This article investigates Soft Systems Strategy, which is a way of working with problem situations where there is a high social, politics and individuals activity part. SSM varies from other methodologies as it does not package with the HARD issues that are more technically oriented but instead it handles Tender problems. Organizations are making large purchases in construction assignments. Many factors have an effect on the successful accomplishment of projects, and be considered successful, project goals and specs must be performed on time and on budget, also projects should meet Stakeholders anticipations and realize measurable benefits. But construction projects tend to be difficult to calculate and take care of; some projects are terminated or reduced in opportunity because of overruns in cost and or time, or inability to produce expected benefits. That what makes risk management for structure tasks a challenging task.
Soft System Methodology is the brainwave of Professor Peter Checkland. The strategy was devised as a result of "consultancy work" (Platt, 1995). Hutchings (2006) explains this development as a strategy that can be accessed in the problem where Hard System Methodologies are fruitless. He writes,
"When met with complex real life problems which cannot be defined only in the medical terms, Checkland was compelled to forego the classic system engineering thinking that could not describe fully the situation he encounters. This led to a fundamental reappraisal of the classics "hard" plan and the next development of the Soft Methodology".
Hence, SSM is labeled as "a common technique" (Wilson, 1992) which should be modified to any given situation. It deals with "fuzzy" problem situations - situations where people are viewed not as passive items, but as lively subjects, where objectives are unclear or where multiple goals may can be found (Rosenhead, 1989). This is explained as real human activity system (HAS) - a assortment of activities, where people are purposefully involved, and the connections between your activities (Platt, 1995). Hence SSM is a qualitative approach you can use for applying System Pondering to non-systematic situations. It follows its development in seven phases as laid down by Checkland in seven stage model "which is considered by most visitors to be the SSM" (Platt, 1995). The seven levels are contained into two parts: the real world and systems thinking, as illustrated in Physique 2. The diagram is split into two halves. The upper half (Stages 1, 2, 5, 6, 7) are activities that take place in the 'real world' "that is they derive from the knowledge and connection with the participant of how things are to them" (Beckford 1998) and for that reason should involve people in the problem situation. The bottom half (Phases 3, 4, 4a, 4b) are 'systems pondering' activities which can be carried out in the terminology of systems and could or might not involve people in the challenge situation, depending on the circumstances of review (Johnson, 1999).
FIGURE 2: LEARNING Pattern OF SSM
Project risk management contains two phases: Risk Assessment, and Risk Control. Risk Evaluation can be an iterative process; it can take place at any stage and during any time of the project lifecycle, though the earlier the better. Risk Control cannot be effective without a previous risk assessment.
Risk in the look (Flanagan, Norman):
The design risk includes:
Errors in the drawing and design by the architects, structural engineer, Threat of finishing the pulling in the decided time, Risk due to amount of revisions manufactured in the drawings, Risk due to the oversight in estimation and costing.
Risk arising by the contractor:
Risk occurring because of the in connection with the company in doing the type of job, Risk occurring because of the insufficient coordination with the sub companies and the suppliers which results in wait of the work, Risk due to the manpower mismanagement and also because of the issues regarding cases, disputes, Risk because of the delay in repayment of bill to the service provider by your client.
Risk arising by your client:
Risk due never to giving insufficient home elevators the clients must the contractor, Risk credited to delay to make important decision, Risk due to the wrong selection of procurement route to construction of the building, Threat of delay due to changes in the architectural drawing and the design calculations, .
Risk arising in the website:
Risk anticipated to improper ground investigation in the website which results in problems like normal water logging, Risk scheduled to problem with the travelling facility to the website which delays in the delivery of the materials to the website.
Other miscellaneous hazards:
Risk in hold off of the project because of the hold off in the approval from the neighborhood authorities, Risk anticipated to some politics interferences, Risk because of the problems lifted by the neighbourhood property owners, Risk because of the existence of prior building in the site.
FIGURE 4: RISK IN Building MANAGEMENT
The stake holders mixed up in Risk management analysis (Lambeck,
He is the top of the chance management study. He initiates the ending up in the client and submits the risk management report to the client. The risk manager will prepare a risk management evaluation report to send to the client.
Architect works on the design of the building based on the requirements given by the client. He's responsible for the design and he has to make sure that the look is proper and the chance of changes in the pulling is little.
The structural Engineer proves the structural design of the project. He is in charge of the structural steadiness and the safeness of the building. He can transform the architect pulling when there is no structural feasibility in the design.
The Project Director is the primary representative from your client side who is responsible for the whole construction work. He calculates the time limit to complete the job and also appears into the quality factors. He coordinates the construction team and make sure that the potential of risk is least.
The number Surveyor is a main part and works on the cost facet of the project. He'll be responsible for selecting and delivering different materials for the engineering. The estimates suggested by the QS will be very competitive.
The client is the owner of the project. Your client will be providing his requirements to the project team. There fore his satisfaction with each one of the proposals is very important.
The service engineer is in charge of the risk involved in the service provided in the building such as electric powered, plumbing, air-con etc.
The Information Consumer should provide to the Workshop Participants before Each Study:
The client provides the requirements he expects from the analysis to the stake Holders such as Architect, Structural Engineer and Volume Surveyor etc. the info client must provide are:
The aim and the aim of the task:
Quality is an essential aspect and must be considered for the job. All of the materials used for the job should be of high quality and proper checking must be done by the task manager.
The budget allotted for the job must be clearly identified. This will help in calculating the coastline control techniques. The complete life routine cost of the project and the cost certainties also needs to be assessed. There fore a detailed risk management research has to be carried out during the pre defining stage.
The time period limit to complete the project should be finalised and should be completed in the calculated time since it adversely have an effect on the task budget. There fore the time required for the design and the execution of the project must be calculated.
The set of machineries going to be installed in the job:
It is required to fix the electronic connection.
The risk director should be provided with the strategies of future growth if there is any.
The site factor like the size and form of the site and the region where the site is situated has to meet the project objective.
'Hard' systems thinking are goal-directed as this study starts with the definition of the advisable goal to be performed. It really is essentially concerned with the question of 'how' to achieve a predetermined target. 'Soft' can be involved with defining your options for improvement thus dealing with the 'what to do' question. It is also focused on the examination of human being activity, which is the other tender part of the formula, in hard systems pondering a goal is assumed. The overall purpose of the methods utilized by the analyst is to modify the system for some reason so that this goal is achieved in the most effective manner. Whereas hard systems pondering can be involved with the 'how ' of the condition, in soft systems considering, the objectives of the systems are assumed to be more complex than a simple goal that may be achieved and assessed. Every system can be thought to have a set of purposes or missions rather than goals. Knowledge of soft systems may be accomplished through debate with the actors in the systems. Emphasis is positioned on the 'what' as well as the 'how' of the machine.
To deliver successful development projects that meet the three deliverables (budget, time, and customer satisfaction), project managers should spend time assessing and controlling risk, and allocating contingency and management reserves, so that any risk that arises will be mitigated, pursuing risk diagnosis and planning. Without preserving a contingency reserve, the project manager is forced to go back for additional time or dollars for each and every risk as it becomes problems. Also to attain successful projects, the project professionals have to follow a delicate system methodology to ensure that the job starts with a potential for achievement.
Michael. F. Dallas (2006)- Value and Risk Management- Helpful information to best practise
N. J. Smith, Managing risks in development projects
Beckford, J. (1998), Quality: A Critical Introduction, Oxford: Routledge
Hutchings, J. (2006), A Soft System Platform for the Conservation Management of Material Cultural Traditions in Alan, D. (2008) Managerial Problem Solving, Newport: University of WALES
Johnson, A. (1999), Using Soft Systems Methodology in the Research of Public Involvement in EIA
Platt, A. and Warwick, S. (1995), Overview of Soft System Methodologies, Journal: Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol 95, No. 4, Site 19-21
Checkland, P. (1981), Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Wiley: Chichester
Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (2001) Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice, London: Sage
Rosenhead, J. (1989), Rational Examination of an Problematic World, Wiley: Chichester
Wilson, B. (1992), Systems: Concepts, Methodologies and Applications, Wiley, Chichester,
Roger Flanagan, George Norman: Risk management and construction
By Richard Lambeck, John Eschemuller: Urban Development Project Management