Notes on-Systems Approaches to Managing Change:

Part 4Strategic Options Development & Analysis

SODAA Practical Guide

Eds. – Martin Reynolds & Sue Holwell

Chapter 4 –Strategic Options

Development and Analysis –

SODA

Fran Ackermann and Colin Eden

AbstractSODA – a graphical representation of a problem so as to be able to:

• explore options

• follow possible outcomes

• arrive at negotiated agreement for resolution.

Picture is created using ‘language of problem owner, therefore accessible, encourages reflection and learning. Graphics can be ‘rough and ready’ or designed using ‘causal mapping’ software.

• Aimed at group learning therefore includes the facilitation of events.

• Uncover blockages to change by engaging with the social dimensions of the problem in a visual way.

• Concept is derived from the fields of ‘cognitive psychology’ and social negotiation

4.1 SummaryProblematic situations addressed by a group or individual can be explored fully using the SODA approach. The mapping techniques have a number of rules:

• The problem is placed in a central position

• Arrows moving away from the central concern are ‘objectives’

• Arrows pointing in toward the central problem are constraints.

• ‘-’ signs at the head of an arrow are negative consequences

Maps grow – unfold, as the exploration deepens. This gives a more holistic view of the situation and because it is participatory, those involved feel connected to the process, see it as ‘procedurally just’ and emotionally buy-into the actions.

• By widening the scope and gaining participation it creates ownership of the situation and helps protect the system being tinged with the traps of dogmatism or reductionism.

Two skills for the consultant:

1. Being confident in the facilitation process

2. Adoption of the ‘framework’ for the construction of a model which comprises the content – those issues, problems, strategies & options explored

4.1.1 What Does It Look Like (Basic Characteristics / Attributes)?

Four interacting perspectives

• The individual

• The organisation, groups and negotiated enterprises

• The consulting practice

• Technology – its role and use in the construct of visual representations

• Individual draws on the social psychology of problem solving and the use of cognitive mapping as a means to explore the concepts and make sense of the world. Actions then follow once meaning, which will vary from person to person, has been established . This individual understanding and contribution is allowed to flourish in the SODA model.

• Organisations – consisting of teams with particular interests in specific outcomes. Communication style and tone to negotiate and persuade only accentuated the complexity. These coalitions can be better understood and realised through the process.

• Consulting practice - an instrument of facilitation for the negotiation of consensus and gaining commitment. Consultant is accountable to the designing and negotiation of this.

• Technology and tools – causal mapping and associated software ‘Decision Explorer’ as the means for modelling and analysis

4.2 Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA): A Detailed Exploration

The foundation of the work is thatof seeking multiple perspectives tograsp the detail of a particularsituation or problem.

• Everybody brings differentexperiences and wisdom to aproblem. SODA is the tool formanaging process and content.

• This is a scientific approach sothat managers experiment withtheories and apply them to realorganisational problems.

• Exploration of problems throughthe use of the ‘cognitive mappingprocess’ – the analysis of the map

4.2.1 Introduction to the SODA method

4.2.1.1 Where has SODA been Used?

• It is a pretty flexible tooland is used extensively acrossall sizes of organisation, public/ private, for profit / not-for-profit, large or small. It is usedby all layers of managementfor multiple reasons.

• The process can take aslittle as half a day, on anurgent problem to a numberof days for a full exploratoryworkshop.

• It is also a useful tool towork through an individuals’problem

4.2.1.2 Conceptual Background

The basis of the methodology relates to the work of George Kelly in the 1950’s. In essence we develop ideas and models from how things happen and the experiences we gain to inform our future actions and assumptions. This is the Personal Construct Theory (PCT) of the way things work.

This is then related to organisational behaviour and augmented further through the approach of the consultant

4.2.1.3 The Theoretical FrameworkTo make sense of our world we compareand contrast events, observations and factsetc. to help us ‘navigate the future’ (p141).Kelly refers to this information as a ‘body ofknowledge’ and states that it is finite andmade up of bipolar constructs. A construct isdifferent from a concept in that a constructhas opposites or contrasting perspectives(http://www.centrepcp.co.uk/whatis.ht,Accessed 04.07.17).

Good and bad perceptions of the sameevent happily exist and are necessary. Thereis no ‘good’ without an awareness of ‘bad’.

To understand ourselves we have tounderstand why we have done what wehave done. Equally then to understandothers we have to ask the same question ofthem, we have to put ourselves in theirshoes and ask. We are active beings, notinert objects buffered from state to state,we are therefore alive and engaged.

4.2.1.3 The Theoretical framework (Cont.) • The 5 corollaries (inferences) of PersonalConstruct Theory PCT for use with SODA and theproblem solving framework

• Construction – a model of experience thatleads to a worldview

• Organisation – as individuals we place anorder of importance on our constructs. Atthe top are our values/beliefs and lowerdown issues, option and constraints. Placingthese in a hierarchy adds to our sense-making

• Individuality – everyone has a differentinterpretation of the same event. How weengage with something can be very differentto how others see it, good or bad

• Commonality – teams develop a sharedcommon language through a deepinterpretation of events.

• Sociality – decision makes need to find ‘acommon path’ between all parties so thatconsensus is an acceptable outcome

4.2.1.4 The Conceptual FrameworkSocial and political interactions in anorganisation: rational analysis is never enough tocarry through change. We need people to buy-into change and this does not happen inisolation. Organisations are hotbeds of coalitions,power plays and politics. Knowing people’s rolesand levels is an important piece of stakeholdermanagement.

Role of consultant/facilitator: two importantaspects;

• A consultant raises the expectation ofchange

• Act of talking changes people’s minds,reframes the problem and delivers thesolution

Incremental nature and development of strategy:big change big resistance – gain commitment forchange through involvement and communication

4.2.1.5 The MethodProcess, content, context and outcomes:

Process is about;

• Power, politics, people and personalities

Content is about;

• Operational research skills used in the capture, structuring of and analysingof problem statements

Process informs content and content will inform process in a loop.

E.g.. Certain data is at the heart of an issue so it is the appropriate place to startthe SODA. Therefore content is informing process design.

Alternatively, a particularly thorny issues is identified so that starting here is notthe option because of motional fragility. Here process is informing content.

Context is also central. Decision maker should consider

a) If sufficient resources exist to manage the change

b) If buy-in for the change is across the board

Context is elaborated through discussion of the problem, it is made moretangible through the beliefs and the values driving the change

Outcomes – explore the aims and objectives of the intervention to assess SODAsuitability.

Process Management

Content Management

informs

informs

4.2.1.6 The Technique• Cognitive mapping and causal mapping:

• The representation of an issue and the way that the individual perceives, interprets and the world around them are the primary outputs of the mapping process. It is wholly subjective and creates insights into a particular persons actions and behaviours.

• Maps are the networks that show multiple facets including concerns, themes, dilemmas and contradictions. Cognitive maps are the focus on an individual.

• Causal maps are the amalgamation of cognitive maps. Group cognition is a problem since the amalgamation of individual perceptions even if they are all the same, do not sum to a single piece of cognition but are rather “fragments of a number of different cognitions”.

4.2.1.7 The Tool

• Use ‘Decision Explorer’ to manage ideas:

• Piece of software designed for the purpose of creating and managing maps.

• Rapid search functionality and working as a relational database

• Helps to manage complexity rather than just simplify it

4.2.2 SODA and Cognitive / Cause Mapping4.2.1.1

Mapping: What is it?

• Structures thinking by capturing thoughts, arguments andissues – turns messes into more defined areas to work on

• It presents ideas, which can be messy, in a graphical wayavoiding linear lists

• It allows for a rough analysis to be done - an overview toseen and the focus identified.

• It can be shared more easily than an A4 sheet of words

• You get the sense of distance from the problem, anobjective overview

• Everything is at different levels, so you can drill down intothe map or work at a higher level. You gain ‘wisdom’ andinsight as well as capture tacit knowledge

• It promotes active listening especially when conductinginterviews. You have to capture points in such a way thatthey have immediate meaning and impact

• It gives you clarity and allows you to move on

4.2.2.2 Building a Map: How a Map is Constructed

• Kelly’s Personal Construct Theory states

that each construct has two poles which

sit at the extremes (bipolar), we need to

have clarity over both the content and

context of the construct.

• Attribute Maps help in visualising this

process. In the example in the book the

central tenet is what makes a teacher

‘good rather than other teachers’ . This

debate sits at the heart of the map.

Surrounding this issue are the attributes

expressed as traits and always with the

‘rather than’ view.

• ‘Rather than’ expressed as ‘…’

• Each contrast adds depth to

understanding

• The attributes surrounding the

statement is the ‘context’ or someone’s

perspective

Good…other teachers

Excited by her / his subject rather than just do it for a job

Organised rather than chaotic

Informal rather than severe

Articulate … poor communicator

4.2.2.2 Building a Map: How a Map is Constructed (Cont.)• Now consider therelationship. Maps tell astory and the arrows havecausality. So ‘A may lead toB’, or Option A may lead tooutcome B’ or this ‘MeansA might lead to B’.

• The ‘negative’ sign atthe arrow head turns the‘leads to’ into ‘may NOTlead to’ as such we capturepositive and negativestatements which indicatea ‘dilemma’

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping• The map opposite (lifted from the text) deals withthe implementation of a new information system in auniversity. Shaded and unshaded denote input fromdifferent perspectives. In this case the shaded entriesare from the IT staff and italics from academics. Thenumbers only represent simple ‘tags’ to allowstatements to be shifted around. For the arrows read ‘may lead to’ so in 62,63,68 and 37 read the followingargument; being able to archive old data would lead toavoiding clogging up the system which would enablefaster and easier access to the information andtherefore lecturers would be able to access studentrecords during counselling sessions.

• The dotted arrows with numbers on them indicatethat on the ‘whole’ map there are links that add to thispoint. You can therefore show as much or as little ofthe information at this level as you want

• The hierarchy of the map places goals and values inboxes at the top and assertions at the bottom indotted boxes

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline one:Separate sentences into distinct phrases:

• Example “We need to expand our business intonew areas and, therefore we must focus on buildingstrategic alliances, and tapping and developing ourskills base”

• Four linked statements

• Expand our business into new areas

• Build strategic alliances

• Tap into our skills

• Develop our skills

The reason why we split the “tapping and developing”into two is that both activities have differentramifications in respect of outcomes.

Other paired phrases including “improve and increase’

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline Two:Build up the hierarchy:

Laddering up and downthe flow of theargument. Think of thisas expanding andfocusing in the enquiry.“How might this bedone” is laddering downwhilst “why do you wantto increase activity’ isladdering up. Expansivethinking an narrowingthinking to bring focus

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline three:

Identify the option and outcome (meansand ends) within each pair of ideas.

• What is the ‘direction of the link’? The direction islinked to the action and outcome so ‘do you do x tolead to y’ or ‘do y to lead to x’. Consider ‘quench yourthirst’ and ‘buy a bottle of Coke’ – for most buying abottle of Coke is just one option of many. Therefore doyou buy the Coke to quench your thirst? Or have thirstto buy a bottle of Coke. Clearly the arrow would gofrom the ‘Have a thirst’ to ‘buy a bottle of Coke’ withother arrows showing possible alternative solutions

The text says this is relative to a belief system – and achain of argument but it is not yet clear to me howthis works

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline Four:

Watch out for values / beliefs /goals and strategic / key issuesand mark them.

• Values and goals are statementsand seen as good

• Strategic are key issues that willhave a lot of activity aroundthem – carry emotions

• No prescribed way of marking up‘key issues’ but you can use an *to highlight their importance. Ininterviews subjects bodylanguage is a good indicator forstresses and points of inflection

• Values/beliefs/goals – circle them

Make sure our customers leave the centre with a smile

on their faces

Capture through film the dogs at play; fun moments

to share and keep *

Increase likelihood of customer being relaxed and ready for a good evening

Goal

Strategic issue

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline Five:

Add meaning by workingthe statement in imperativeform

• Make statements actionorientated

• Helps make sure the correctlinks are captured

• Where they don’t have verbsassociated to them they arelikely facts or assertions

• Place at the base of thediagram as they can appear asexplanations for a particularaction

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline Six:Use a person’s own language

• Avoid the temptation toparaphrase

• Capture exactly what was saidby the subject

• Map must be recognisable tothe interviewee

• Paraphrasing might place adifferent emphasis ormeaning to the key points

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline Seven:• Capture contrasting poles

• Not all statements will be bipolar from the onset

• Statements may well be followed with an elaboration of the point rather than a statement of the opposite

• Be alert to this situation – ask the ‘rather than…’ question

• In the case of the Pet Centre ‘We need to be seen as the “guardians” of our client’s pets

• Now ask – ‘rather than…’ – reply could be ‘simply than the keepers’

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline Eight:Tidy up the map – look for isolated

statements and examining the heads and

tails

Orphan statements, those without

connections may indicate something not

thought about. Follow up with interviewee –

“I noticed that you mentioned ‘X’ – can you

elaborate?” leads to greater understanding of

the position on the map as well as increases

‘surfacing’.

Check the end-points – the head with no links

leaving from them, are goals/values – if not

more questioning may be needed

Check tails – those statements with no links

going into them, to see if they can be further

developed. Are there any other options

4.2.2.3 Guidelines for Mapping (Cont.) Guideline Nine:

Consider the following tips

• Use a blank sheet of paper

• Keep it portrait rather than landscape

• Start two thirds up the page

• Write in rectangular blocks of text

• Use a self-propelling pencil

4.2.2.4 Have a Go!First attempt

The areas which I found difficult related to the objectiveof the map, what was I trying to communicate and was Itrying to follow a particular path?

There were areas of confusion, the primary goal couldhave been seen as two but separate goals, but as theauthor of the piece did not make that distinction –neither should I. Second, the area of developing anddelivering were not sequential they were separate, so theneeds to develop a strategy should have had differentactions leading into it as should the ‘delivery’.

Overall it is hard to do this because you are stepping intothe text and have no means to question the relationships.During an interview this would not be the case.

Two personal goals:

1. To use mapping as the ‘first tool’ of analysis in anysituation

2. To practice ‘on-the-hoof’ mapping at veryopportunity

4.2.2.7 Getting the wording right

• Use between 6-8 words foreach statement

• Avoid duality of meaning bylooking for phrases such as; “inorder to”, “due to”, “through”as they imply a link

• Follow the who/what/whentrail

• Avoid ‘perspective’ givingwords like ‘should’, ‘ought’,‘must’, etc.

• Adopt ‘action’ orientationwords

• Reflect and mirror thelanguage of the person, groupor piece

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

Curtesy of Bryson et al, Visible Thinking

4.2.2.8 Direction of the Arrows• Links should be causal; ‘means to an end’, ‘options tooutcomes’

• Link a specific into a generic statement e.g. Thegeneric ‘Privatise prison services’ leads to options;‘Privatise catering’, ‘Privatise cleaning’ and ‘Privatisemaintenance’

• Assertions or facts appear at the bottom of a map.The imply ‘action is necessary’ – and action appearshigher

• AVOID double headed arrows as these imply thedynamic situation of ‘feedback’

• How to manage feedback loops

• How does A lead to B by adding in a statementbetween the two.

• How does B lead to A – again add a statement betweenthe two

• The fours statements need to make sense

The goal of a map is to pull ‘a mess into a system ofinteracting issues’ P155

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.2.2.9 Developing Practice• Map another piece of text, a newspaper piece orsuch like which has clear area of concern, andcaptures the values and options.

• Focus on a personal area of practice, capturethe main issue using an action word, and let thelinks and connections fly. From connectionsextended ideas may well emerge, note these down.Ask “why are these issues and are they supportiveor resistant to the desired outcome?” – ladderingup. “What are the options and constraints youface?” – laddering down. Goal is to understandsome of the consequences of our options. Use theguidance to help bring focus to the approach.

• Find a subject and interview them about aconcern or issues that they face. Make sure this is acurrent issue and not a past one as a past issue thesubject will present solutions. Build a map,remember use their words, and from the map and,discuss the connections and options that emerge.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC

4.2.3 Reflections on Mapping: Some Hints and Tips

• Don’t worry about the appearanceof the map. Chances are that themap is a representation, at first, of amessy situation.

• Capture their language. If the map isshown to someone with theirlanguage, their phrases and a clearidea of issues, options, constraintsand catalysts, then it can validate thediscussion points and show that youhave actively listened to them. Atworst they will have a starting pointfor exploration and , at best, gainreal insight and a solution.

• Sit at right-angles to the interviewee.This way they can witness themapping process but you do notinvade their space.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND

4.2.3 Reflections on Mapping: Some Hints and Tips (Cont.)

Capture the constructs/statement first. It iseasier to map from the constructs / statementsrelating to the issue because you gain claritybefore drawing in links. If it statements are veryobviously linked then draw the arrows earlier.

Use natural breaks productively. Build rapport,review and reflect on the work so far, validatewhere things are going. Use this information bywriting down feedback before it is forgotten.

Build in review time. Allow at least five minutesat the end of an interview t g through the map.Start by recounting the primary issues – lots oflinks in and out; check for ‘orphans’ – isolatedlinks; review the goals (statements that are‘good in their own right’) – those with no arrowsleaving them. Are they accurate goals or do theyneed further ‘laddering-up’? By going throughthe map you gain additional validation anddemonstrate how the mapping works.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.3 Reflections on Mapping: Some Hints and Tips (Cont.)

• Consider the shape of the map. Is it broad but shallow? This suggests a wide set of issues but with no length chains of argument. Is it narrow and deep? In which case could suggest in-depth knowledge of the subject but a focused part of the business

• Be inclusive and capture the interviewees key issues not yours. If you are interviewing a selection of people excluding a recurring issue because it has appeared before could create anxiety from the interviewees expectations but you could be denigrating the importance of this issue to the group.

• Start with broad, open questions. Such as ‘How could you move yourself forward in your career in the next three years?’ Focus on the concerns, constraints and opportunities which then lead to a series of follow up questions. How might this issue be resolved? – laddering in. Don’t prepare a load of questions as these will emerge from the process.

• Carefully introduce the process. Don’t get lost in confusion explaining the process to the interviewee. Avoid the term ‘cognitive mapping’ because that comes with a connotations that lead to anxiety. Once they see you taking notes in this way they may ask what you are doing? Simply explain it is a way of collecting information that beats a list. Cocreation of the map is the goal.

• Manage multiple opposite poles. This is when it emerges that there are a number of possible outcomes and solutions to a repeating issue. Make sure you note each outcome and the separateness of them

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.3 Reflections on Mapping: Some Hints and Tips (Cont.)A few final pointers:

• Do not learn ALL of the guidelines at once

• Follow a process that simplifies; statements,links, causality, action orientation

• Statements should not be two words – themore complete the better theunderstanding

• Use lower case handwriting rather thancapitals

• You ae producing a map that belongs to theinterviewee, therefore you are looking tocreate meaning for them not for you. Go forrichness and depth as much as you can.

4.2.3.1 How Does Mapping Compare with Other Graphical Processes ?

Cause Mapping Mind Maps Influence Diagrams

Nodes Formal guidelines for capturing material: Action orientated 6-8 words

No formality: Normally 1 word

Formal guidelines: variables

Links Formal guidelines for linking: i.e. hierarchy in causality

No formality Formal guidelines for linking: flows of single unit of analysis

Size Aims to build up a rich and detailed picture. Links to maps outside current map and inside new maps

Usually small Focuses on stocks, flows and intervening variables

Analysis Open to analysis –detects feedback and identifies central statements

No analysis usually carried out

Analysis crucial

Format Graphical format – easier to remember, understand underlying structure and engage with ideas

Graphical format – easy to remember and understand structure

Graphical format – easy to remember and understand structure

4.2.4 Where Has Causal Mapping Been Used?4.2.4.1 To Elicit Representations of Individual Thinking

Mapping is extremely useful inmany situations:

• When seeking to clarify andprioritise as well as identifysynergies for competing goals

• As a consultative tool to helpexplain models anddemonstrate added value andthe skills of the consultant

• At the start of a project as ascoping tool to help clarify thesituation and set boundaries,set objectives of a particularproject

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.2.4.2 To Support Group Working

Firstly, since organisations are social and political animals thenorm for tackling ‘messy’ problems is to consider the wider group.The idea is to facilitate the change through buy-in. People who‘take ownership’ of the change and vested in its success.

Viable change is change that is ‘politically feasible’.

Niccolò Machiavelli, the Renaissance philosopher, suggested thatto plan and deliver change in a system is fraught with danger sincethose who would lose from the new will fight harder than thosewhose potential gain is yet to be realised.

Change requires emotional commitment, people having their sayand influencing outcomes. Cocreation and through the mappingprocess provides this.

Secondly, getting input and perspective from the many andincorporating this into the change makes the outcome more‘robust’.

Processes are ‘procedurally rational’ – that is they are collectivelyunderstood and validated by all. If one department can negotiatewith another in a commonly understood language thensuccessfully shared outcomes becomes the norm.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

Niccolò Machiavelli 1469 - 1527

4.2.4.3 To Analyse ModelsModels can grow into complexrepresentations with over 1,000nodes of information andstatements. Computer basedanalysis can help in delving intosuch levels of complexity, offerintuitive and at times,counterintuitive outcomes andcan be a stimulant to the creativeprocess.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.2.5 Analysis for SODA

• SODA when combined withan analytical approach is apowerful means of exploring acausal model’s structure.

• Analysis ranges from thesimple to the more complex,from tidying up a map toexamining the underlyingstructure

• The goal is to maximise theclarity of thinking, taking a‘messy complex’ issue orproblem and resolve it.

• Three stage process

4.2.5.1 Identifying Goals

• A goal, in SODA terms is “somethinggood in its own right”. To understand thegoals is to understand the greater purposeof the individual and allow for exploration.

• In this world a ‘head’ is a term with noother term or statement linking from it.

• Statements in their raw form canbecome goals. Whilst they are in the stageof ‘to be evaluated by the cohort’ the arecalled ‘candidate goals’ and identified insuch a way (change of font, bolding etc.) tomake that clear.

• Those that are ‘heads’ but not goals willneed to have links ascribed to them. Aprocess that must be done when creating acause map.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC

4.2.5.2 Identifying Issues

• Exploration of issues todetermine strategies. An issuecan de defined as something ofconcern that to resolve will takeresources, both time andfinancial.

• Issues can be both positiveand negative

• The analytical approachessuggested by Ackermann andEden are the ‘Domain’ or‘Central’ approaches

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.5.3 Carrying out a Domain AnalysisDomain analysis starts calculating the number oflinks each statement has coming in and out of it.In essence how busy the links are.

• In a larger map of say 200 statements thismay produce very discrete outcomes, for smallmaps it may be less evident.

• Also maps have to be consistent in respect ofthe rules for causality.

• Any statements with high numbers of arrowsin and out are highlighted in some way, as‘candidate key issues’

• Domain analysis can be influenced by aparticipant or group spending a lot of time on asingle issue. This issue may be relevant as anissue now but be peripheral to the whole.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.5.4 Carrying out Central AnalysisCentral Analysis is additive tothe Domain analysis as it takesthose statements which are‘busy’ but also now looks forhow ‘central’ they are to themodel.

• Picture a molecule –elements are central andconnected to the core andsome are peripheral

• It is almost impossible to dothis analysis without thesoftware – but the results aremore accurate overview ofwhich issues are central to themodel.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.5.5 Carrying Out a Cluster Analysis

• Cluster Analysis is based off an algorithm and

therefore only really suitable to be run through the

software.

The following is a description of the methodology.

• Two statements are similar if they share multiple links

which are in common. So if Diana knows five people then

the most similar would be John because he knows 4.

Therefore the cluster would put these two together.

• If you have a number of statements that share many

links between them but are primarily disconnected from

each other, then these are clusters.

• Each cluster will have a theme, and each theme should

have a key issue. If no key issue exists then the cluster

could be indicative of ‘candidate key issues’

• To do this mapping requires good mapping disciplines

and the absence of redundant links.

• Feed back loops can distort the analysis since they

create large cluster based on causality NOT topic based

ones

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY

4.2.5.6 Carrying out a Hierarchical Set Analysis• Hierarchical sets work by takingthe key issue and then drilling downinto the chain of argument. Eachstatement is linked into the seed.

• Anything above 40 statementslook for new key issues

• Examine one Cluster (Hieset insoftware) at a time

• If set is very small (<10) – ask ifthe issue is a key issue?

• Useful analysis to providefeedback to participants

• The goal is to show all theoptions that will influence a chosenoutcome whether that be an issueor goal

4.2.5.7 Finding Options

• Identifying PotentConcepts

• Potent options arethose that have a widerconsequences for a lot ofkey issues or goals.

• Use this information toprioritise options

4.2.5.7 Finding Options

• Identifying Composite Tails

• A composite tails is a conceptthat has multiple out-bound arrowsout of it.

• Analysis starts at the bottom,works it way up and looks forbranch points.

• A means to refine the potentanalysis further – asking if acomposite tail is also part of apotent option? If it is it then it is thegreatest point of leverage within thesystem.

• Top concept within a potentoption with branches greatest pointof leverage

Branching Point

4.2.5.7 Finding Options

Detecting Feedback Loops

• Finding loops in the model cancreate a wealth of new insight. It canalso help tidy up the structure of themodel. Clusters (Hieset) can appearwhen using the software and it isadvisable to check they arelegitimate loops. If they are real –categorise them into, controlling orvirtuous or vicious cycles.

• If they exist then any group cansee the dynamic nature of the modeland also a useful means to explorethrough system dynamics.

• Finding feedback loops withoutthe system is very difficulty but oncefound they are enlightening

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.5.7 Finding Options

Producing an Overview of the Model’s Content

• Before facilitating a group analysis of the model it is advisable that participant gain some additional help.

• This is done as a ‘road map’ –in the form of a road atlas. A higher view, perspective that draws some higher level links to connections.

• This helps participants understand what we are looking to uncover

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.5.8 Summary

• The purpose of this analysis is so thatwe can make the thinking more robust byuncovering any ambiguities andassumptions that may make the linkstenuous or at least uncertain.

• All analysis is based off the structure ofthe model

• Analysis is not easy and at times is justoverwhelming – keep in mind themapping guidelines and the underlyingpurpose of the analysis

• Gain a clarity of thinking for all involved

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.6 SODA for Group Problem Structuring and Resolution

4.2.6.1 Introduction

SODA is predominately group tool for addressing issues and gaining buy-in. But a numberof different considerations need to be understood before a process for delivery is agreed.

• Openness – how open is the group to participation, to disconformity and theembracing of a contradictory standpoint?

• Being out on a limb – individuals need to believe that points of view, no matter howoutlandish will not be ridiculed

• Existing relationships – are the participants fighting for the same piece of a pie? Arethere trading relationships in place that may be put at jeopardy by an opposing view?

• How strong is the team? Does dissent damage cohesiveness?

• Time availability – is there enough time to cover the process? Does it require animmediate or rapid response?

• Resource availability – does the consultant have the time to see the process through,is the room and equipment bookable?

• What are the primary and secondary objectives? Problem solving yes, but also teamcohesion?

• Skills of the facilitator – are they a novice or seasoned practioner? Is it a slow burn orstraight in?

• The context – what is the culture of the organisation? Have we had widerstakeholder views taken?

• The participants – personality types, ability to come out of their shells and feel a partof it?

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.2.6 SODA for Group Problem Structuring and Resolution

4.2.6.1 Introduction (Cont.)

Combinations of these modes or considerations is likely and acomposite ay of working will appear. This is why the pre-workshop phase, the analysis is crucial to the facilitation.

Technology can and will likely play a crucial part in theprocess. One particular strategy might be:

• Interviewing each participant using cognitive mappingperformed manually

• Weave together views using ‘Oval Mapping Techniques (yetto be discussed) or computer modelling

• Create a focus group and take the workings to them to gainfeedback

• Perform analysis on Decision Explorer

• Bring the results back to the wider group, using DecisionExplorer through a projector, involve them, get them tointeract with the process

• Control and review findings before sharing

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.2.6.2 Working Manually: Using the Oval Mapping Technique

What it is? A group piece of work, facilitated which is superficially looks likebrainstorming but is not lateral thinking and requires participant to ‘surface’ theproblem. They do this by placing their views directly on an oval-shaped adhesiveand posting them publicly on a wall. Benefits include:

• Building teams - participatory, interactive and informative. Client’s maywell have covert desire to enhance team spirit

• Providing social context – group learning, contributing to outcomes andparticipating in the ‘fun’

• Sense of purpose – roles clearly understood

• Flexibility – easy to set up, works for people with limited resources andrequires no technology

• Holistic perspective – group sees bigger picture perhaps that effectdifferent departments, teams etc.

• Capture all – participants contributions caught and recognised.

• Transparent – participants easily can identify the strength of differentviews, se the process unfolding and gain from ‘procedural rationality’ Morelikely to buy into the outcomes

4.2.6.2 Working Manually: Using the Oval Mapping Technique

Starting an Oval Mapping Session

• Pre-meeting activity

• Guest list – make sure it is representative of the range of views – aim for 7 to 9 participants

• Get buy-in from the power holders who can make outcomes happen

• Chose suitable location – clean walls for hanging paper and writing on walls

• Gather materials – flipchart (14-16 sheets), Pens – all the same,

• Set aside 3 hours preferably morning

• Send out an agenda covering primary issues, objectives and ground rules

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-ND

4.2.6.2 Working Manually: Using the Oval Mapping TechniqueNine steps to a successful OMT Session

1. Encourage participation and settle concerns

2. Explain they are the experts and the process is designed to get theinformation out of them. Anything not raised in the forum cannotthen be used

3. Stress one statement per oval. This ensures no duality in thestatement, allows linkage and is easier to read

4. Recommend a maximum of 6-10 words, to be ab actionorientated statement, avoid single words and questions

5. Once on the wall it stays on the wall – if they agree or disagreethey need to write it up. It forms the basis of the argument

6. Encourage participants to piggyback off statements – creatingnew lines of thinking. As a facilitator pose questions about wherethis thinking might lead

7. Two facilitators – one to capture ideas and enter them intoDecision Explorer – the other to move around the material,identify clusters and make sense of ideas

8. Pens (the same) and ovals should be distributed

9. Participants should be asked to explore some statements andwrite them on the ovals and put them on the wall

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.2.6.2 Working Manually: Using the Oval Mapping TechniqueRunning an OMT Workshop – Stage 1

• Goals of workshop are to gain clarity around the issue andidentify actions. Covertly to establish team working.

• Initial stage – 30 mins, ask for contributions to be written upand then put on wall.

• If you reach a quiet stage – ask ‘ participants to review materialalready up, consider consequences, explanations and constraints.

• Make sure any new ideas / material is collected and captured

• Create clusters, i.e. HR issues, operational processes,competition, funding, IT etc.

• Get group to review clustering – get them to confirm orchange. Try moving an oval into a cluster to confirm its place. Thiswill prompt additional insights.

• Very large clusters (30+) – see if they can be broken down.

• Once the ideas have been exhausted – try arranging the ovalswithin the clusters into a hierarchy

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-ND

4.2.6.2 Working Manually: Using the Oval Mapping Technique

Running an OMT Workshop – Stage 2

• Move away from apparent brainstorming to ‘structuring process’

• By reviewing the material in each cluster reconfirm the position of thestatements

• Start, led by the participants, to link the ovals into ‘chains of arguments’. Tofacilitate this write a sequential number on each oval so large extended lines are notneeded, shortened truncated arrows with numbers on them will work.

• Capture new material emphasise the learning that the new focus brings on themeaning of each cluster

• Look for ‘aha’ moments where people see different interpretations from whatothers do – do not side with rights or wrongs instead capture both chains or views.

We are moving the group from divergent thinking to a shared vision which in itselfcan reveal new insights. This is an important stage and one that requiresdocumenting from the participants perspective. Write up new ovals (I would bringsome additional documentation in via recordings of discussions, points of views,new learning).

• Use this stage of the workshop to make sure each oval, if a single word or twoworded statement, has action orientated phrases on them. ‘How do weconvert this to an action?’

This stage will take time at the start but will gather pace later

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-ND

4.2.6.2 Working Manually: Using the Oval

Mapping TechniqueFinishing an OMT Workshop – Part 1

• Exploring the material and reviewing each of the clusters toconfirm relevance and accuracy is the climax of the session.

• Identify the head (top point) of the cluster – ask the group ifit constitutes a good title?

• Use the analysis tools to find key issues and potent options.Take the participants through the principles and goals of theanalysis:

• To identify busy ovals (ins/outs)

• Look for options that hit many clusters

• Collect all the cluster heads and assess them forpossible goals

• Look for feedback loops

• Each of these provides deeper understanding around thenature of the problem. The analysis does not replace thejudgement of the group it informs the group. This informationcan help set priorities around action and look for resolution tothe problem

• Statements that have different status’s should bedifferentiated using different colours.

4.2.6.2 Working Manually: Using the Oval

Mapping TechniqueFinishing an OMT Workshop – Part 2

• Identify those statements that can be rewritten as ‘options’ or arepotentially options

• Give the participants packs of self-adhesive coloured spots

• Attach them to the options most important. Don’t be tempted toscore these as it will work against the qualitative nature of the maps

• Use different colours to determine if they are short or long-termoptions

• This delivers a degree of consensus over which option is the priorityfor resources and focus

• One colour to indicate the degree of leverage this option may offer

• One colour to differentiate how practical it would be to follow thisoption

• Finally, offer one colour to act as a ‘veto’ dot – providing peoplewith an option to veto this choice provides a aspect of proceduraljustice and validation

• Conclusions ideally should provide a consensus on the next stage oractions that follow.

• Take photos of the wall – I would also add in another means ofcapturing the learning from the event

Short term

Long term

Most important

Key leverage point

Practicality

4.2.7 Working in Facilitator Supported (Single User) Visual Interactive Mode

4.2.7.1 Introduction to Facilitator Supported Modelling

Using Decision Explorer software in facilitator supported mode provides fourdifferent options.

1. Follow on from the cognitive interviews and subsequent causal mappinganalysis

2. Follow on from an OMT workshop

3. Follow on from the analysis of documents

4. Starting point for modelling exercise =- although this option places thegreatest workload on the facilitator

Facilitated workshops have the advantage of:

• Allowing for group development of ideas

• Develop common language and understanding

• Visualise theirs and others ideas in an interconnected and dynamic way –supporting learning from different perspectives and judging ideas on merit

• The physical act of projecting or placing ideas and links on a wall has the effectof distancing them idea from the individual giving it an objective perspective

• Participants go from a highly reactive state to a more thoughtful one

• Model starts to act as a powerful negotiation tool – actively listening to anddigesting different views, gently acquiescing toward agreement

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.7.2 Why Use the Software Supported Mode?

• Participants focus on issuerather than being distracted bythe manual process

• Mapping guidelines adhered to– essential for edification ofideas and linking statement

• Greater concentration on theunfolding process – avoids longdebates over uncontextualizedissues

• Participation increases asfacilitators absorb the physicalwork

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.7.3 Running a Single User Workshop Create

Develop

Agree

Digest

Generate

• Seat participants in a semi-circle aroundthe screen an in comfortable seating

• Run this as an off-site – limit distractions

• At start be clear on what the focal pointof the intervention is. Put it on thescreen.

• Assuming model is in existence – provideoverview of model, goals, central issue

• Have pre-worked up views depicting thesupportive material for each key issue

• Create a set of predetermined text stylesfor goals, key issues, potent options,agreed strategies and agreed actions(Green for Go)

• Design work shop to work in a cycle of 20mins

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

20 mins

4.2.7.3 Running a Single User Workshop (Cont.)

Decision Explorer Hints and Tips

• Set up styles in advance do not use borders around selected concepts

• Keep it simple at the start – don’t clutter the screen with multiplestatements, start small and build

• Turn off menus – they are distracting! – learn the ‘Hot-Keys’

• Work in ‘Fit to View Mode’ – participants see the whole map, keeps thecontext in place and help to dynamically engage

• Capture as much of the dialogue as possible – statements for review withthe group

• Stick to the 20-minute cycle, material fresh in minds, ensures facilitator hascaptured all the links

• Use ‘views’ to explore hidden depths of issues and loops

• Avoid analysis during the workshop – allow coffee breaks and lunch toopen up thinking through the analysis tools

• Have hard copies of starter-maps as points of reference – give participantscopies might be useful

• Save your work regularly

4.2.7.4 Summary

Some final points

• Time for reflection – progress madeand clarify next step

• Review agreements and actions

• Make sure message is in a formatthat can be taken back to widergroup

• Provide a set of rough and readyprintouts

• Follow up with ‘tidied-up’ notes later

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.2.8 Reflections on the Method

The benefits of SODA

• Problem structuring through effective collection andanalysis of causal maps

• Adaptability and agility of participants to change theirminds. Giving them time to think, act more cognitivelyand avoid rush gut reactions

• Gain consensus and negotiate a group view. Get sharedownership and a commitment to deliver

• Creativity in the generation of ideas and options throughthe social construct that the workshops provide.

• Gain real-time interaction with the model. Play, exploreand amend in a dynamic forum. Gain buy-in andownership of the ideas

• On-line documentation in the form of an action plan andreference t the decision choices available

• Through collaborative working we remove the impact ofdysfunctional interpersonal dynamics.

• Gain commitment in getting things right. Becomefamiliar with handling complexity as groups share theburden of learning and delivery This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.3 Developments in the Uses of SODA• The effectiveness of SODA in delivering group problem solving means that further applications and development reside here.

• Key areas also include ‘negotiation’ and conflict resolution, higher group productivity – solving problems quickly, exploring the future along with stakeholder management. SODA has also been of use in operational research specifically the modelling of system dynamics. The final part of the development is about overcoming the risks of first time delivery of problem solving through the management of expectations

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.3.1 Managing Social Processes4.3.1.1 Increasing Social and PsychologicalNegotiation

• Organisations as negotiated enterprises – this relates to howeveryone has a perspective of a problem. Accordingly each bringstheir own experiences, skills, education etc. to the table whereeveryone knows that these subjective views need to coexist if aproblem is to be collectively solved.

• One aspect of SODA is that it must lead to better organisationalnegotiations. Because negotiation requires the gradual softeningand repositioning of positions identifying causal relationshipsthrough a causal map is an important part of the process.

• Changing the causal relationships as positioned are softened ormodified means that the SODA process needs to embrace thedynamic nature of the understanding. Inevitably, due to timepressure this dynamic nature is missed and the links, statementsand options take on a static presence.

• In the group SODA sessions these changing shifts ned to berecognised as the means of establishing increased buy-in thatthings change based off discussions.

• Additionally important to negotiations is often the respect ofanonymity

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC

4.3.1.2 Group Productivity Issues

For the last few decades organisations have beenhandling more complexity than previously thecase. Group problem solving productivity, thespeed at which the group solves or addresses aparticularly complex problem is therefore a keyrequirement.

The problem of productivity has been expressedin two approaches:

• The creation of a workshop that can providea deliverable in the form of an actionablenext step every hour.

• The use of a Group Decision Support System(GDSS) to support SODA.

The speed at which the workshop can deliver‘the next stage or problem solving’ is crucialwhilst the second is the means by which,alongside the people interactions, we can applycomputer enhanced analytics and record thelearning

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.3.1.3 Negotiation and Productivity: Using a Group Decision Support System GDSSThe first Group Decision Support System (GDSS) weredeveloped n the 1990’s and worked by providing eachparticipant the access to the causal mapping software,through which they could express a preference for thegiven option. The same as placing multiple dots on theidea/option of choice.

The development of Group Explorer achieved numberof productivity enhancing objectives:

• A causal map that was dynamic, statements couldbe added freely and links created and modified

• Contributions were anonymous

• All the attributes offered by Decision Explorer,styles to indicate statement type, and parallelprocessing and analysis

The use of this type of software (I used this at theUniversity i-Labs in a group approach to address localtransport issues) replicates the Oval MappingTechnique without the need for cognitive interviews. Itdoes, though, have the drawback of being less richthan SODA with 1:1 interviews.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.3.1.4 New and Better Researched Applications

4.3.1.5 Strategy Making

All strategic plans mean nothing if those in a senior role chose not to action them. SODAwith its group facilitation process creates buy-in and ownership of strategy. SODA wasnow being used to extend that function by being the catalyst for the development ofstrategy itself by:

• Paying attention to the existing emergent strategy

• Developing new strategic plans

The creation of a casual map is enlightening to an organisation, it highlights and focusesupon areas of uniqueness and differentiation that creates the competitive advantageso many organisations need. Often this competence would be identifiable in the self-sustaining feedback loops.

Strategic management of key stakeholders was an additional output of the SODAapproach, the types of relationships that exist and perhaps should exist in the future,informal or formal, added to the depth of organisational understanding.

The concept of strategy making as a journey added to the envisioning process of a newfuture. Scenario building and the exploration of different futures is a crucial tounderstand the systemic nature or organisational goals, strengths and weakness as wellas the stakeholders who are needed.

The ‘journey of using SODA’ was now becoming as important as the outcome as ameans to stimulate organisational learning so much so that journey became anacronym:

JoURNeY – ‘Jointly Understanding, Reflecting upon and Negotiating strategy

SODA helped to create ‘procedural justice’ in the process, built consensus andownership of both the problem and solution.

This concept of strategy and journey was further developed in The Practice of MakingStrategy (Ackermann et al, 2005) where the ‘statement of strategic intent’ was the finaltask in a series of tasks that led to incremental improvement in every bite-sized step ofstrategic development.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.3.1.6 Informing Strategy Through the Development of Scenarios: One Specific Strategy Example

Taking the present and predicting the future as an extensionof the underlying trend is both obvious in application andstatistically probable in the future it predicts. This of coursedepends on environmental stability, those drivers of today beingunaltered tomorrow which clearly is not as statistically likely. Sofutures are determined by critical events that break trends.

Envisioning different futures based off ‘black swan’ events aspart of scenario building can be linked to the causal mappingprocess used by SODA. Using OMT and asking participants tocontribute an event, the map unfolds with a series of links andincludes a number of future stories.

Developing different scenarios in this way is not about makingjudgements regarding their likelihood – it is to open people’sminds and become more perceptive about the future. Thepossible implications and impacts of shifts in the environment onthe organisational viability.

“The process of exploring alternative futures means that managers are more likely to see futures unfolding earlier’ (P186)

– a major source of competitive advantage

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.3.1.7 Multimethod Models: SD and Project Management• Understanding the structure of a problem throughcognitive and causal mapping requires that we look forself-sustaining feedback loops. If the system displays thedynamic behaviour associated to feedback loops thenwe need to know how to control them as a part of theproblem solving aspect.

• SODA can help identify those aspects of SystemsDynamics (SD), traps and cures through points ofintervention so that simulation models can be builtusing the software.

• The project management design process can identifycrucial intervention points along the journey wheredifferent analytical tools can best be introduced as wellas the most appropriate questions t be asked.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SA

4.3.1.8 Cognitive Change/Negotiation Causal maps facilitate negotiation across anorganisation.

A number of studies in the field of socialpsychology demonstrate that groups generallyignore contradictory views of those within thatgroup. The creation of causal maps based uponthe principles of SODA can address this issue.

Gradual shifts in mindset as the meaning ofstatements on a causal map are explored,statements added and clarification gained,facilitates a shift in mindset. Rather than seeinginformation as immoveable objects, it is seen asdynamic and potentially multi-meaning(equivocal) in nature. Seeing something from adifferent perspective potentially allows shifts inposition to take place and negotiation to occur.

Overt conflicts and conflict managementseems to be a beneficiary of SODA

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA

4.3.1.9 Small Steps in Application: Low Risk projects First-time facilitators of SODA are facing a daunting

task. Practice in the form of cognitive mapping ofinert mediums, papers, documentaries get you so farin skills development but eventually you have to dealwith a real-life situation.

Keeping risks down is about managing theexpectations of the group. Breaking up the processinto shorter steps with clear smaller but morefrequent milestones as targets is one way.

So causal map construction can be chunked into theprimary stage of initial capture, to identification ofclusters providing an overview, looking for busynodes that bring focus on the ‘nub’ of that problem.This can be done using OMT or Decision Explorersoftware. If this is seen as being of use – additionaldeeper exploration can be encouraged.

Reverse engineering the unpublished goals of anorganisation into a causal map is a useful andpotentially revealing process. Goals that are not seenas supportive of each other become easilyidentifiable, they are seen as independent of eachother. Using this approach can help open up groupdiscussions about change as the aim becomes a‘more carefully worded goal system’. Low riskbecause it is exploratory and not seen as anaggressive stance against the status-quo.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND

Concluding thoughts on SODA

At Relocon-East we are looking to extendour armoury of quality tools that further theaims and aspirations of our clients.

Within our valued proposition and to helpdevelop strategy and promote healthychange, SODA will play a crucial part.

Workshops will be organised and facilitatedby our consultants to help organisations gainthe buy-in and ownership that a process likethis can develop.

Years of facilitation and workshopdevelopment will be accessible to our clientsas we move their business models forwardand take their teams with them.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC

End of Part 4

Notes by James Cracknell BA (Hons.)

As part of TU811 OU Course Systems Tools for Managing Change

Reynolds, M. and Holwell, S. (2010) Introducing Systems Approaches, in Martin Reynolds, Sue Holwell (Eds.) Approaches to managing Change: A Practical Guide. London: Springer in association with The Open University