TB871: Introduction to Strategic Options and Development Analysis (SODA)

Note: this is a post reflecting on one of the modules of my MSc in Systems Thinking in Practice. You can see all of the related posts in this category. 

---

Moving into the Block 4 Tools stream for this module means being introduced to Strategic Options and Development Analysis (SODA). There is no Wikipedia page (yet) for this, which is a shame because I found the chapter on it in the course text, Systems Approaches quite hard-going. As a result, I’ve reviewed a recorded tutorial and done a lot of prompting of GPT-4o. Both have been incredibly useful in helping me understand what’s going on.

It seems that, fundamentally, SODA is about addressing complex problems using interviews and cognitive mapping. This surfaces not only goals, key issues, and options, but also affective issues and group dynamics. Ultimately, the SODA approach produces transitional objects for use when setting organisational strategy.

The why, what, how approach of SODA can be recursively applied to the book chapter, resulting in the following table:

Hierarchical Structure of Cognitive Map	Summary of SODA as an Action Plan from Chapter 4 in ‘Systems Approaches‘
Why? (goals)	1. avoid ambiguity in any strategic action plan
	2. engage more meaningfully with stakeholders regarding strategic action.
What? (strategic directions)	1. reveal core issue(s) – for individuals and/or for an organisation – in the situation of interest in terms of taking meaningful strategic action
	2. highlight options, causes and constraints perceived within the situation
	3. reveal significant feedback loops perceived operating within the situation.
How? (potential options)	1. practise concepts and technique
	2. practise cognitive mapping
	3. practise cause mapping
	4. practise SODA analyses
	5. practise group problem structuring and resolution.

SODA diagrams look similar to the following (The Open University, 2020a):

The following example from the module materials (The Open University, 2020b) give an example which might start with the desire to ‘Enhance equality and diversity in the workplace’ which can be seen in the centre of the diagram:

The ellipses (…) are used to indicate ‘rather than’ before an opposite meaning. This is important, as there might be more than one alternative. For instance, in the above example, we could have:

1. Enhance equality and diversity in the workplace … leave unchanged
2. Enhance equality and diversity in the workplace … adopt superficial policies
3. Enhance equality and diversity in the workplace … implement a different progressive policy

There’s a big difference between choosing to do (1) i.e. something as opposed to nothing, as opposed to (2) i.e. pay lip service, and (3) use the time/attention/budget to bring in another policy.

Using SODA in practice

The process of using SODA begins with individual interviews to gather personal views and insights. These interviews are converted into cognitive maps, which visually represent the thoughts, goals, and concerns of each participant. These individual maps are then combined into a group map, serving as a tool for facilitating discussions and negotiations. This combined map helps visualize value systems, strategic issues, and potential options, ensuring all stakeholders’ perspectives are considered.

Once the cognitive mapping is complete, the group uses the map to explore and analyze the problem from multiple angles. This involves several types of analyses:

1. Domain Analysis: understanding the broader context and relevant stakeholders.
2. Central Analysis: focusing on key strategic issues and central nodes in the map.
3. Cluster Analysis: grouping related concepts to reveal significant themes.
4. Hierarchical Set Analysis: organising goals and strategies hierarchically to understand their relationships and dependencies.

These analyses help identify core issues, reveal significant feedback loops, and highlight options, causes, and constraints perceived within the situation. Specialised software can be used to help with analysis, especially with extensive maps containing over 80 concepts.

When is SODA useful?

SODA can prove beneficial in various scenarios, when:

• A group of stakeholders or an organisation needs to make collective sense of a change.
• An individual is reviewing a situation of interest without a clear way forward.
• There is a need to surface and organise the views and needs of stakeholders.
• It is important to make explicit the cognitive processes of a group of stakeholders.

By offering a structured approach to problem-solving, SODA helps create a shared understanding among participants and supports the development of actionable strategies that reflect the diverse perspectives and needs of all involved.

Analysing cognitive/causal maps

SODA can create insights into a cognitive or causal map by examining various aspects of its structure. These analyses are most useful when dealing with large maps containing numerous concepts. Conducting these analyses manually can be laborious and time-consuming, hence the use of software to handle large amounts of information efficiently. These tools help identify feedback loops and other critical relationships that might be missed through manual inspection, providing useful insights that inform decision-making and strategic planning.

‘Laddering Up’ and ‘Laddering Down‘

Laddering up and laddering down, as shown in the diagram above (The Open University, 2020c) are techniques in SODA to explore and clarify goals, strategic directions, and potential options within a cognitive map.

Laddering up involves asking “Why is that important?” to move from specific actions or options up to broader goals and strategic directions. This process helps understand the underlying reasons and higher-level objectives that justify particular strategies or actions. For example, if a specific option is “Collaborate with others,” laddering up would involve asking why collaboration is important, which might reveal a higher goal such as “Building relationships” or “Pooling resources.”

On the other hand, laddering down involves asking “How might that be done?” to move from broad goals and strategic directions down to specific, actionable options. This technique breaks down high-level objectives into practical steps that can be implemented. For instance, if the strategic direction is “Building relationships,” laddering down would involve identifying specific actions that could achieve this, such as “Collaborate with others” or “Develop equality awareness resources and learning events.”

By laddering up and down, SODA facilitates a comprehensive exploration of the problem space, linking high-level goals with actionable options and ensuring that all strategic actions align with the overall objectives. This technique can help enhance clarity, focus, and coherence in strategy development and decision-making.

Benefits and Drawbacks of SODA

Benefits

SODA offers several advantages for organisations and individuals tackling complex, messy problems. One of the primary benefits is its ability to capture and integrate diverse perspectives through cognitive mapping, which ensures that all stakeholder views are considered. This inclusive approach leads to a more comprehensive understanding of the problem and encourages a sense of ownership and commitment among participants. Additionally, SODA facilitates structured negotiation and strategy development, helping groups identify viable options and make informed decisions. By linking high-level goals with actionable steps, SODA provides a clear pathway from problem identification to solution implementation, enhancing the effectiveness of strategic planning efforts.

Another significant benefit of SODA is its focus on both the content and process dynamics of group work. The methodology not only addresses the technical aspects of problem-solving but also pays attention to the emotional, political, and social dimensions within the group. This holistic approach helps to build consensus, manage conflicts, and ensure that the strategies developed are realistic and acceptable to all stakeholders. Moreover, the use of cognitive mapping software can streamline the analysis process, making it easier to handle large amounts of information and identify critical relationships and feedback loops.

Drawbacks

Despite its many benefits, SODA also has some limitations. The cognitive mapping and aggregation process can be time-consuming, especially in large groups or when dealing with particularly complex issues. Conducting detailed interviews, creating individual maps, and synthesising these into a comprehensive group map requires significant effort and resources. This can be a drawback for organisations with limited time or capacity for extensive analytical work.

Additionally, the success of SODA heavily relies on the skills of the facilitator. Effective facilitation is crucial for managing group dynamics, ensuring active participation, and guiding the analysis process. Inexperienced facilitators may struggle to keep discussions focused and productive, potentially leading to less effective outcomes.

Another potential drawback is the need for specialised software to analyse large cognitive maps. While tools can greatly enhance the efficiency and depth of analysis, they also require technical expertise and may involve additional costs. Organisations that lack the necessary software or skills may find it challenging to fully leverage the benefits of SODA.

Finally, while SODA provides valuable insights and supports decision-making, it does not replace sound judgment. There is always a risk that the focus on mapping and analysis could overshadow practical considerations and common sense, leading to overcomplicated or impractical solutions.

Conclusion

SODA is a powerful methodology for addressing complex problems, capturing diverse perspectives, and facilitating effective strategy development. Through cognitive mapping and structured analysis, SODA helps organisations and individuals understand and navigate intricate issues. The techniques of laddering up and laddering down enhance the process by linking high-level goals with practical, actionable options.

Despite some challenges, such as the need for skilled facilitation and specialised software, the benefits of SODA in creating shared understanding and developing actionable strategies are substantial. By integrating both technical and social dimensions of problem-solving, SODA ensures that all stakeholder views are considered, fostering ownership and commitment. Whether facing organisational changes or individual challenges, SODA offers valuable tools for effective decision-making and strategic planning.

References

• The Open University (2020) ‘4.1.1 An overview of SODA’, TB871 Block 3 People stream [Online]. Available at https://learn2.open.ac.uk/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=2261492&section=2.1 (Accessed 12 July 2024).
• The Open University (2020b) ‘4.1.2 Core concepts and ideas of SODA’, TB871 Block 4 Tools stream [Online]. Available at https://learn2.open.ac.uk/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=2261492&section=2.2 (Accessed 12 July 2024).
• The Open University (2020c) ‘Understanding Tools from Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA)’, TB871 Block 4 Tools stream [Online]. Available at https://ou.adobeconnect.com/p8srgd047yoz/ (Accessed 12 July 2024).