This paper puts forward a systemic methodology to explore Critical Success Factors (CSFs). The common idea about ranking CSFs is to explore the relationship of ‘more important’, i.e. directly assessing whether success factor A is more important than factor B. This idea is prominent in the prevailing approaches, e.g. the qualitative inquiry, quantitative analysis, and multi-criteria decision making. Exploring CSFs from a different lens, this paper argues for systemic approaches, reckoning that manifold interrelationships could exist between system elements. Considering the manifold interrelationships, the proposed methodology contends that two opposite interrelationships could exist between CSFs—‘helping to achieve’ and ‘inhibiting to achieve’. The first step of assessing CSFs is to construct a digraph in a participatory way, showing the transitive ‘helping to achieve’ relationship between CSFs and obtain the ‘helping to achieve’ score for each element. The second step is to examine the inhibiting relationship through a pairwise comparison to obtain the ‘inhibiting to achieve’ score for each element. The third step is to combine the ‘helping to achieve score’ with ‘inhibiting to achieve’ score to obtain the net score for each success factor. This output aims to provide the relevant stakeholders with a more comprehensive spectrum in assessing CSFs to develop their organizations well.

本文提出了一种系统的方法来探索关键成功因素 (CSF)。对 CSF 进行排序的普遍思路是探索“更重要”的关系，即直接评估成功因素 A 是否比因素 B 更重要。 这种想法在流行的方法中很突出，例如定性调查、定量分析和多- 标准决策。本文从不同的角度探索 CSF，主张采用系统方法，认为系统元素之间可能存在多种相互关系。考虑到多种相互关系，提议的方法论认为，CSF 之间可能存在两种相反的相互关系——“帮助实现”和“抑制实现”。评估 CSF 的第一步是以参与方式构建有向图，显示 CSF 之间的传递性“帮助实现”关系，并获得每个元素的“帮助实现”分数。第二步是通过成对比较来检查抑制关系，以获得每个元素的“抑制实现”分数。第三步，将“帮助实现得分”与“抑制实现”得分相结合，得到每个成功因素的净得分。此输出旨在为相关利益相关者提供更全面的评估 CSF 以发展其组织的范围。第三步，将“帮助实现得分”与“抑制实现”得分相结合，得到每个成功因素的净得分。此输出旨在为相关利益相关者提供更全面的评估 CSF 以发展其组织的范围。第三步，将“帮助实现得分”与“抑制实现”得分相结合，得到每个成功因素的净得分。此输出旨在为相关利益相关者提供更全面的评估 CSF 以发展其组织的范围。