7.

Chapter 7: Soft systems thinking

Exercise solutions for Management Science, ISBN 1-4039-4174-2
© H.G. Daellenbach and D.C. McNickle, 2005. Palgrave Publishers Ltd.

The exercises of this chapter do not have unique ‘correct’ solutions. The solutions shown below reflect
the authors subjectivity and should only be viewed as indicative.

1. (Note: The novice may find it easier to specify the CATWOE elements before developing the root
definition.)
Task-based root definition (task: border protection): A system controlled by Bill Dodge for border
protection to a satisfactory level by developing and implementing a staff shift schedule that balances
regular time and overtime duties to process arriving and departing air passengers while staying
within the available budget and staff ceiling.
C: customs staff, passengers
A: development and implementation of shift schedule
T: current inadequate (implied) border protection to high (satisfactory) level border protection
W: Protecting NZ borders is desirable (implied)
O: Bill Dodge
E: Flight arrival and departure schedule, passenger numbers, budget, staff ceiling
Issue-based root definition (issue: (excessive staff overtime): A system controlled by Bill Dodge to
achieve a satisfactory balance of staff regular time and overtime work acceptable to staff by
developing a shift schedule to provides satisfactory border protection with respect to the current
patterns of arriving and departing air passengers while staying within the available budget and staff
ceiling.
C: customs staff, passengers
A: develop shift schedule
T: unbalanced shift schedule (implied) with respect to RT and OT transformed into balanced
shift schedule
W: excessive overtime undesirable, disruptive on staff, some overtime desirable (implied)
O: Bill Dodge
E: fulfil border protection duties, flight arrival and departure schedule, passenger numbers,
budget, staff ceiling.
An alternative issue-based root definition could centre around the current inadequate staff ceiling.

2. Task-based root definition (task: develop/adapt software): A system controlled and used by analyst
for providing Bill Dodge with an efficient, user-friendly tool for exploring and evaluating staff shift
schedules by adapting existing MS/OR software or developing new software relevant for the
customs operations at CIA, while staying within the project budget agreed.
C: Bill Dodge, customs staff
A: adapting existing software or developing new software
T: current unwieldy manual system (implied) replaced by software
W: MS/OR tools/software should be efficient and user-friendly; efficient, user-friendly tools will
convince client to use them (both implied)
E: analyst’s MS/OR training (implied), software available, project budget.
 7.2

3. Conceptual model for blood bank root definition.

4. Conceptual model for the task-based root definition for Bill Dodge’s customs operation problem.
 7.3

Conceptual model for issue-based root definition for Bill Dodge’s customs operation problem.

5. Strategic map for father/son career dispute (exercise 8 Chap. 4 continued):

Notes: Where similar constructs in different maps show different, but strong wordings, or similar
constructs within a single map are combined into one, it is advisable to show both wordings (as a
contrast). This is done for the three constructs in the rounded boxes. Furthermore, in a small map
like this, even four links (in and/or out) may indicate that it is a core construct.
Emerging theme: the two concepts “Settle down” and “Get married now”, reflecting the father’s
concerns, and both acknowledged by a (dutiful) son. (Six links to and from it to other
constructs.)
Core constructs: “Find good job*Find good job with international consulting firm” (five links)
“Settle down” and “Get married now” each have four links and could be seen as crucial.
 7.4

6. (a) Uncertainties/ambiguities of type

UE: aircraft flight arrivals/departures, passenger numbers.
UV: Staff preferences about overtime/short shifts/part-time staff/flexible shifts.
Flexibility of union representatives.
Minimum percentage of flights that should be processed within government guidelines.
Priorities for/importance of various aspects of border protection (e.g. prevention of entry
of illegal aliens/drug, collection of customs duties, etc.).
Adequacy of staff ceiling.
UR: Relationships/interactions between decision areas (shift size vs overtime/special call-outs,
short shifts vs overtime/special call-outs, etc.) are well defined and involve little
uncertainty.
Relationships between decision areas and issues or between issues:
Effect of change in overtime volume/flexible shifts/short shifts/part-time staff on staff
recruitment/staff morale.
(b) Decision areas: regular shift start and end times; short shifts; flexible shifts; special call-outs;
shift size; overtime use; use of part-time staff; border protection: illegal aliens; border protection:
illegal items; meeting of government standards for processing arriving passengers; time to
execute other duties; staff ceiling.
(c) Decision areas diagram for customs staffing problem.

(d) Option tree for initial subset of decisions: shift start and end times, shift size, special call-outs,
overtime use.
 7.5

7. (a) Uncertainties/ambiguities of type

UE: Attrition rate of donors, size of blood collections.
Fraction of bad blood collected.
Percentage of each blood type collected
Response to donor drives.
Requests for blood.
Amount of blood reserved actually used.
Demand for various by-products and other blood products.
Effectiveness of blood as it ages.
UV: Preference structure between shortages and outdating of various stakeholders (surgeons,
patients, donors).
Willingness of surgeons to have their requests for blood questioned.
Preferences for how long crossmatched blood should be kept on reserve.
Surgeons’ preferences about maximum age of blood to be used for different types of
surgery.
UR: Effect of preferences on shortages and outdating on donors.
Effect of preferences about reserve time on shortages and outdating.
Exact effect of a change in reserve period on shortages and outdating.
(b) Decision areas: when and where to have donor drives and by what mode; amount of fresh blood
withdrawn from stock for other uses; length of reserve period; response to shortages
(emergency call-in of donors, cancellation of elective surgery, etc.); maximum age of blood used
for various types of operations; maximum age at which stocks of blood are outdated; provision
of help/feedback to surgeons on their record of requests vs actual use for various operations.
(c) Decision areas chart.
 7.6

8. Assumption rating chart for Bill Dodge’s customs staffing situation issues.
Note the rating deals with assumptions, i.e., how important they are and how certain the evaluator
is about their correctness (not the uncertainty of the events).
most certain

B A

least most
important important

C E
I
F
D
H

least certain

9. “What” questions address which issues should be addressed, which world views to consider and
the choice of values or preference structure, stakeholders to be considered, choice of boundaries
of narrow and wider system of interest. “How” questions deal with the best way to achieve a given
“what”, particularly those dealing with how to address (method, approach, procedure) a chosen
issue. “How” questions assume that relevant “What” questions have been addressed.
Point (1) of the paradigm underlying hard OR (page 113) implies that the major “what” questions
have been addressed, i.e., the issue to be looked at has been defined as to boundary choices,
objectives, and potential courses of action (the “hows), and that all that remains is to find the best
“how” to ‘solve’ the problem. In contrast, the soft OR paradigm (page 172) extols the stakeholders
to appreciate and possibly reconcile each others’ world views, decide on which set of issues to
address, etc., with the “how” aspect often elicited from the stakeholders involved in the process.

10. Unless the solution to a problem is culturally feasible or acceptable to various stakeholders, it may
never be properly implemented or its implementation is forced on the stakeholders, it may be
subverted, sabotaged, and ultimately abandoned. A solution that is not culturally feasible will
encounter serious obstacles to implementation. Examples: (1) The organization’s incentive structure
is inconsistent with the solution, hence users may feel penalized for using it (e.g., if university
promotions are based solely on published research, so any solutions to improve teaching that
encroach on research time have little chance to get properly implemented). (2) Top management
fails to give proper support to the solution for various reasons. (3) The solution is in conflict with
vested interests of some subsystems. (4) The changes are a radical departure from the prevailing
culture. (Section 8.1 on pages 205-7 discusses obstacles to implementation.)