128
V. R. Vargas et al.
3 Systems Thinking, Analysis and Assessment
of Stakeholders’ Networks in HEIs
When assessing the performance of a system, the relationships of the components
within the system are of crucial importance. Through this premise, systems thinking
gains a bigger picture. Systems thinking advocates the importance of making a
conscious effort to appreciate other people’s perspectives. C. West Churchman,
described the systems approach both as a process in which one needs to ‘sweep
in’ as many elements and actors affected as possible; and as a process of looking
at the situations from different perspectives, indicating that—“A systems approach
begins when first you see the world through the eyes of another” (Churchman 1968:
231).
In theory, these are the principles underpinning systemic thinking but when we
try to apply them we need to use a methodology to guide the use of these principles. We outline soft systems methodology (SSM) a systemic methodology developed by Checkland (1981, 1999). SSM has been widely used in management to
tackle complexity and to bring improvement in a particular complex, messy situation
(Ackoff 1993, 1995) and possibly to introduce some changes.
3.1 Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) a Way of Enquiring
About Complexity
Peter Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is one of the most developed
Systems Methodologies in terms of its theoretical premises and philosophical underpinnings. It is also one of the most widely used in the UK and in other parts of
the world (Mingers and Taylor 1992; Ledington and Donaldson 1997; Macadam
and Packham 1989; Macadam et al. 1995; Paucar-Caceres et al. 2015). During the
1970s, Checkland and his colleagues at Lancaster University questioned the use of
hard (reductionistic) systems thinking to real-world situations and started to test a
new methodology that shifted the systemicity from the real world to the process of
enquiry itself. In other words, we can use systems to enquire about the real world.
In essence, SSM articulates a learning process which takes the form of an enquiry
process in a situation that people are concerned about. This process leads to action
in a never-ending learning cycle: once the action is taken, a new situation with
new characteristics arises and the learning process starts again. The methodology
is summarised in Fig. 1. This is the SSM best known methodology and although
Checkland has expressed a most flexible way of applying his ideas in his latest book
(Checkland and Scholes 1990), the 7-stage methodology is still the most convincing
and helpful account of the SSM enquiry.
The basic structure of SSM rests on the idea that in order to tackle real-world
situations, we need to make sure that the ‘real-world’ is separated from the ‘systems
thinking world’. This distinction is crucial for SSM because that assures us that we
V. R. Vargas et al.
3 Systems Thinking, Analysis and Assessment
of Stakeholders’ Networks in HEIs
When assessing the performance of a system, the relationships of the components
within the system are of crucial importance. Through this premise, systems thinking
gains a bigger picture. Systems thinking advocates the importance of making a
conscious effort to appreciate other people’s perspectives. C. West Churchman,
described the systems approach both as a process in which one needs to ‘sweep
in’ as many elements and actors affected as possible; and as a process of looking
at the situations from different perspectives, indicating that—“A systems approach
begins when first you see the world through the eyes of another” (Churchman 1968:
231).
In theory, these are the principles underpinning systemic thinking but when we
try to apply them we need to use a methodology to guide the use of these principles. We outline soft systems methodology (SSM) a systemic methodology developed by Checkland (1981, 1999). SSM has been widely used in management to
tackle complexity and to bring improvement in a particular complex, messy situation
(Ackoff 1993, 1995) and possibly to introduce some changes.
3.1 Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) a Way of Enquiring
About Complexity
Peter Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) is one of the most developed
Systems Methodologies in terms of its theoretical premises and philosophical underpinnings. It is also one of the most widely used in the UK and in other parts of
the world (Mingers and Taylor 1992; Ledington and Donaldson 1997; Macadam
and Packham 1989; Macadam et al. 1995; Paucar-Caceres et al. 2015). During the
1970s, Checkland and his colleagues at Lancaster University questioned the use of
hard (reductionistic) systems thinking to real-world situations and started to test a
new methodology that shifted the systemicity from the real world to the process of
enquiry itself. In other words, we can use systems to enquire about the real world.
In essence, SSM articulates a learning process which takes the form of an enquiry
process in a situation that people are concerned about. This process leads to action
in a never-ending learning cycle: once the action is taken, a new situation with
new characteristics arises and the learning process starts again. The methodology
is summarised in Fig. 1. This is the SSM best known methodology and although
Checkland has expressed a most flexible way of applying his ideas in his latest book
(Checkland and Scholes 1990), the 7-stage methodology is still the most convincing
and helpful account of the SSM enquiry.
The basic structure of SSM rests on the idea that in order to tackle real-world
situations, we need to make sure that the ‘real-world’ is separated from the ‘systems
thinking world’. This distinction is crucial for SSM because that assures us that we