Information Systems Development Methodologies - High Level Models and Methodologies for Information Systems - page 44

Table 3.1 Principles of SSADM
Differentiation between logi-
cal and physical

SSADM makes a distinction between designing the logical
basis of the system, and designing its physical properties

Diverse views of the system Specific attention to the logical structure of the data, how that

data flows in and out of the system and how it is changed
(entity life histories)

Top-down and bottom-up Top-down procedures (data flow diagramming, logical data

structuring), and bottom-up approaches (relational data
analysis)

User involvement It is paramount that end users participate in the development of

the system from the beginning

Quality assurance Quality reviews must be performed at the end of each stage of

the process, by users, developers and experts outside of the
project

Self-documentation Each stage must be accompanied by extensive documentation,

so that records on the progress and outcome of the project are
always updated

It is crucial that the aforementioned principles stand to support the entire
development project (Ashworth 1988 ). These principles should be seen as guide-
lines that must be followed when adapting this method to speci c environments and

contexts.
Schumacher ( 2001 ) argues that SSADM is primarily focused on the design
stages of the process. It is evident that both planning and design are paramount to
this process. Its basic, fundamental idea is that if planning and design are thorough
and adequate to the requirements of the project, then the probability of the project
failing is lower. Therefore, it can be asserted that SSADM is a much more rigid
perspective than the agile methodology, because of the amount of time and
resources spent on planning and analysis, as well as the importance of documen-
tation as opposed to face-to-face communication. However, the fact that user
involvement is a crucial factor means that there is openness for user feedback along
the project, primarily at the testing phase.

3.2.3 Soft Systems Methodology (SSM)

The soft systems methodology (SSM) emerged in the late 1960s and was popu-
larized when Checkland and his colleagues at Lancaster University questioned the
usage of hard systems thinking in real-life contexts and situations (Hardman et al.
2011 ). It is fundamentally based on the distinction between “ hard ” and “ soft ”

thinking. “ Hard thinking ” implies a form of observation of the world, where spe-

ci c aspects are identi ed as organized systems that can be analyzed or engineered.

“ implies viewing the world as a set of disorganized, confusing, and

complex realities that can be organized by the viewer in systems to facilitate

Soft thinking ”