Soft Systems Methodology & User Experience

Researched by Trudy Hall

Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), developed by Peter Checkland, offers a systemic approach to socially complex problems. Its principles — empathy toward multiple perspectives, iterative learning, and conceptual modeling — directly correlate with the practice of user experience (UX) design. By applying SSM tools such as rich pictures, CATWOE analysis, and conceptual models to digital ecosystems, UX designers can move beyond surface-level usability to address deeper ethical challenges. The result is a design methodology that strengthens digital environments as human-centered systems that, when applied, can ignite lasting reform.

User experience design has long grappled with the tension between functional efficiency and human complexity. While traditional methods emphasize usability testing and interface optimization, these often fail to capture the messy, multi-stakeholder realities in which digital systems operate. Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), as a problem-structuring approach for “soft” or undefined issues, provides a complementary framework. Rooted in systems thinking and organizational learning (Checkland, 1981), SSM is particularly well-suited to digital design, where user needs, technological constraints, and institutional interests frequently collide.

SSM begins from the premise that problems cannot be reduced to a single definition. Instead, it emphasizes the coexistence of multiple worldviews, each of which frames the system differently (Wikipedia contributors, 2025). In UX design, this corresponds to the principle of empathy — acknowledging that no two users encounter a system in the same way. Tools such as “rich pictures,” which map diverse perspectives visually, find direct parallels in UX practices such as persona development and customer journey mapping (IfM, n.d.). Both methods resist premature simplification and instead cultivate a holistic understanding of human interaction within virtual systems.

Another central SSM tool, “CATWOE analysis,” provides a structured lens for examining Customers, Actors, Transformations, Worldviews, Owners, and Environmental constraints (Sauter, 2015). This mirrors UX research methodologies that question who benefits from a system, who maintains it, what transformations are intended, and how contextual factors constrain or enable design. By embedding UX work in systemic inquiry, CATWOE encourages designers to consider not only interface elements but also the broader social context.

SSM emphasizes “conceptual models” as learning devices rather than prescriptive blueprints (Burge Hughes Walsh, n.d.). In UX, prototypes function in precisely this way — as thought experiments that provoke reflection, iteration, and refinement. Both approaches recognize that models serve as a bridge between abstract possibilities and practical realities, opening space for dialogue rather than closure.

Digital ecosystems are marked by fragmentation, complexity, and competing interests. SSM’s iterative cycle — problem exploration, modeling, stakeholder debate, and reflective action — offers a method for addressing these challenges (Checkland, 1981). For example, a platform plagued by confusing navigation or manipulative design patterns can be reframed through an SSM lens. “Rich pictures” surface user frustrations, “root definitions” clarify the intended purpose of the platform, and “conceptual models” envision alternative flows that prioritize transparency and trust. Stakeholder discussions then determine which changes are both desirable and feasible, leading to crucial improvements in architecture and governance.

SSM also provides a temporal perspective through the concepts of system-as-was, system-as-is, and system-to-be (Zelenkauskaite & Yoo, 2024). This mirrors the UX responsibility to anticipate future user needs and to design with adaptability in mind. By situating digital ecosystems within a trajectory of learning and change, SSM supports the creation of infrastructures that evolve in response to emerging challenges rather than ossifying into rigid, exclusionary structures.

Soft Systems Methodology provides UX design with more than a set of analytical tools — it offers a philosophy of practice that aligns with the human-centered aims of the field. By using empathy, systemic inquiry, and iterative learning as focal points, SSM expands UX beyond usability toward structural reform of the online realm. As digital infrastructures become increasingly central to social life, this integration reminds us that design is not only functional but also ethical, resilient, and capable of supporting diverse human needs. In this way, SSM and UX chart a pathway for digital systems that move beyond efficiency into structural care.

Burge Hughes Walsh. (n.d.). Soft Systems Methodology (SSM): An introduction.

Checkland, P. (1981). *Systems Thinking, Systems Practice.* Chichester: Wiley.

IfM (Institute for Manufacturing). (n.d.). Soft Systems Methodology (SSM). University of Cambridge.

Sauter, V. L. (2015). *Soft Systems Methodology.* University of Missouri–St. Louis.

Wikipedia contributors. (2025, August 27). *Soft systems methodology.* In *Wikipedia*.

Zelenkauskaite, A., & Yoo, Y. (2024). *A soft ecosystems methodology of digital innovation.* UK Academy for Information Systems Conference Proceedings. University College London.