My Two Cents Worth on How OR Should Develop

Chapman, Chris

doi:10.1057/jors.1992.98

Cited by 21 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bryant, 8 for example, argues that a focus on techniques is inappropriate, suggesting instead that what sets soft' OR apart from what he terms`conventional' OR is a`F F F self-conscious emphasis on the process aspects of a consultancy intervention.' Chapman 9 argues along similar lines, advocating that`F F Fsoft OR methods should be embodied in the OR method, to the extent that they are relevant and the OR practitioners involved are able to apply them. ' Soft Systems Methodology 2,10 is seen as one of the most commonly applied manifestations 4,6 of soft OR.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating soft OR: some reflections on an apparently ‘unsuccessful’ implementation using a Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) based approach

Connell

2001

Journal of the Operational Research Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper re¯ects on a case study in which a soft OR problem structuring approach, based on Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), was used to help in the design of an information system for health service users providing care in the community in a part of the South and West Health Region in the UK. The paper re¯ects on why an apparentlỳ successful' structuring led to an apparently`unsuccessful' implementation. As part of this re¯ective process, the paper makes a contribution to the soft OR literature by reviewing some of the approaches taken in the literature to the evaluation of success of problem structuring using soft OR. This review reveals a lack of evaluative criteria, a lack of clarity over the identi®cation of users, and a failure to differentiate criteria associated with`structuring' and implementation' issues. An evaluative framework is proposed, which is applied retrospectively to the case study.

show abstract