Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Fall semester 2010 2011

The Summary prepared by:

Honey Bonny

April 24, 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
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 Discuss why the system practitioner needs to understand the concepts of hierarchy or
systems levels. Use an example to discuss this. Final 2009
Table1: Hierarchies for structuring sustainable development situations:
Single organizational: Individual/ group/ team/ company
Organizational

Community

Multi-organizational: Sector/ bigger sector/ cross sector/ all

Individual/ network/ bigger network

Geographical

Local/ regional/ national/ international/ global

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Spheres

Physiosphere/biosphere /noosphere/theosphere

Being and consciousness

Matter / life/ mind/ soul/ spirit

Cultural

A hierarchy that ranks collective worldviews

Personal

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.
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.
For example: in any situation there are many different hierarchies which individuals find meaningful
in the domain of SD, so we may have focused more on people (individuals & social groups) or on
physical environment element and weather systems. BUT in fact we should includes both human and
non-human sub-system as it is important to remember the interdependence of these element in the
context of sustainable development, separating them out in our thinking will have difficulties later
(SAQ2)

System - sub-system - wider system, are relative

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

1------2------3------4------5-------

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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

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 Is the level of "T" (transformation). Activities

contributing to doing T are then sub-systems. The
wider system level is that of "O" (Owner) in
CATWOE, who could stop T.

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 observerdependant
o

Observer 1
Observer 2

Achieving a higher
Why (wider System)

price for the property

Improving the appearance

system)
What (system)
How (sub-system)

Why (wider

of the property
painting the house

what

(system)
Hand painting

How (sub-

system)

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.
Some aspects of sustainable development that many people experience as complex:
4

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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

April 24, 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
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.

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 a n 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:
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.

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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:
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.

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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.
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.
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

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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
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.
Deciding with other stakeholders
9

April 24, 2011

Important questions

III.

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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

Decide who learns:

Why is the question of who learns what? important? and why is it relevant to this block?
Because:

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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 (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

multiple stakeholder situations:

SD

in

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;.
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;
11

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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:
First order process

Second order process

1. Assume data describes a system as if it was an 1. Utilize data that takes as its starting point first
objective set of operations functioning
order data such as description of physical
independently of its historical and social
events with reference to personal experience
creation.
of working with data.
2. Changes happened in term of identifiable 2. To achieve change it is necessary to step out
objects with well defined properties.
the usual frame of reference and take a metaperspective i.e. this perspective avoid being
subjective or objective.
3. A first order understanding gained by 3. Second order is built on the understanding
that human beings determine the world that
accepting that there are general rules that apply
they experience.
to the situations in terms of those objects and
properties.
4. Learning and action are based on the belief in 4. Second order characterized by experience of
'awareness' of being the agent in generating
a single reality a real world, which can be
key distinctions: what is the system of
approached objectively.
interest? What are the problem/ opportunity?
5. A practitioner is minimally aware of how the 5. Problems and improvement are generated in
context or the participants act would shape
the conversation that take place between
any experience.
stakeholders and not outside such
engagement
6. The first order process characterized by
concerned intervention, clear goals, naming the
problem and identifying the rational solution.

12

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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 tIhe action taken been judged by
stockholders?).
(Please refer to pages 92-93) for more information.

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?

Figure 21: The seve-step activity model of SSM as articulated in 1980s

(checkland and Scholes, 1999, p.27

13

April 24, 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

SSM (1990)
Mode 2

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

Starting from what is to be done and making sense of

it by mapping it on to SSM.

Method driven

Situation-driven

intervention

interaction

Sometimes used only as a linear sequence

Always iterative

SSM as an external recipe

SSM as an internalized model

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

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.

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 of
14

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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?

15

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?

April 24, 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?
Consulting with SSM:
16

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

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.

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.

17

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

BLOCK 5 The systemic practitioner:

Being reflective, becoming aware

:PART ONE

:Systems practice and the systems practitioner

Locating
practioner:

1.2
The
practitioner:

the

systems

systemic

systems

Write about your experience as a system practitioner and draw a systemic diagram for
learning from engaging with a complex situation?

The systemic systems practitioner:

In figure 1, the situation is represented by a spiky, irregular shape. I understand this to represent the
messiness of the complex situation I encounter and the irregularity of their boundaries. Although
there are some element of the situation that are clearly inside the boundary of the systems-of-interest,
there are other parts of the situation where it is less obvious whether they are inside or outside the
boundary I use to think about the issue.
In one of the other variant of the diagram (figure 3), used by of the other distinguished lectures, the
complex situation was represented by a wobbly-blob shape, which conveys a similar sort of idea. I
have reproduced this variant of the diagram in Figure 3.
The main component in the diagrams is the practitioner. By contrast with the situation, the
practitioner is represented by regular shape. This suggests to me that, unlike the situation, the
practitioner is rational, uncomplicated and full describable. The regularity of the shape suggests that
unlike the stakeholders in the situation-of-interest, the practitioner is uniquely rational and has a
clear agenda about any action he or she might choose to take.
Activity 2:
18

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

In what ways does the practitioner as drawn in Figures 1 & 3 not represent your understanding
of what it means to be a systems practitioner?
(Comments on activity 2): this practitioner was nothing like me. My experience of engaging with
complex situations is that I do not feel very rational. The initial experience is of being confused,
puzzled and sometimes even overwhelmed by the situation. I also sometimes experience a sense of the
impossibility of ever understanding the situation enough to be able to do something useful within it.
For me one of the exciting features of systems thinking and practiced is that I know I can begin to
make sense of what I initially experience as overwhelming complexity as I identify systems of interest
within it.
Systemic practitioner:
The concept of systemic practitioner draws attention to the location of the systems practitioner with
respect to the situation-of-interest. It means that the aware systems practitioner must not only think
systemically about the situation-of-interest and their approach to it, but must also pay attention to their
own part in a system of inquiry which includes herself or himself as well as their systems approach and
the situation-of-interest. This is illustrated by the systems map in Figure 4 (p. 13) important-.
The systemic way in which the systems practitioner is an integral part of the system of inquiry can also
be illustrated by an influence diagram. This is shown in Figure 5 (p. 13) important-.
Explain the following term clearly through example. Final 2008
i.
System of interest.
ii.
Situation of interest.
iii.
System of inquiry
Or Critically explain the concepts of 'system of inquiry' and 'system of interest'. Use
relevant business examples to explain them. Final 2009
Or Critically explain the concepts of 'system of inquiry' and 'system of interest' and
'situation of interest'. Use relevant business examples to explain them. Final 2010
To discuss such framework, I have to draw the suitable diagrams showing the situation of that and its
improvement.

19

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Diagram in figure 4 (system map) showing how the system of inquiry in which a system practitioner
uses a system approaches to address a situation of interest.
Diagram in figure 5 (influence diagram) showing the system of inquiry in which the systemic role of
the system practitioner is explicitly recognized.
I have to explain each type as following:
1. System of Interest: where stakeholder interested their perspective (individual, group of individual)
in a system. For example: in our university the system of interest will be the education system which
includes the tutors, students, study materials, assignments and other supporting items.
2. System of Inquiry: where it can be explained in how you proceed and inquiry about your system
and how you inquire for the part of system. For example: in the same example of university how to
inquire about the following (Class, PC, Network, Rules and Regulations).
3. Situation of Interest: where in that issue is to find the sum total of system of Interest involved in
the situation, so they named as situation of interest.
Picturing
practice:

systems

Draw a multiple-cause diagram to show how strongly help beliefs become self reinforcing.
How beliefs become self-reinforcing:
Recognizing that what I think of as the 'real world' is a self-constructed model, based on signals which
cannot be verified, can be disconcerting, even when I am used to the idea. When my beliefs are strong
enough to generate certainty, I no longer to question them. When I no longer question my belief then I
become self-reinforcing. The figure below illustrates this idea:

20

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Self reinforcing beliefs is a system because they are purposive.

Self reinforcing beliefs is problematic because it prevent SP seeing important features of the situation
of interest.
Draw a control-model diagram illustrating the phenomenon of self-reinforcing belief
systems. In what way can self-reinforcing beliefs be regarded as systems?
A suitable starting point is a transformation model which can be thought of as a system to make a belief
stronger. This gives the control model a goal and a transformation which, when it is working, transforms
a belief into reinforced belief. (figure 38):

The goal of this system acts to make the system work by regulating the evidence that is accepted. This
leads to the full control model shown in Figure 39 (opposite).
Self-reinforcing beliefs can be said to be systems because they are purposive. It is as if they had the
purpose of sustaining themselves.

21

April 24, 2011

Important questions

Exploring
practice:

3.1 Exploring
practice:

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

systems

aspirations

for

systems

Identify the main characteristics of practice, of whatever kind, that might be implied by
the term professional. Indicate which characteristics might be thought of as common to all
uses of the word, and those which may only apply in some contexts?

Professional: having or showing great skills or a skilled practitioner or person who works in a skilled
occupation, specialist.
Professionalism: Assumes the practitioner will endeavor to set aside purely personal preferences in
favor of achieving good resolutions in problematic situation.
Professional standards, whether imposed by fellow-members of a profession or self-imposed, seem
to fall into groups. The groups I have chosen concern the practitioner themselves; the client or
recipient of the practitioner's practice; and the practice. I have sorted my responses to the previous
activities into these three groups in Table 1. My purpose in doing so is to see if any other insights
about being professional can be generated.

Table 1: Characteristics of professional practice:

Concerning the practitioner

Concerning the client, or

recipient of the practice

Concerning the practice or the

domain of practice

1. Having high level of expertise, 1. Having a relationship with the 1. Being

competence and knowledge.

client

that

respects

their

2. Being efficient.

autonomy and that of other

3. Being qualified.

stakeholders.

22

thorough,

doing

everything necessary to do a
good job.
2. Acting in ways appropriate to

April 24, 2011

Important questions

4. Being paid.
5. Being committed to
professional development.

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

2. Acting in ways appropriate to

the client's needs.

the situation.
3. Being thoughtful in the use of

3. Acting responsibly towards

other.

one's expertise.
4. Taking responsibility for one's

4. Putting the client's interests

own

first.

actions

and

their

consequences.
5. Knowing

and

operating

within, the boundaries of own

expertise and competence.
6. Practicing ethically.
7. Recognizing and respecting the
expectations of practice.

3.2 Becoming aware:

3.2.1 Perceiving complexity in myself:
Explain the Law of Requisite Variety and Requisite Variety.

I would like to celebrate complexity. For me, the world is interesting because it is complex. I dont
understand it all so I have space to wonder at it, I perceive it as being capable of almost infinite
variety and display a density of interconnectedness that defies understanding.
The variety and interconnectedness of the human organism and the human brain allows people to
survive and thrive in a variety of environment, including those generated by human activity. This
interconnectedness makes the human organism and its relationship to its environment problematic to
understand but not problematic in itself quite the reverse.

Law of Requisite Variety:

Variety and interconnectedness is also what enables me to deal with the world. Ross Ashby, one of
the founding fathers of cybernetics, recognized their importance in adapting to circumstance and
proposed his now famous Law of Requisite Variety.
According to Ashby:
The formal statement of this law is:
only variety can destroy variety OR if you can describe complexity, then its not complex any
more.
To understand the law:
To describe variety and interconnectedness in something, I need at least as much variety and
interconnectedness myself, otherwise cannot make the distinctions that describe the complexity I
perceive.
By extension, I have to have variety and interconnectedness myself to manage variety and
interconnectedness.
By extension again, to adapt and survive, a system must be capable of at least as much variety as the
environment that it has to respond to.

23

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

When a system, such as a human being, is exposed to perturbations in its environment, It may have a
number of responses. These responses lead to a number of possible outcomes. Of all the possible
outcomes, only some will be acceptable in terms of the systems purposes and survival. In practice,
the law says that, in order to fulfill its purposes and survive, the system must be capable of a greater
variety of responses than the variety of perturbations in its environment.
To short, the fewer the number of acceptable outcomes, then the more the variety of possible
responses must exceed the variety of perturbations. The system then has requisite variety the
variety it requires to survive and fulfill its purpose.
Requisite Variety:
This is one of my reasons for wanting to celebrate complexity whenever I perceive it. The very human
variety that can be so infuriatingly difficult to understand is the variety that enables the human-person
system to survive in an environment that also exhibits astonishing variety. Returning to the context of
systems practice, and my question about the significance of bringing all my human variety to
situations I perceive as complex, I need to be capable of variety in my thinking, actions and emotions
to respond appropriately to the complexity I perceive in the situation-of-interest.

Why do the author claims that complexity, perceived in a situation-of-interest, should not
Automatically be perceived as problematic?
The perception of complexity is often accompanied by a perception that something is problematic to
understand, or problematic to describe. This is not the same as being inherently problematic.
The perception of complexity may also be perceived as a capacity for a variety of adaptive responses to
the environment particularly in human beings.

3.2.2 Asking questions about my systems practice:

There are two obstacles to asking questions about the practitioners role in their own
systems practice. What are these obstacles and how did the author think they could be
overcome.
The two obstacles identified by the author are:
1. The suspicion that there is something unwholesome, self-indulgent or self centered about thinking
deeply about oneself.
2. The suspicion that asking questions about oneself and ones systems practice might reveal
unwelcome answers.
The author suggest that:
The first obstacle be addressed by recognizing the suspicion as a cultural one; by:
Recognizing that asking such questions are necessary for systemic coherence;
And by recognizing that the inquiry has a practical purpose.
The second obstacle can be addressed by:
Recognizing that a unwillingness to deal with particular questions signals a preexisting recognition
of something that needs attention, and which it is easier to address than to avoid.
Recognizing that insights gained will also be positive and welcome.

3.2.3 Identifying question about practice:

Please read it from the book page 29 & 30 + Box #3.
24

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

3.2.4 Responding to the questions:

Please read it from the book page 31 & 32

3.3 Reflecting on practice:

3.3.1 Thinking about reflective practice:
Distinguish between reflection-before-action, reflection-in-action, and reflection-onaction? Final 2006
Or Distinguish between reflection-before-action, reflection-in-action and reflection-onAction through suitable example. Final 2008
Or Discuss based on your understanding and through suitable illustrations the concepts of
reflection-in-action, reflection-on-action and reflection-before-action. Final May, 2010.

Reflective practice is a group of activities that allow the system practitioner to move towards achieving
the goals to becoming more aware and of improving his practice.
A fuller picture of reflective practice needs to include self-evaluation and self-knowledge.
Learning, self-evaluation and self-knowledge are necessary features of the juggling act performed by the
ideal system practitioner.
In reflective practice Schon drew a distinction between: reflection-on-practice and reflection in
practice. Nevertheless, he didnt discuss the idea of reflection before action:
Reflection before action:
It is where the practitioners stop to think about what they intend to do and how they intend to do it
before they actually do it.
It might include game playing, simulations, process design, mental rehearsal and anticipatory thinking,
as well as planning.
Also, somewhere between reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action is the practice of stop and
think. Time for stopping and thinking is rarely allowed in project planning.
Reflection-in-action:
This is the kind of reflection that occurs whilst a problem is being addressed, in what Schon calls the
action-present. It is a response to a surprise where the expected outcome is outside of our
knowing-in-action.
The reflective process is at least to some degree conscious, but may not be verbalized. Reflection-inaction is about challenging our assumptions (because knowing-in-action forms the basis of
assumption). It is about thinking again, in a new way, about a problem we have encountered.
It takes place when something unexpected happens and the practice is not going as planned. When this
happens, the practitioner calls on their existing knowledge and experiences and formulates the next
step.

25

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

Reflection-in-action takes place simultaneously with practice action, braiding theory-in-use,

knowledge-in-use* and practice, in a seamless whole. It may take place as pre-verbal thinking.
*Knowledge-in-use: pre-existing knowledge and experience used to formulate the next step.
Espoused knowledge: knowledge base held by practitioner.

Reflection-on-action:
This is reflection after the event. Consciously undertaken, and often documented.
involves verbalization and representation. Reflection on previous practice experience. Interprets action
in terms of espoused theory.
Example: My T306-Project:
Before I proceed on working on it, I think about the complexity that I will chose, collect information
about it, think about how to organize my work and the style and methods that I will use, set a time
schedule to be able to meet the project deadline without delay.
By doing this I am in the phase of reflection before action. This phase will help to reduce errors and
organize my work more and focus on my goals.
Afterwards, I start the actual work on the project and start analyzing the situation. During my work, I
faced a difficulty on applying a system method that I chose, I stopped and re-think again the suitability
of the method and I found that I it is not suitable for the complexity that I am working on, so I had to redo
my analyses again and try with another method. This situation was not expected and required an
immediate action from me to be able to face it and move on to the next levels of working on my project.
This phase would be reflection-in-action.
After I will finish my project, this is when I will review all my work done and reflect on it, evaluate it and
decide if my work and practice have helped me to reach my goal. This phase is reflection-on-action.
Distinguish between reflection-before-action, reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action.
Reflection-before-action

Reflection-in-action

Reflection-on-action

Not a distinction made by Schon.

A distinction made by Schon.

A distinction made by Schon.

Takes place before action.

Takes place simultaneously with Retrospective

reflection
action as in-action reflection make previous action.
in the heat of practice.

Includes
scenario
planning, May take place as pre-verbal Involve
verbalization
simulation, etc. as forms of mental thinking; steers the course of action representation of action.
rehearsal
when action is not going according
to plan.
Braids theory-in-use with practice.

Interprets action
espoused theory.

in

terms

on

and

of

3.3.2 Developing my own practice through reflection:

Read it from the book (Figures 9, 10, 11 + SAQ #8 & 9)

26

April 24, 2011

Important questions

Structuring
practice:

T306-B

an

inquiry

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

into

4.1 A system of inquiry into a

situation:
4.1.1 Revising the soft systems method:
Draw the SSM learning inquiry and discuss it. Final 2007

The essence of the soft systems method is captured in this figure, Checkland describes the soft
systems method as a learning system or as a system of inquiry.

The whole cycle constitutes a system of inquiry. Its purpose is to improve the situation-of-interest. In
that respect it is an elaboration of the Kolb action-learning cycle. The system may be brought into
being for any particular inquiry, and the systems practitioner both participates in the inquiry and
orchestrates its component parts.
A characteristic phase of the soft systems method (SSM) is the development of some conceptual
models of systems which might have some improving effect upon the situation. Each CM is
characterized by a world view. The world view is important because it allows for explicit recognition
that the system represented by each conceptual model only makes sense if its purpose is matching with
the needs of stakeholders. The explicit world view allows stakeholders to articulate what they mean by
'improve'.

27

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

The conceptual models take the form of activity models, each derived from a root definition, that
explicitly identify customers, actors, a Transformation, an owner and an external Environment as well
as the world view checked off against the CATWOE mnemonic. Such a system is illustrated, in
outline, by Figure 17, Checkland explicitly recognizes that such a system cannot simply be put in
place even if it were agreed to be a desirable improvement and left to run. He therefore incorporates a
system for monitoring and controlling its action.

Note: If you are asked to draw Figure 16 above, add to it the three elements shown in Fig. 18 on
page 49.

4.1.2 Monitoring and controlling a system of inquiry:

How to constitutes you system of inquiry into how to improve the sales floor layout.
Suggest criteria or measures of efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness for the system of
inquiry into improving the use of sales floor space. Do these criteria prompts the
specification of further criteria?
The situation:
Imagine that situation A is a small fashion shop and you want to know how to improve its sales floor
layout when an additional 10 m2 becomes available at the back of the shop. There are all sorts of issues to
take into account.
How to constitute the system of inquiry:
Return to figure 18:
You decide on a soft systems approach to your inquiry. This is represented by the main system
boundary.
So having engaged with the situation, drawn rich pictures and son on (represented by situation A),
you create some conceptual models of systems that might have an improving effect on the sales floor
layout.
28

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

These conceptual models of system (or activity model) to make the shop look brighter; a system to
draw customer in; a system to give better access to the jewellery section, and so on.
As these each of this models is developed, you debate its feasibility and appropriateness with
yourself, with shop manager, with the sales staff, and with a few regular customer you know well.
After negotiating a few compromises, and making a few changes to your conceptual model, you
decide to implement the system for improving the lighting first. You then start looking for further
ways to improve the way you use the space.
Criteria or measures of efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness for the system of inquiry into improving
the use of sales floor space:
Defining efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness, and then monitoring them allows the system to be
grounded in the stakeholders world view.
The 3 E's are:

Efficacy: measures whether the system does what it is supposed to do.

Efficiency: measures how well it does it.
Effectiveness: measures whether this is having an improving effect on the situation.
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.

Efficacy:

Does the system achieve its purpose?

Since the overall purpose of the inquiry is to improve the use of the floor space, this question has
to be of the form: Has the use of shop floor space improved? This prompts some further questions:
How will improvement be recognized? And in whose judgment?
Efficiency:
How well does the system achieve its purpose?
The efficiency is (Amount of output divided by amount of resources used?).
In its technical sense, efficiency compares the amount of beneficial effect with the input it took to
get it.
You may decide that a way to look at this is to compare the financial cost of the inquiry,
including the cost of staff and other time, and the resulting actions with the financial benefits
achieved. Alternatively, you may decide that this is inappropriate because achieving a brighter
workplace for your staff is benefit enough for the effort invested.
Effectiveness:
The question whether this is having an improving effect on the situation becomes more difficult
to answer if there are other changes which are not necessarily improvements. For example, The shop
may be brighter, but the better lighting may highlight the shabbiness of the changing rooms an
unintended consequence. Is there still an overall improvement? Different stakeholders may have
different views and you may have to make some judgments here about how to balance the opinions?
So the question of effectiveness relates to the overall need. Does this system meet the overall needs of
the situation? How does the shop specify its own purpose? If the aim of the shop is to yield good
profits, then: Does the inquiry system help to maintain and improve the profits? Might be a useful
criterion for effectiveness? If the main aim is to provide a creative outlet for the enthusiasms for a
29

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

group of friends, united in their love of fashion, then does the inquiry system help to keep the shop
looking stylish? Might be a suitable criterion?
While explaining, suggest criteria or measures of efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness
for system of inquiry into the using of new cold and regular flu drug. Do these criteria
prompt the specification of further criteria? Final May 2010

The three Es can, and are, used to evaluate drugs. A new type of tablet for treating migraine, for example,
is said to be efficient:
if it relieves the headache.

if I perhaps achieves this effect with only one or two doses,

if it also reduces the other complex of symptoms associated with migraine and enables the patient to
return to normal functioning within twelve hours.
It is clear that issues of efficacy, efficiency and effectiveness need to be explored in conjunction with
other stakeholders. They are criteria and measures that need to be negotiated.
The systems practitioner taking responsibility for the system of inquiry needs to seek feedback in order to
reflect on how well the system is functioning. If, as Checkland suggests, the processes that constitute the
inquiry system are to be given away, the systems practitioner must also monitor how well the
stakeholders in the system are learning to take responsibility for maintaining the system themselves. This
too is a reflection that must be informed by feedback processes.
Once criteria and measures of performance for the system of inquiry have been negotiated and
processes for monitoring their achievement are in place, the systems practitioner then needs to consider
how action is to be taken if the system is discovered not to be working, or not to be working as well as it
could.
The system of inquiry into a situation, illustrated in Figure 18, was built upon a soft systems approach to
the situation-of-interest. However a system of inquiry can be based on other approaches, such as the hard
systems approach, or indeed any system of connected activities for action and learning. Each can be
monitored and changed to ensure that they fulfill their purpose as systems. Figure 19, page 52 (overleaf)
shows an inquiry system based on the hard systems method. As before, the performance of the system of
inquiry is monitored and action is taken to ensure it is efficacious, efficient and effective. Figure 20, page
53 is similar, but shows a more general action-learning cycle at the core of the system of inquiry.

4.2 A system
practice:

of

inquiry

into

Read it from the book page 54, 55, 56 & 57

Representing systems practice:

Discuss why 'recognizing', 'understanding' and 'surfacing' metaphors are relevant in

representing systems practice. Final 2009

Representing systems practice:

30

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

The first step in a soft systems inquiry, after engaging as fully as possible with the situation, is to capture
as much of the complexity as possible in some form of representation. Traditionally, the usual approach to
this representation task is to draw a rich picture an unstructured representation using images and ideas
to represent the complexity you encounter in the situation-of- interest.
1. Recognizing metaphors:
o Metaphor: is a form of language in which something is described, or thought of, in terms of
something else. Thus making an implicit comparison as in a sea of troubles.
o It is something described as something else and in everyday speech metaphor is common and
often unconscious.
o It highlights certain information and relationship between ideas in the situation that are not visible
in text.
o Example of metaphors:
Life is a journey.
Death is sleep.
Time is a thief.
2. Understanding metaphors:
o Metaphor is pervasive in everyday life, not just in language but in thought and action. Our
ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in
nature.
o Metaphor structure understandings, including those of the systemic practitioner.
o Metaphors have entailments through which they highlight and make coherent certain aspects of
our experience.
o Metaphor is a key way in which people structure their experience and attribute meaning to it.
o Please read from the book page 60 & 61 (Armson , 1999) 3. Surfacing metaphors:
o Read from the book page 62 & 63.
o Some of the metaphors used by systems practitioners, whom they were not previously aware of,
emerged in my workshops. Participants worked in pairs.
o In all three workshops surprise was expressed at just how rich the spontaneous imagery was. The
listener in each pair generally found it easier to identify visual imagery used by the speaker and
typically generated a much richer list of images. This suggests that the consultant's use of imagery
was not fully conscious or, at least, was more accessible when the recognition was facilitated by a
listener.
In what ways can metaphors be compared with rich pictures as a way of representing
systems practice for an inquiry into practice?
Metaphors are a powerful way in which people structure experience, but metaphors do not reveal the
totality of experience and so they are less complete than a good rich picture. However, they may reveal
underlying images that the practitioner holds in a way that rich pictures do not.

PART TWO:

The reflective systems practitioner:

31

April 24, 2011

Important questions

T306-B

Prepared by: Honey Bonny ((

PART THREE:

Ethics and the systems practitioner:

32

April 24, 2011