In line with the conference theme - "Collegiality" - the authors propose to build a bridge between two Systems Approaches, namely System Dynamics (SD) and Management Cybernetics (MC). This synthesis is aimed at opening a path for a better capability to deal with complex issues of actors in both organizations and society. With their resprctive strengths - modelling and simulation of content issues for SD, and providing a viable organizational context for MC - a combination appears to be potentially promising. The authors propose the Integrated Systems Methodology as a framework for combining SD and MC, and they give practical illustrations to support their argument.
This paper introduces model-based theory building as a feature of system dynamics (SD) with large potential. It presents a systemic approach to actualizing that potential, thereby opening up a new perspective on theory building in the social sciences. The question addressed is if and how SD enables the construction of high-quality theories. This contribution is based on field experiment type projects which have been focused on model-based theory building, specifically the construction of a middle-range theory - not a general one. The process of model building and validation is analysed from a theory-building perspective. The resulting theory is evaluated by means of a set of criteria for high-quality theories. As a conclusion, the insighths thus gained are presented and condensed in a tentative set of heuristic principles for model-based theory building.
The concept of autopoiesis introduced by Maturana and Varela has, in the last four decades, triggered intellectual efforts for the understanding of phenomena of self-organization in general. This contribution aims at conceptualizing and applying two aspects of autopoiesis-operational closure and self-reference-in respect of social organizations. We formalize these concepts and demonstrate their power to explain change processes. This is achieved by means of a qualitative case study and a quantitative simulation model, which lead to counterintuitive insights about the dynamics of organizational transformation.
Models should be relevant for coping with the complexity of the real world. At the same time, the methods by which they are constructed and validated must be rigorous; otherwise the quality of the model suffers.
We take a test of model structure, demonstrating a new technique of analysis of the model's structure called Structural Dominance Analysis (SDA). SDA has been developed in the science of complex systems [Kampmann and Oliva 2006; Kampmann and Oliva 2009]. SDA makes use of one axiom of System Dynamics: model structure influences the behavioral outcome of a simulation [Forrester 1993]. In principle, SDA evaluates the relative partial influence of individual feedback loops on the behavior of the variables of interest. Based on this evaluation, loop dominance then signifies which particular piece of model structure is dominant, i.e., most influential for the behavior in a certain period of time. Research about loop dominance has bred several formal and informal techniques to enable SDA [Kampmann and Oliva 2008]. In this paper, we revert to an behavioral technique by Ford [1999]. The rationale for using SDA as a validation method is to compare the discovered dominant model structures with the model structures the modeler or expert perceives as dominant in the real system under study. Especially, the comparison of the shifts of dominance between structures over time is a fruitful source for model validation. In this respect, the presented approach is based on a formal quantitative analysis, but for the interpretation it relies on a qualitative comparison of the model with the real system under study. The Structural Dominance Test (SDT) is a means of validating the macro-structure of a simulation model. To apply SDA for the issue of validation is a novelty of this paper. Its application requires a feedback based, continuous-time simulation model, as used in System Dynamics. A brief case study demonstrates the new technique for validation purposes.
The current economic crisis could deliver valuable lessons for economic agents. However, it seems that those have not learned essential lessons, continuing their "business as usual". A dynamic simulation model presented in this chapter highlights that this is likely to lead to the next crunch in the offing. Even before we have mastered this crisis the next one is already looming. Does prevention have a chance? How can it be achieved?
Building better models is crucial for coping with complexity in general, and for the management of organizations in particular. This paper discusses the epistemological aspects of model validation for the achivement of high-quality models. Then it provides an overview of validation methods. The logic of validation is demonstrated by introducing the Structural Dominance Test as a means for testing the correspondence of the structural dominance between model and reality.
Ziel dieses Beitrags ist es zunächst, die Konzepte der Kybernetik so aufzuarbeiten, dass ein übersichtlicher Satz an Bausteinen vorliegt. Auf dieser Basis soll ein konzeptueller Rahmen für ein modellbasiertes Management entworfen werden. Dabei wird "Modellbasiertes Management" als eine Führung von Organisationen verstanden, die durch formale Modelle unterstützt wird. Ausgegangen wird von den Grundideen der Kybernetik und der Entwicklung der Konzepte der Kybernetik mit ihren drei Anwendungsfeldern, - technisch, biologisch und sozial. Damit werden die je nach Kontext unterschiedlichen Schwerpunkte bezüglich der Anwendung kybernetischer Prinzipien vermittelt. In der Folge wird untersucht, welche kybernetischen Konzepte ein modellbasiertes Management wirksam unterstützen können. Auf dieser Basis wird dann ein integratives kybernetisches Rahmenkonzept für ein modellbasiertes Management erarbeitet. Dieses soll Führungskräften helfen, das besser zu verstehen, was sie im Managementprozess tun.
This contribution aims to show a way towards better models for management support. We compare linear and nonlinear models in terms of their respective performance. Based on a case study, the respective benefits and shortcomings are fleshed out. A linear spreadsheet model and a nonlinear System Dynamics model are used to deal with one and the same issue: capacity planning in a large telecommunications company. Our analysis refers to both the qualities of the models and the process of model building in that firm. The necessity of non-linear models, when dealing with complex dynamic issues, is substantiated, and strategies for the implementation of such models in organizations are outlined.
The current economic crisis could deliver valuable lessons for economic agents. However, it seems that those have not learnt essential lessons, continuing their "business as usual". A dynamic simulation model presented in this chapter highlights that this is likely to lead to the next crunch in the offing. Even before we have mastered this crisis the next one is already looming. Does prevention have a chance? How can it be achieved?
