethical position.

Why are group values as well as individual values considered to be so important for sustainable development The main reasons why group values seem to be important to sustainable development is that all individuals operate within social or organizational contexts and group as well as individual values affect peoples actions in relation to sustainable development. Groups of values can be thought of as value systems, which will have some sort of outcome that is greater than the sum of its parts. Group values change albeit slowly according to Steely and Worcester presumably with sustainable development in mind but these changes only seem to occur (according to Hebel) when one set of values is confronted with another. Explain with suitable illustration the concept of Sustainable Development. Also discuss the congruence between your sustainable development and your behavior. PART FOUR: Systems practice for managing SD:

Historically, as discussed earlier in the block, the concept of SD emerged from when postwar assumptions were powerfully challenged in many different ways. What are those challenges. 1. The first challenge: limit to growth: was that industrial development could not continue to ignore its impact on the environment. As this challenge evolved it crystallized into a belief that there were significant limits to the scale of human activity on Planet Earth. 2. The second challenge: commons: Was related but with a different focus. It was concerned with whether the economic assumptions, on which the western economies were based, were an appropriate basis for planning and policy making. This challenge came to be focused and discussed in terms of management of common land. 3. The third challenge: learning from Brent Spar: Was to the assumption that science and technology were universally benign and could and would solve all development problems. Underlying this criticism was a profound challenge to the positivist and rationalist world views, which then prevailed amongst scientists and other practitioners.

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Explain the concept of 'commons' as used by Hardin. Give two examples with reasons, one for which you consider should be treated as a 'commons' in Hardin's sense of a limited shared resource and one for which you consider 'not'. Final 2009

In 1968, Hardin published a book called The Tragedy of the Commons. Hardins story concerns an area of common land on which a group of villagers are able to graze their cattle. Like any area of grazing land the commons will have a limited carrying capacity that is the ability to provide food for animals on a sustainable basis. If the number of cattle on the common exceeds its carrying capacity then the animals will not have as much food as they could eat, with the result that the yield of meat or milk will be slightly reduced. Figure 18 in page 69 illustrates the concept of carrying capacity and the decline in yield as none animals are introduced onto the land. The logic of this story runs directly counter to the free market assumption that pursuing self interest results in the best outcome. Hardin was able to demonstrate that when a resource is limited, market economics would not produce sustainable outcomes. Hardin suggests that governments should interfere in markets to manage the limited resources so as to produce sustainable outcomes. Limit to Growth and Tragedy of the Commons provided a powerful counter argument to the accepted wisdom, namely that economic growth through the operation of competitive free markets would provide solutions to all the problems of development, poverty, food supply and so on. In most communities, there are some types of local control put in place in order to make sure that resources will not be exhausted by over use. Example for common: The oil and gas reservoirs in the North Sea: these are commons which it is widely accepted will be exploited and depleted within a finite time period. Example for not common: The Atlantic Ocean: it is not commons because it is well connected with other water resources. Fish stocks within the Atlantic Ocean could be regarded as a commons, but not the ocean itself. Drawing on your own experience and your knowledge about the evolution of using systems 9 June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

ideas in the domain of sustainable development, suggest some answers to the question 'who learns what?' for systems practice based on each of the ethical choices: Final 2010 I. Deciding for other stakeholders II. III. Deciding with other stakeholders Enabling stakeholders to decide

Managing systems practice in contexts of SD:

An aware systems practitioner has 3 choices in how they manage their engagement with stakeholders when pursuing any form of purposeful activity, the choices are to: 1. Decide for stakeholders 2. Decide with other stakeholders 3. Enable stakeholders to decide Deciding for: When the systems practitioner takes control of the situation and uses their expertise to tell, or recommend to stakeholders what they should do. In this situation the systems practitioner would have the most potential for learning about issue and about their own practice. The disadvantage of deciding for is that however much we might try to put ourselves in the shoes of another, or acknowledge other perspectives, it is never the same as having these stakeholders participate. Deciding for is often needed in case such as: a. where stakeholders are not human. b. where stakeholders cannot be involved with decision making either because they have: o No capacity, where capacity might be determined by time constraints as well as bio physical restraints. o No desire to be involved. o Not yet been identified. Deciding with: When the systems practitioner acts as a facilitator for other stakeholders in the situation and participates in decision making with other stakeholders. In this situation the systems practitioner could facilitate and involve other stakeholders in using the systems approach but he/she may do so in a way that protects rather than share their specialist knowledge and skills. In this case the outcome may be owned jointly by the participants but the process to achieve the outcome would not. In the longer term this scenario would be less sustainable because learning about the process has been limited to the 'expert' rather than residing in what Wenger describes as a 'community of practice'. Creating an enabling process for deciding: When the systems practitioner explain to stakeholders what they see as the strengths and weaknesses of a particular method in a given context so that the stakeholders could choose for themselves. In this situation, there is the potential for the systems practitioner and stakeholders to become colearners or co-inquirers. Each of these 3 situations requires a different set of skills for effective practice and will result in different capacities and potentials for learning.

10

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Decide who learns: Why is the question of who learns what? important? and why is it relevant to this block? Because: Aware practitioners, using systems approaches are able to arrange a process of action research in which the key systems ideas of connectivity, emergence, communication and control are appreciated and in which multiple perspectives are valued. The question of who participates in a learning process affects their capacity to be responsible to be able to respond purposefully. Also it is helpful for practitioner to become more aware of different ways of managing their systems practice in relation to the question: Who learns? The following scheme is helpful in addressing the question of who learns what: a. All systems practice requires the practitioner to be concerned with his own learning. b. Using systems thinking to formulate systems of interest can help us to improve a situation for ourselves, a client or clients. This often results in deciding for. c. In order for changes to be more sustainable, it might make sense to design our practice in a way that involves giving away or (embedding) systems thinking and practice skills so that the stakeholders in the situation can use them in an on-going action-learning manner. This could be deciding with or enabling to decide d. In some cases it may make sense to design the practice in a way that enables the stakeholders to give away their systems thinking and practice to others. This is a further elaboration of enabling deciding by Examples for deciding for & with: As system practitioner I classify the following examples into one of the three categories of management the engagement with stakeholders: a) Limit to Growth: The study itself involved a great deal of deciding for others. However the main thrust of the authors publications is to encourage others to make different decisions in the light of their analysis. In this sense it is an invitation to decide with others. b) Using SSM with my management team: a straightforward example of deciding with others. c) Public Inquiry into new road scheme: whilst this may appear to be a process for deciding with others, in fact decisions are taken by an Inspector or Minister for all other stakeholders. It is deciding for others. PART FIVE: Designing learning systems for purposeful action in the domain of SD

Creative use of SSM for managing SD in multiple stakeholder situations:

List the five principles on which the European Community environment policy is based. The five principles are: 1. The adoption of global, proactive approach aimed at the different actors and activities which affect natural resources or pollute the environment;.

11

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

2. The will to change current trends and practices which harm the environment for current and future generations; 3. Encouraging changes in social behavior by engaging all the actors concerned (public authorities, citizens, consumers, enterprises, etc.); 4. Establishing the concept of shared responsibility; 5. Using new environmental instruments.

2.1 Engaging with process design for emergent outcomes:

List the five features for each of "first Order" processes and "Second Order" process while engaging with process design for emergent outcomes. Final 2008 Or Describe and explain any three main features of 'Second order processes' while engaging with process design. Final 2009 Or While engaging in designing a process which allows for emergent outcomes, discuss the complete meaning of 'First order' and 'Second order' processes Final 2010 Difference between first order and second order process:

12

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

First order process 1. Assume data describes a system as if it was an objective set of operations functioning independently of its historical and social creation. 2. Changes happened in term of identifiable objects with well defined properties.

Second order process 1. Utilize data that takes as its starting point first order data such as description of physical events with reference to personal experience of working with data. 2. To achieve change it is necessary to step out the usual frame of reference and take a meta- perspective i.e. this perspective avoid being subjective or objective. 3. Second order is built on the understanding that human beings determine the world that they experience.

3. A first order understanding gained by accepting that there are general rules that apply to the situations in terms of those objects and properties. 4. Learning and action are based on the belief in a single reality a real world, which can be approached objectively.

4. Second order characterized by experience of 'awareness' of being the agent in generating key distinctions: what is the system of interest? What are the problem/ opportunity? 5. Problems and improvement are generated in the conversation that take place between stakeholders and not outside such engagement

5. A practitioner is minimally aware of how the context or the participants act would shape any experience.

6. The first order process characterized by concerned intervention, clear goals, naming the problem and identifying the rational solution.

List the four stages employed by Russel and Ison in their design of an inquiring system. The 4 stages involved in designing a process for emergent outcomes: For any system to be active this 4 stages have to be followed: Stage 1: Bringing the system of interest into existence (i.e. naming the system of interest). Stage 2: Evaluating the effectiveness of the system of interest as a vehicle to elicit useful understanding (and acceptance) of the social and cultural context. Stage 3: Generation of a joint decision-making process (a problem-determined system of interest) involving all key stockholders. Stage 4: Evaluating the effectiveness of the decisions made (i.e. how has the action taken been judged by stockholders?). (Please refer to pages 92-93) for more information.

13

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

2.2 Development in practice with SSMethod:

Compare and contrast between the two models of SSM they represent by drawing on your own learning about SS-method or methodology. Outline what the main changes appear to be between the 1980s and the 1990s versions. Suggest any implications of the changes for the systems practitioner? Or Describe the features and changes between Mode One and Mode Two in the Soft System Methodology? Do you think these changes are designed or emergent development and why? Then, draw the model of the SSM process as articulated by Checkland & Scholes to explain the logic-based stream of analysis and the cultural stream of analysis. Midterm 2011

Figure 21: The seve-step activity model of SSM as articulated in 1980s (checkland and Scholes, 1999, p.27

14

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Figure 22: An iconic pictorial model of the process of SSM as articulated in 1990s (checkland and Scholes, 1999, p.29 Some distinctions an observer might make between Mode 1 and Mode 2 use of SSM by a practitioner:

SSM (1980) Mode 1

Starting with SSM and use it to structure what is done.

SSM (1990) Mode 2

Starting from what is to be done and making sense of it by mapping it on to SSM. Situation-driven interaction Always iterative SSM as an internalized model There is no clear division occurring in a sequence of steps, this absence of division means that one is always iterating between the real world situation and the conceptual world of systems thinking.

Method driven intervention Sometimes used only as a linear sequence SSM as an external recipe There is a distinction between the real world and the conceptual world. This division is use to distinguish between the everyday world of the problem situation and the systems thinking about it

Differences: 1. The development of a rich picture is explicit in the early model but implicit in the later mode. This may be disadvantage, but it can also be advantage as it allows the systems practitioner to think

15

June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

of other methods techniques or tools which may play a similar role to rich picture such as SWOT, or other diagrams. 2. The later model has two streams of analysis: the cultural analysis which includes analysis of the intervention, the social system and the political system The logic-based stream of analysis is much the same as depicted in the earlier version except presented in a linear format In later use the two streams of analysis have been fused to define four specific activities (a) finding out about a problem situation, including culturally, politically (b) formulating some relevant purposeful activity models (c) debating the situation, using the models, seeking from the debate both changes to improve the situation and the accommodation between conflicting interests which will enable action to improve the situation. (d) taking action in situation to bring about improvement 3. The two headed arrows between the cultural and logic streams of analysis shoe that there is constant iteration between these two streams and that both continue throughout the life of a project. The early model tended to suggest that a rich picture was done at the start and later version suggests that use of rich pictures or metaphors etc is an ongoing activity as long as it aids learning in the situation. 4. 1990 version draws attention to the fact that the problem/opportunity "real world" situation has a history. 5. There is a fact that the problem/opportunity real world situation has a history 6. What has not changed is the central place of constructing relevant systems (based on CATWOE, transformation) and activity modelling Similarities: The central place of constructing relevant system (based on CATWAE, transformation), and activity modeling, the process being used to gain insights, to learn about the real situation, not model it as it is. Model 1and Model 2 are not two categories, they define a spectrum, and they are ideal types. The Model 2 arose naturally as two things came together: The technology of SSM became internalized, it became tacit knowledge and his experience of the use of SSM convinced us that there was a need to pay attention to the process being enacted as much as the content which the process was addressing Model 2 was thus an emergent development arising experientially not a designed development What are the three E's? What claims are made about their inclusion in SSM? What are the other two E's that can be added and how might they add to the use of SSM? An ES sets out the ethical aspirations the values that someone aspires to in their work. ES emerges from reflection on the values that are important to the individual as they tackle a task within their multi-membership of several communities of practice. The 3 E's where every model builder ought to decide what the criteria would be for these E1: EFFICACY: (dose the mean work?). Are the criteria to be met recognizable as appropriate for a strategy to manage SD? 16 June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

E2: EFFICIENCY: (Amount of output divided by amount of resources used?). Can this to be done without losing commitment with stakeholder? E3: EFFECTIVENESS: (is the transformation meeting the longer term aim?) The three Es are criteria to judge whether a particular transformation can be judged as successful or unsuccessful. They can also be applied to any activity model that is built because the transformation is at the core of any model. The other two Es are ethicality and elegance. Exploration of the ethicality of particular activity models would seem to be highly relevant in any attempts to manage sustainable development purposefully. What feature does Haynes claim distinguishes SSM from other systems approaches? Features of SSM: SSM is a learning system because it involves an organized process of inquiry based on systems ideas. For example: it might be seen as a process to orchestrate a particular form of the experiential learning cycle. He emphasize is that systemicity (the property of being a system) is focused on the process of inquiry rather than being in the world. The role of SSM-practicing consultant is to design and manage a learning system appropriate to the needs of the client and the problem situation and suggest improvements will occur. What weaknesses does Haynes identify as being associated with the seven-step, Mode 1 use of SSM. Weaknesses of Seven-step Model of SSM (1980): Slavish adherence to the seven step model by practitioner's lacking confidence to contextualize it to a particular situation. Cultural aspects of the problem/opportunity situation tended to be overlooked Sometimes fail to get to the root of a problem. Haynes describes the seven-step Mode 1 form of SSM as clear, easily understood and able to be assimilated by most in a limited time period. Outline the two main difficulties he recognizes in the practical Mode 1 application of SSM. Difficulties in Mode 1 use of SSM: The two difficulties Haynes recognizes are: 1. Persuading people that developing some form of picture ( a rich picture ) capturing the main elements of the problem / opportunity situation is useful thing to do and that considerable artistic talent is not a prerequisite; and 2. Ensuring that the purposeful activity models constructed are not models of the real world developing root definitions and activity models that include issue based models in addition to primary task models. What process does Haynes stress as an important consulting objective to adopt in using systems concepts and SS-method in particular? What aim links the different ways of enacting this process? 17 June 18, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Consulting with SSM: Haynes stresses giving specific attention to organizing the process of inquiry in order for useful learning for the client to occur. He identifies a number of ways in which learning occurs but argues that the common aim is to learn how to move forward and make some improvement. What are some of the ways identified by Haynes for entry to the problem situation in the developed form (Mode 2 use) of SS-method? Entering the problem situation: Haynes suggests any number of ways but specifically names group-meetings, one-to-one interviewing or mixtures of both. He suggests one-to-one interviews are useful for teasing out issues as part of a cultural analysis. Discuss the various stages in brief of the LUMAS model through suitable examples. Final 2006.
New problem situation improved

Learning Yields

Becomes

Changes Perceives has concern for User of methodology

Modifies enriches appreciation of

Real-world Problem situation

Appreciates

Tailors M to S Yielding Used to guide inquiry and action in Actual (situation and user specific) approach adopted

Methodology formally described (source of A)

Because

Figure 25 The LUMAS model: Learning for a user by a methodology -informed Approach to a problem situation (Checkland, 1999)

Learning, for a User by a Methodology-informed Approach to a problem Situation, It a sense making device and a process of enacting aware system practice. LUMAS is a model that can be used by other system approach not just with SSM. The LUMAS model itself seems general sable as a design for thinking across many different complex social change situations. Vignette 6 (p. 106 to 115), it is an example of how a systems practitioner used SSM, as he interpreted it, to design an inquiry process in a multiple stakeholders situation concerned with sustainable development.

18

June 18, 2011