To structure and organise the analysis a framework that generates theory was needed, but it was also necessary to retain the importance and use of practical strategies for change. This is because the aims and objectives of the research specifically require theory generation and implementation in practical ways. Soft systems thinking (SST) links both theory and “real world” evidence to create strategies for problem solving. This made it an ideal choice to structure and guide the analysis. Other approaches were considered, but lacked the linkages between theory and practice, which is a central aspect of this work. Elements of grounded theory were used in understanding and organising the raw data, but this is not a grounded theory study. Aspects have been taken and used where appropriate in a ‘toolbox’ style, as discussed by Charmaz (2006). The use of SST was also appropriate as it recognises and actively is involved in the construction of systems. Based upon the epistemological approach of this work, this was an essential component needed in the analysis.
Devised by Checkland (Bausch, 2002; Checkland and Scholes, 1990) SST set out to create a structured approach to dealing with problem situations and creating practical and achievable solutions. Developing from the “hard” systems thinking of mathematics and computer science, SST took a logical approach to real world problems (particularly those involving management) and created steps to understand and address issues. The steps focus on understanding what the problem is, who is involved in it, what purposeful activity would create change, how this could theoretically be achieved, what is happening in actuality, what changes could be made to achieve the theoretical ideal, and how this could be practically achieved. SST has been applied to numerous areas of study over the past thirty years with success (Checkland and Scholes, 1990; Vandenbroeck et al., 2014; Wilson and Van Haperen, 2015). Particular areas of usefulness have been management and health care (Checkland and Scholes, 1990; Leischow and Milstein, 2006; Vandenbroeck et al., 2014). Understanding complex systems and creating practical strategies for change is a key aspect of SST, thus making it highly applicable within this research.
Developing from research into management, Checkland (2000) required an approach to research that was structured, focused upon problem solving, and accounted for the complexity of the social world. SST was the resulting epistemology. In this work SST is being used solely to structure the analysis. If it had been considered earlier in the project it is likely that it would have played a larger role in creating the methodological approach. It was felt that there was a
need to have some further guiding principles for the analysis to avoid issues that can occur when using thematic analysis. When constructing themes from the data the wider context can be lost as to how these themes relate to and impact upon the real world (Bazeley, 2009). Additionally, there have been discussions within the literature about the need for qualitative research to do more than ‘identify themes’ (Bazeley, 2009), so SST is being used to further the analysis and generate a useful theory. This also satisfies the objectives of the research better than thematic analysis alone would.
To solve problems SST considers how systems of activity can be made purposeful (Checkland and Tsouvalis, 1997). This means that the aims and objectives of the system as a whole need to be taken into account and how to practically achieve them considered. SST recognises that systems are complex and encompass numerous groups, approaches and views. Recognising that certain processes that occur within systems also impact upon the system exemplifies the cyclic aspects of SST (Checkland and Winter, 2005; Checkland, 2000b). The process of SST is generally presented in seven stages. These are shown in Diagram 3.3. Stage 1 is the awareness of a problem situation, this awareness may occur from reading the literature, personal experiences etc. Stage 2 expands upon this by expressing the problem situation in terms of who is involved (actors), what the context of the problem is (culture), and what needs to be done to understand the problem. Stage 3 then defines purposeful activity for that system. To create a definition of purposeful activity certain aspects must be considered. These aspects are outlined by the acronym CATWOE, each letter of which is outlined in Table 3.2. By considering each aspect of CATWOE, a definition of purposeful activity can be created that considers who is involved in the system, what it is trying to achieve, the context in which it takes place and factors that affect the system as a whole. This allows any purposeful activity definition to be applicable to the system and potentially achievable.
C Customers The victims or beneficiaries of
the transformation process
A Actors Those who would do the
transformation process
T Transformation Process Purposeful activity that gives a desired output
W Weltanschauung The worldview that makes the
transformation process meaningful in this context
O Owners Those who could stop the
transformation process
E Environmental Constraints Elements outside the system which are taken as a given
Table 3.2: Definitions of CATWOE (Adapted from Checkland, 1999)
Once a purposeful activity definition has been created, stage 4 creates a conceptual model of how this could occur. This is an ideal version of the system and can be based upon theory, the literature, knowledge of the system and logic (Checkland and Tsouvalis, 1997; Checkland, 1999). This conceptual model is then contrasted with reality in stage 5. An understanding of the “real world” version of the system can again come from numerous sources, typically action research is used (Checkland, 2000b). This is not strict though and SST has been used with other methods, including case studies (Thomas, 2011). By comparing the conceptual version of the system with the actuality, it becomes clear where problems are occurring and what changes are necessary. Stage 6 outlines changes that are both desirable and feasible to elicit the transformation process. Stage 7 finally describes these changes in practical terms as specific actions to create improvement. This process can be seen in Diagram 3.3. It is important to note that the SST process is somewhat cyclic; once purposeful and achievable activities have been implemented the problem situation can be considered again to see if this was successful. The idea of having a continuous hermeneutic cycle in this way may be perceived as problematic, however, considering the social constructionist perspective and the continual changes within the YOS, it seems reasonable to be aware that there is not a static end point where the problem situation is solved permanently.
Diagram 3.3: Outline of SST (Taken from Checkland, 1999)
Using SST to structure the analysis is appropriate as it allows the case study to answer the research question by considering how social justice is affected by mental health provision. The process of SST leads to the creation of models of mental health provision within the YOS. By creating two models; one based in the experiences of mental health workers and the other a conceptual model based upon principles of social justice, and then comparing the two, the differences that are identified can be said to be due to the different levels of social justice within each model. This allows the impact of service provision upon social justice to be assessed, thus satisfying the research question. It must be noted that there are various definitions and conceptions of social justice, this research is using Rawls’s justice as fairness (Rawls, 1971) when referring to social justice.
In addition to understanding the impact of service provision upon social justice, SST also can be used to suggest solutions for the problem situation, meaning there is a practical aspect to the work. SST is also applicable considering the methodological framework of the research. SST is strongly based in the social constructivist tradition (Checkland and Scholes, 1990), understanding that theory is a construction that can affect systems implementation in the real world and subsequent interactions. Traditionally SST has been used with action research (Checkland and Scholes, 1990), but it is not limited to this. SST has been used with varying
methods of data collection and in numerous fields, with particular success when looking at organisations (Checkland and Scholes, 1990; Vandenbroeck et al., 2014). It has also been used positively in case study research (Thomas, 2011). The blending of theory and practice that is part of SST is also useful in this area as there have been long running debates in social work and social science about the need for theory in practical applications (Gomory, 2001; Thyer, 2001). The way in which SST works satisfies both sides of the debate to an extent, by using theory to create suggestions for improvement practitioners themselves do not necessarily have to spend time learning and understanding the abstract theory to utilise its benefits.
In addition to being used to structure the analysis within this work, SST has also impacted upon the writing and presentation of the research. Stages 1, 2 and 3 of the SST approach have largely been covered by the literature review, in which the problem situation was identified, expressed and purposeful actions identified. By adapting the literature review to express a problem situation in this way, the relationship between how the literature shaped the research and impacts upon it is clarified. Stages 4, 5, 6 and 7 form the analysis of the data. The approach to constructing conceptual and “real-world” models of mental health provision in the YOS is discussed below. These two models were then compared to understand disparities, what moves towards purposeful action are necessary, and what actions could be practically implemented for improvement. This means that the suggestions for practice include both short term goals that can be applied practically by YOTs and longer term aims which are more theoretical in nature and may require restructuring of the YOS or further consideration before they can be successfully applied. This means that not only can improvements be made quickly, but there is an ideal to work towards as a goal or standard.