LC 00452: verschil tussen versies
Geen bewerkingssamenvatting |
Geen bewerkingssamenvatting |
||
Regel 1: | Regel 1: | ||
The hard system approach, in particular System Dynamics (SD), was, and still is today, very successful in understanding complex problems involving interacting feedback loops. But hard systems thinking, or first-order cybernetics for that matter, is also criticized. Hard systems thinking is about prediction and control. One or more common, shared goals are assumed and by intervening in processes, these goals are achieved as good as possible although trade-offs have to be made in case of conflicting goals. The goals are typically set by those in power. This way of thinking is less suitable for systems in which human’s ideas and feelings matter. Humans differ in ideas about purpose and hold different norms, values and beliefs. Also, the way how to achieve a goal, even if shared, may differ. In short, worldviews may discord or even stronger may be in conflict. SD, or hard systems thinking in general, provide no ways to deal with these issues. | |||
Peter Checkland recognized the problems with hard systems thinking and established a radical shift to soft systems thinking. The result of his shift is Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), which is one of the most practiced systems approaches today. It entails shifting from modeling a real world situation to how people think about the situation. The real world is messy. By assuming that (most) people act purposefully, thinking about the world entails capturing people ideas about purpose and ways to act accordingly. | |||
<accesscontrol>Access:We got to move</accesscontrol> | |||
{{LC Book config}} | {{LC Book config}} | ||
{{Light Context | {{Light Context | ||
Regel 12: | Regel 16: | ||
|Show title=Ja | |Show title=Ja | ||
|EMM access control=Access:We got to move, | |EMM access control=Access:We got to move, | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{LC Book additional | {{LC Book additional | ||
|Preparatory reading= | |Preparatory reading= | ||
|Continue reading= | |Continue reading= | ||
}} | }} |
Versie van 28 mei 2020 12:49
The hard system approach, in particular System Dynamics (SD), was, and still is today, very successful in understanding complex problems involving interacting feedback loops. But hard systems thinking, or first-order cybernetics for that matter, is also criticized. Hard systems thinking is about prediction and control. One or more common, shared goals are assumed and by intervening in processes, these goals are achieved as good as possible although trade-offs have to be made in case of conflicting goals. The goals are typically set by those in power. This way of thinking is less suitable for systems in which human’s ideas and feelings matter. Humans differ in ideas about purpose and hold different norms, values and beliefs. Also, the way how to achieve a goal, even if shared, may differ. In short, worldviews may discord or even stronger may be in conflict. SD, or hard systems thinking in general, provide no ways to deal with these issues.
Peter Checkland recognized the problems with hard systems thinking and established a radical shift to soft systems thinking. The result of his shift is Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), which is one of the most practiced systems approaches today. It entails shifting from modeling a real world situation to how people think about the situation. The real world is messy. By assuming that (most) people act purposefully, thinking about the world entails capturing people ideas about purpose and ways to act accordingly.
Dit is een beveiligde pagina.
- Lees hiervoor:
- Lees hierna:
Referenties
- Truth and Method (Wahrheit und Methode), Hans-Georg Gadamer, 1 januari 1960.
- Systems Approaches to Managing Change: A Practical Guide, Martin Reynolds and Sue Holwell, Editors, Springer, The Open University UK, 1 januari 2010.
- Learnig for Action; a Short Definitive Account of Soft Systems Methodology and its use for Practitioners, Teachers and Students, Peter Checkland and John Poulter, Wiley, 1 januari 2006.
Hier wordt aan gewerkt of naar verwezen door: Colophon, Critical Systems Thinking, Foundation, In Conclusion, Uitvoering van het proces