IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/syspar/v30y2017i6d10.1007_s11213-017-9409-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Soft Systems Methodology Approach to Occupational Cancer Control Problem: a Case Study of the Ministry of Petroleum of Iran

Author

Listed:
  • Ramin Sepehrirad

    (Tarbiat Modares University)

  • Ali Rajabzadeh

    (Tarbiat Modares University)

  • Adel Azar

    (Tarbiat Modares University)

  • Behrouz Zarei

    (Tehran University)

Abstract

Petroleum industries of Iran offer some of the best job opportunities within Iranian labor market. However, due to the attributes of the chemicals used in these industries, their staffs are exposed to various risk factors of several chronic diseases. Such exposures might lead to cancer incidence after a decade or two. The Ministry of Petroleum (MoP) runs an organization, namely Petroleum Industry Health Organization (PIHO), which is responsible for the health insurance of the personnel working in Petroleum industries. PIHO and Health, Safety & Environment (HSE) units play fundamental roles in providing the employees with health services during their professional life and retirement period. Yet, these organizations still do not have a system to specify occupational cancer control mechanisms at the MoP. The negative influences of cancer on patients suffering from it as well as its heavy costs of treatment have forced MoP to put measures of coping with this chronic disease in the first priority. This paper aims to define the structure and design a framework for MoP’s occupational cancer control problem as the first step for improving the described situation. Given the presence of various stakeholders and actors, and the wide range of complexities of this problematic situation, we have adopted Soft System Methodology (SSM). We have reached an agreement with the problem owners on a rich picture, CATWOE analysis, root definition and a conceptual model for the way this situation could improve within real world circumstances. The results were obtained through various sessions with practitioner from different departments of MoP, while the conflict of interests was common.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramin Sepehrirad & Ali Rajabzadeh & Adel Azar & Behrouz Zarei, 2017. "A Soft Systems Methodology Approach to Occupational Cancer Control Problem: a Case Study of the Ministry of Petroleum of Iran," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(6), pages 609-626, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:30:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s11213-017-9409-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11213-017-9409-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11213-017-9409-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11213-017-9409-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M Winter, 2006. "Problem structuring in project management: an application of soft systems methodology (SSM)," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 802-812, July.
    2. Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2010. "Mapping the changes in management science: A review of 'soft' OR/MS articles published in Omega (1973-2008)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 46-56, February.
    3. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    4. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    5. J Mingers & W Liu & W Meng, 2009. "Using SSM to structure the identification of inputs and outputs in DEA," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 168-179, February.
    6. P Checkland & M Winter, 2006. "Process and content: two ways of using SSM," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(12), pages 1435-1441, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Igor Krejčí & Pavel Moulis & Jana Pitrová & Ivana Tichá & Ladislav Pilař & Jan Rydval, 2019. "Traps and Opportunities of Czech Small-Scale Beef Cattle Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, August.
    2. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    3. Ali Shahabi & Adel Azar & Reza Radfar & Reza Asadi Asadifard, 2020. "Combining Soft Systems Methodology with Interpretive Structural Modeling and System Dynamics for Network Orchestration: Case Study of the Formal Science and Technology Collaborative Networks in Iran," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 453-478, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    2. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.
    3. Georgiou, Ion, 2012. "Messing about in transformations: Structured systemic planning for systemic solutions to systemic problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(2), pages 392-406.
    4. G A Hindle & L A Franco, 2009. "Combining problem structuring methods to conduct applied research: a mixed methods approach to studying fitness-to-drive in the UK," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1637-1648, December.
    5. J Davis & A MacDonald & L White, 2010. "Problem-structuring methods and project management: an example of stakeholder involvement using Hierarchical Process Modelling methodology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(6), pages 893-904, June.
    6. Santos, Sérgio P. & Belton, Valerie & Howick, Susan & Pilkington, Martin, 2018. "Measuring organisational performance using a mix of OR methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 18-30.
    7. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    8. Payam Hanafizadeh & Mohammad Mehrabioun, 2018. "Application of SSM in tackling problematical situations from academicians’ viewpoints," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 179-220, April.
    9. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    10. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    11. Maria Franca Norese & Diana Rolando & Rocco Curto, 2023. "DIKEDOC: a multicriteria methodology to organise and communicate knowledge," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1049-1082, June.
    12. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2012. "Linking stakeholder visions with resource allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 762-772.
    13. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    14. M. Nassereddine & M. A. Ellakkis & A. Azar & M. D. Nayeri, 2021. "Developing a Multi-methodology for Conflict Resolution: Case of Yemen’s Humanitarian Crisis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 301-320, April.
    15. Daniel E. Ufua & Odunayo P. Salau & Joseph A. Dada & Mosunmola O. Adeyeye, 2020. "Application of Systems Approach to Achieving Cleaner and Sustainable Environment: A study of Waste Dumping Issue on Idiroko Road, Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria," Working Papers of the African Governance and Development Institute. 20/007, African Governance and Development Institute..
    16. Carayannis, Elias G. & Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Wurth, Bernd, 2022. "OR for entrepreneurial ecosystems: A problem-oriented review and agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 791-808.
    17. Ferretti, V., 2021. "Framing territorial regeneration decisions: Purpose, perspective and scope," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    18. Brocklesby, John & Midgley, Gerald, 2016. "Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of interventionAuthor-Name: Velez-Castiblanco, Jorge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 968-982.
    19. Espinosa, Angela & Reficco, Ezequiel & Martínez, Andrea & Guzmán, David, 2015. "A methodology for supporting strategy implementation based on the VSM: A case study in a Latin-American multi-national," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 202-212.
    20. Sydelko, Pamela & Midgley, Gerald & Espinosa, Angela, 2021. "Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: Creating a common, cross-agency understanding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 250-263.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:30:y:2017:i:6:d:10.1007_s11213-017-9409-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.