Talk:Soft systems methodology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| WikiProject Systems (Rated Start-Class) | ||
|---|---|---|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles about the idea of systems. If you would like to help, you can edit this article or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| High | This article is on a subject of high importance within Systems. | |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
[edit] Renaming the article to Soft systems methodology
The current title of the article is Soft systems, and the name Soft Systems Methodology redirect to here. Now I like to rename the article to Soft systems methodology for the following reasons:
- The "soft system" is a concept within the "Soft systems methodology"
- The term "soft system" refers in general more to one kind of system, among the many kinds of systems already mentioned in the Wikipedia.
- The term "Soft systems methodology" refers in general more to a theory, or a set of methods and techniques. And this is the main subject of this article.
- Now Peter Checkland uses the term Soft Systems Methodology. But in Wikipedia it has become a habbit to write titles with only one capital, like Soft systems methodology. The term "Soft Systems Methodology" can be used in the article itselve.
Renaming I think will make this article more obvious. - Mdd 11:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Accommodation, not Consensus
In the [Methodology]] section, the statement "...the decision makers will arrive at consensus..." is wrong and has been changed to "...the decision makers will arrive at accommodations (or, exceptionally, at consensus)..."
In "Learning for Action", Checkland & Poulter, Wiley 2006, p54, the authors state that; "When describing the discussion/debate in SSM, much - perhaps most - of the secondary literature about the approach makes a remarkable and fundamental error. It assumes that the purpose of the discussion/debate is to find consensus. It is a 'remarkable' mistake in that anyone who had read the primary literature with care would not make it, and it is 'fundamental' because, in order to cope with the complexity of human affairs, SSM uses a much more subtle idea than 'consensus'. It works with the idea of finding an accommodation among a group of people with a common concern. This does not abandon the possibility of consensus rather it subsumes it in the more general idea of accommodation."
Chris.hoggarth 08:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for this explaination. To be honest I didn't understand the recent changes you made in the article untill I read it now. I think we should copy this explaination into the text (with a reference) so this will become more clearer to all readers. - Mdd 11:03, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
