TB871: Comparing CSH boundaries with SSM boundaries
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.
In my last post I outlined Critical System Heuristics (CSH). In this one, I want to compare and contrast the 12 boundary questions that make up CSH with the CATWOE mnemonic from Soft Systems Methodology (SSM).
As a reminder, the CATWOE mnemonic helps identify and analyse the different elements of a problem situation. It stands for:
- Client: the person or group who is the beneficiary of the system or who would be affected by the outcome of the system.
- Actor: individuals or groups who would carry out the activities within the system.
- Transformation: process that converts input into output, representing the main change or transformation the system is intended to achieve.
- Worldview: broader perspective or belief system that frames how the situation is understood, influencing the way the problem is perceived and solutions are judged.
- Owner: person or group who has the power to stop or change the system, often the one with control over resources or authority.
- Environment: external factors, constraints, and conditions that the system operates within and cannot control.
The 12 boundary questions of Critical Systems Heuristics (CSH) are designed to critically reflect on the boundaries of systems thinking and practice. These questions are grouped into four categories, each with three questions related to a specific aspect of boundary critique:
1. Sources of Motivation (Who gets what?)
- CSHq1: Beneficiary – Who ought to be the beneficiaries of the system? (who should benefit from the system’s design and operation?)
- CSHq2: Purpose – What ought to be the purpose of the system? (what should the system aim to achieve?)
- CSHq3: Measure of Success – What ought to be the measure of improvement? (how should success be measured?)
2. Sources of Control (Who owns what?)
- CSHq4: Decision Maker – Who ought to be the decision-maker? (who should have the authority to make decisions about the system?)
- CSHq5: Resources – What conditions of success ought to be controlled? (what resources are necessary for the system’s success?)
- CSHq6: Decision Environment – What conditions ought to be part of the decision environment? (what external factors influence the decision-making process?)
3. Sources of Knowledge (What does what?)
- CSHq7: Expert – Who ought to be considered as an expert? (who should be consulted for their knowledge and expertise?)
- CSHq8: Expertise – What ought to be the role of the expert? (what should the expert contribute to the system?)
- CSHq9: Guarantor – What ought to guarantee the success of the system? (what guarantees or safeguards are needed?)
4. Sources of Legitimacy (Who suffers what?)
- CSHq10: Witness – Who ought to be considered a witness to the system? (who should be consulted to provide an independent perspective?)
- CSHq11: Emancipation – What ought to be the conditions of emancipation? (what should be done to ensure that those affected by the system have a voice and are not marginalised?)
- CSHq12: Worldview – What ought to be the worldview underlying the system? (what fundamental values and assumptions should guide the system?)
If we map CATWOE against these 12 boundary questions, we end up with the following:
| CATWOE Term | Equivalent Boundary Judgement from CSH |
|---|---|
| Client (C) | Beneficiary (CSHq1) |
| Actor (A) | Decision Maker (CSHq4) |
| Transformation (T) | Purpose (CSHq2) |
| Worldview (W) | Worldview (CSHq12) |
| Owner (O) | Guarantor (CSHq9) |
| Environment (E) | Decision Environment (CSHq6) |
With my next tutor-marked assignment (TMA 03) coming up, comparing CATWOE with CSH boundaries can be useful to zoom in and out of systems. For example, CATWOE is useful for structuring thoughts around key elements, which gives a clear picture of how the system funcitons on a practical level. However, this can sometimes miss the bigger picture, such as the broader societal impact.
By adding in CSH, it means that I’m prompted to think more critically about the boundaries of the system — e.g. who benefits, who has the power, and whose perspectives are included/left out. Using CATWOE and CSH together makes for a more well-rounded analysis, not only addressing the operational aspects of the system, but which also takes into account its wider ethical dimensions.
Image: DALL-E 3 (prompt: Create a series of three 16:9 format image prompts to go with a blog post. Be really creative. For example, you could have a crying cat (CATWOE!) playing with a ball of wool which forms a kind of ‘boundary’ on the floor. Ensure you don’t use any text. Experiment with a range of illustrative styles.)
