Root Definitions
A Root Definition is a structured description of a system (which is relevant
to the problem). It is a clear statement of activities which take place
(or might take place) in the organisation being studied.
It is structured in such a way as to enable modelling the system. There
are two main kinds of Root definitions in SSM language:
- the Primary Task Root Definition
- the Issue based Root Definition.
Primary Task Root Definitions concern processes which the organisation
being studied performs as a part of their regular activities (for example,
in an oil company, the process of refinement of the oil).
Issue Based Root Definitions concern processes which are rare or one-off
occurrences (such as a management restructuring).
A properly structured root definition has three parts, referred to as
what, how and why.
The 'what' is the immediate aim of the system, the 'how' is the means
of achieving that aim, and the 'why' is the longer term aim of the purposeful
activity.
The following formulation should always be used:
A system to
By
In order to
For example, if one were to construct a root definition for constructing
this page, it might look like this:
"A system to contribute to a suite of web pages concerning Soft
Systems Methodology by writing and designing a web page explaining root
definitions, in order to contribute to the resources available for the
teaching and learning of SSM."
In this root definition,
- theWHAT is 'to contribute to a suite of web pages concerning Soft Systems Methodology'
;
- the HOW is 'by writing and designing a web page explaining root definitions', and
- the WHY is 'in order to contribute to the resources available for the teaching and learning of SSM
This is not the only root definition which could be constructed for the
activity of constructing this page. It is a root definition derived from
just one way of looking at the activity.
The practitioner should derive the root definition from the information
gained from within the organisation. That is to say, the root definition
should be a description of what the organisation believes itself to be
doing.
It is important that the root definition is internally consistent (for
example, the 'how' must describe a process which will (or should) result
in the 'what', and so on).
A common mistake is to include more than one purposeful activity in a
single root definition: the practitioner should ensure that there is just
one what, one why and one how in each RD, and that:
- the how could reasonably be seen as a way of achieving the 'what'
aim
- the 'what' could reasonably be seen as a way of achieving or contributing
to the 'why' aim
CATWOE
The CATWOE analysis is about thinking about the various positions which
individuals take up in regard to the specific system described in the
root definition.
The categories are:
- C (customer) who would be the victims/beneficiaries of the
purposeful activity
- A (actors) who would do the activities
- T (transformation process)
- W (weltanschauung) what view of the world makes this definition
meaningful?
- O (owner) who could stop this activity?
- E (environmental constraints) what constraints in its environment
does this system take as given?
For the example Root Definition given above, this is a possible CATWOE:
- C: the users of this page
- A: the author of this page
- T: requirement for a page describing Root Definitions -> that requirement
met
- W: that the suite of which this page is a part will contribute to the
resources available for the teaching and learning of SSM
- O: the body funding this project (the OR Society); the Head of the
Department in which this project is based (Management Science, Lancaster
University)
- E: the restrictions of web technology; the time available to compose
the page
The process of doing the CATWOE analysis is vital to the process of thinking
around the various positions and worldviews which are involved in any
particular situation.
The 3 E's
For each Root definition, the practitioner should understand the 3 E's.
If the system as described were to be implemented in the real world,
what measures would one use to establish whether the system was efficacious,
efficient, and effective?
Answering this question involves defining the criteria by which you would
judge the:
- E1: Efficacy (criteria for establishing whether the system works in
its own terms: does it do what it says it does)
- E2: Efficiency (criteria for establishing whether the system is working
with the minimum use of resources: divide the amount of output by the
amount of resources used)
- E2: Effectiveness (criteria for establishing whether the system is
meeting the longer term aim: is it worth doing at all?)
Back to the top
