QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

This forum contains all archives from the SD Mailing list (go to http://www.systemdynamics.org/forum/ for more information). This is here as a read-only resource, please post any SD related questions to the SD Discussion forum.
Locked
""Melhuish, James (US SSA)"" <
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""Melhuish, James (US SSA)"" < »

Posted by ""Melhuish, James (US SSA)"" <james.melhuish@baesystems.com>

As we near the 50th anniversary of the field of System Dynamics (or is it the methodology of...?), I would like people to consider writing system dynamics with initial capitals: System Dynamics.

I believe this is important as we write papers and publish our work, both in our field and outside of it. Consider sentences such as:

1) The behavior of this dynamic system was hard to control.
2) The vehicle system dynamics were unstable during cornering.
3) Jay Forrester invented system dynamics in the 1950s.

The third sentence doesn't work for me. ""system dynamics"" have been around for a lot longer than humans have existed, whereas System Dynamics has been around only since 1956.

See an example from a different field:
http://iol-a.informs.org/site/OperationsResearch/

""The mission of Operations Research is to serve the entire Operations Research (OR) community...""

Thoughts anyone?

James

----------------------------------------------
James Melhuish
Lead Research Scientist
BAE Systems, Advanced Information Technologies
6 New England Executive Park
Burlington, MA 01803
Posted by ""Melhuish, James (US SSA)"" <james.melhuish@baesystems.com> posting date Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:25:28 -0400 _______________________________________________
John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.ED
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.ED »

Posted by John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.EDU>

I agree with James Melhuish -- System Dynamics is a field of inquiry,

system dynamics describes the dynamics of a particular system.
Further, the field is System Dynamics, not Systems Dynamics, System's Dynamics, or Systems' Dynamics.

I also want to urge our community to capitalize System Dynamics in another way -- in this 50th anniversary year, consider a gift to the System Dynamics Society to capitalize our operations by building an endowment.

We look forward to seeing you all at the conference this summer, capital letters at the ready!

John Sterman
Posted by John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.EDU> posting date Fri, 16 Mar 2007 07:24:50 -0400 _______________________________________________
""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london »

Posted by ""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london.edu>

Thanks to James Melhuish for suggesting the capitalisation of System Dynamics, and John Sterman for further clarification.

In my spare time I work as a freelance editor of academic papers and theses in management science and related business-school areas, mainly for those whose first language is not English (in addition to maintaining a long-standing interest in SD).

I've often hesitated over the omission of capitals for SD, and also the inclusion of the terminal 's', but from here on will suggest 'System Dynamics' when it refers to the field of enquiry, unless authors prefer otherwise.

Paul G. Ellis PhD
Teaching & Research Coordinator
Management Science & Operations
London Business School
Posted by ""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london.edu> posting date Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:42:14 -0000 _______________________________________________
Bob Eberlein <bob@vensim.com&
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by Bob Eberlein <bob@vensim.com& »

Posted by Bob Eberlein <bob@vensim.com>

Bill Harris and I had a small exchange on this. Bill points out that many style guidelines push away from capilization in a case such as this (psychology, economics, quantum physics, mathematics - none use caps). But psychologists study psychology, economists study economics and so on. Our field is unique in that, as John Sterman points out, ""system dynamics"" does not necessarily mean the same thing to different people.

Bill's research results are below - I don't think this is the right forum for the fine points of style - perhaps an informal committee can convene itself over dinner or drinks during the conference and issue a ruling.


...


You might have a problem getting that past editors, at least those who
follow the Chicago Manual of Style, and those non-editors who know the
CMOS might wonder at your usage. See, for example,

http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS ... ion01.html

Here are a few style guides I found this morning in print and online
that seem to have varying degrees of authority:

_Keys for Writers_, Ann Raimes, Second Edition, p. 353

""Do not capitalize general classes or types of people, places,
things, or ideas: government, jury, mall, prairie, utopia, traffic,
court, french fries, the twentieth century, goodness, reason.""

_Handbook of Technical Writing_, Alred et al., Sixth Edition, p. 82

""Types of organizations are not capitalized unless they are part of
an official name."" From that, I presume that both ""System Dynamics
Society"" and a ""society devoted to system dynamics"" are correct.

http://www.sc.edu/webpresence/editorial ... ation.html

From points 9 and 18 of their capitalization rules and 2 and 3 of
the do-not-capitalize rules, I gather they'd write ""system dynamics""
unless it were the name of a specific class or degree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... al_letters

Perhaps less authoritative, the Wikipedia style guide says not to
capitalize systems of thought or musical genres; they point to
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS ... ons01.html.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitaliza ... capitalize

This article suggests that the trend is towards fewer capitals; I
would agree that Wikipedia isn't necessarily authoritative unless
one can confirm it against other sources.

http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/capital.asp

By omission, I think this author of a book on grammar would have one
use lower case for system dynamics.

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/capitals.htm

This seems to be a teaching reference for students. They say, ""We
do not capitalize majors or academic disciplines unless they refer
to a language, ethnic group, or geographical entity: Roundbottom is
an economics major, but he loves his courses in French and East
European studies,"" which I think is relevant.

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000050.htm

They seem to say the same thing by example.

http://dictionary.reference.com/writing ... ation.html

The Miscellaneous section seems to say not to capitalize ""system
dynamics"" unless we had called it ""Forrester system dynamics law,""
in which case only his name would have been capitalized.
Interestingly, according to this reference, had system dynamics been
a satirical law, we could have apparently written ""Forrester System
Dynamics Law."" I think that's inconsistent, and I'm discounting
this reference.

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~lingpub/mis ... _sheet.pdf

Section 19b of this document is the first one I found that might
suggest System Dynamics as the proper form.

Bill Harris via Bob Eberlein
Posted by Bob Eberlein <bob@vensim.com>
posting date Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:42:14 -0000
_______________________________________________
""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london »

Posted by ""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london.edu>

It's useful to see this compilation, and as an editor (ref SD6331) I'll go with the proposed ruling, if it happens.

However, I'm not convinced that journals generally adhere fully to their own style guides. One of my Stanford clients who submits regularly to Journal of Finance (and regularly gets accepted) routinely ignores my suggestion to conform to their style guide. Whether or not JoF copy-editors fully revise his submissions, I've not checked.

I suspect that authors would often get away with capitalising System Dynamics, and doubt it would damn a submission if included. If the copy-editing is not obsessive, it might end up helping the cause, so I argue that there's nothing to lose by trying.

As I won't be able to attend the proposed informal committee, someone might like to count this as a vote in favour.

Paul Ellis
Posted by ""Paul Ellis"" <pellis@london.edu> posting date Sun, 18 Mar 2007 18:00:46 -0000 _______________________________________________
""Bob Cavana"" <Bob.Cavana@vu
Junior Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""Bob Cavana"" <Bob.Cavana@vu »

Posted by ""Bob Cavana"" <Bob.Cavana@vuw.ac.nz>

hi all,

aren't we being a bit 'over-sensitive' here by trying to create a new norm to capitilise the first letters in our field of 'system dynamics'? in System Dynamics Review the field is referred to as 'system dynamics' not 'System Dynamics'; and that is the situation with most (all?) of the system dynamics textbooks.

the usual 'international norm' is to capitilise the acronym to SD which is also the standard practice in the systems sciences, eg Peter Checkland's soft systems methodology is referred to as SSM; Stafford Beer's viable systems model in cybernetics is referred to as VSM; etc

if we introduce further 'rituals' into system dynamics practice & behaviour, we possibly risk further 'alienation' rather than 'acceptance'.
unfortunately history is littered with ritualistic forms of behaviour - some good, some bad.

i suggest that members of the system dynamics community just continue to use their own judgement when they wish to refer to the field with the first letters capitilised or in lower case (as is the 'usual' practice).

all the best,

Bob

A/Prof Bob Cavana
Victoria Management School.
Posted by ""Bob Cavana"" <Bob.Cavana@vuw.ac.nz> posting date Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:42:51 +1200 _______________________________________________
Khalid Saeed <saeed@wpi.edu&g
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by Khalid Saeed <saeed@wpi.edu&g »

Posted by Khalid Saeed <saeed@wpi.edu>

We can also capitalize System Dynamics by working on big issues of the time, as Jay pointed out, and publishing our penetrating analyses and innovative policy insights.

Khalid Saeed
Posted by Khalid Saeed <saeed@wpi.edu>
posting date Sun, 18 Mar 2007 13:31:45 -0400 _______________________________________________
Bill Harris <bill_harris@faci
Senior Member
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by Bill Harris <bill_harris@faci »

Posted by Bill Harris <bill_harris@facilitatedsystems.com>

One more set of points, and then I'll stop.

First, will we be consistent, or is System Dynamics above Programming (which, for computers, is different than programming for a TV network -- or will the TV networks want the capitalized version?), Internal Medicine (which, as a field, is different than medicine intended to be taken internally rather than applied externally), or even Chemistry (as a discipline no doubt different than the potential attraction between people -- but match.com might want the capitalized version, too)? Will we differentiate between Chemistry (which, I think, has confounding
uses) and physics (which seems to cause less confusion)? If we just capitalize SD, we may look conceited; if we capitalize them all, we may look silly; if we try the Chemistry and physics approach, we may need a rather byzantine set of rules.

Second, isn't this focusing on precisely the wrong thing, especially shortly after our laments about not being accepted by business and government? No one (well, almost no one) cares about SD, just like
(almost) no one cares about a half inch (or 12mm) box end wrench. What they care about is solving a problem or tightening a bolt. Wouldn't we further SD more by focusing more on the customer / client / problem and less on us?

Finally, what about having someone on the editorial board of the SDR contact Wiley and ask for their ruling? Of course, the editorial board could decide on a ""house style,"" but, if it strays too far from established Wiley norms, they may risk looking silly, and Wiley could, I presume, override them.

These are (I hope, as I'm sure you do, too) my last words on the subject.

Bill
-- Bill Harris http://facilitatedsystems.com/weblog/ Facilitated Systems Posted by Bill Harris <bill_harris@facilitatedsystems.com>
posting date Sun, 18 Mar 2007 13:36:35 -0700 _______________________________________________
Monte Kietpawpan <kietpawpan@
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by Monte Kietpawpan <kietpawpan@ »

Posted by Monte Kietpawpan <kietpawpan@yahoo.com>

Fields like servomechanism and cybernetics have no problem
with the usage of their names. There are two things in common.

1. Use single term as the fields' names
2. Be dictionary entries.

System dynamics, by contrast, lacks these properties.
Two words are used to name the field, and system dynamics has
not yet become an entry of general dictionaries like Webster's and Oxford.

Moreover, the term 'system dynamics' means different things to
different researchers, even among system dynamicists.
Using system dynamics as a key word for finding SD papers,
ones would obtain many results that are not SD papers.
To change the name of the field is a policy choice.

Monte Kietpawpan
Ph.D. Student,
Faculty of Environmental Management
Prince of Songkla University
Songkhla, 90112, Thailand
Posted by Monte Kietpawpan <kietpawpan@yahoo.com> posting date Mon, 19 Mar 2007 23:35:08 -0700 (PDT) _______________________________________________
""John Gunkler"" <jgunkler@sp
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""John Gunkler"" <jgunkler@sp »

Posted by ""John Gunkler"" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com>

While I have no strong opinion about whether we should capitalize system dynamics (System Dynamics), I feel obligated to point out one reason to do so. It has to do with marketing and, in particular, branding.
Kimberly-Clark spends money every year to insist that editors capitalize Kleenex, as a brand name -- and justify it by the advantage they get from calling attention to the fact that ""not all tissues are alike, ours is better.""

We are not in quite the same position, but we are definitely (in my opinion) in danger of being lost in the shuffle among such phrases as ""systems thinking,"" ""systems science,"" ""general systems theory,"" ""systems analyst,""
""systems analysis,"" ""system mechanics,"" ""systems development,"" etc., etc.
The word ""system"" is everywhere these days, and everyone, at least in the business world, wants us to know that they understand ""systems"" (not just whatever method it is that they're flogging.)

I think it might be useful in calling more attention to our field, and distinguishing ourselves from others, if we capitalized the name of our discipline. Whether that's enough reason to do so I leave it up to others in this society to decide,


John
Posted by ""John Gunkler"" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com> posting date Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:01:32 -0400 _______________________________________________
""John Morecroft"" <jmorecrof
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""John Morecroft"" <jmorecrof »

Posted by ""John Morecroft"" <jmorecroft@london.edu>

My preference is to continue the use of system dynamics without capitals.

The topic of capitalisation cropped-up for me recently with an edited book on methods and models for strategic development (Supporting Strategy, editors O'Brien and Dyson, Wiley 2007). In that case the editors and contributing authors agreed that named approaches such as Soft Systems Methodology or SODA (Strategic Options and Development
Analysis) will have capitals but that fields such as economics, scenario planning and system dynamics will not use capitals. I thought this was a clear and practical solution.

John Morecroft
Adjunct Associate Professor
Management Science and Operations
London Business School
Regent's Park
London NW1 4SA
United Kingdom
Posted by ""John Morecroft"" <jmorecroft@london.edu> posting date Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:04:05 -0000 _______________________________________________
""Magne Myrtveit"" <magne@myr
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""Magne Myrtveit"" <magne@myr »

Posted by ""Magne Myrtveit"" <magne@myrtveit.com>

Our emotions want System Dynamics to be something special, right?

Sometimes our emotions (and defensiveness) work against us.

Standards seem to point towards the use of system dynamics.

Do we agree that the use capital letters tend to be somewhat narrowing? It makes me think of something like a particular product or method, a brand, or something that is owned and protected by a company or a closed community.

We should not be closed, protective, and narrow.

My wote: system dynamics

Best regards,
Magne Myrtveit
Dynaplan As
Posted by ""Magne Myrtveit"" <magne@myrtveit.com> posting date Tue, 20 Mar 2007 12:14:20 +0100 _______________________________________________
Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jac
Senior Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jac »

Posted by Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jacques.lauble@wanadoo.fr>

Hi everybody.

I think that capitalizing or not should normally have no importance.
But capitalizing may reinforce the point of view that the world is separated in static and dynamic, with a weak and not quantitative dynamic called system thinking or by some SD lite.
That point of view has caused a lot of damage to the field, and especially to new comers who would better first learn to make static models which is already difficult and learn to use all the fundamentals of SD (dimension coherence, causality, calibration, reality checks etc. ) in a static environment before wanting to make dynamic models that are much more difficult to build.

I personally do not see a real difference between these worlds, because I am interested into understanding reality and can choose to wear static or dynamic spectacles or both depending on the subject.

But changing the type of spectacles will not change the reality, it will only change the perception of it.
So I vote for system dynamics.
Regards.
Jean-Jacques Laublé
Strasbourg France
Posted by Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jacques.lauble@wanadoo.fr> posting date Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:59:20 +0100 _______________________________________________
Carl Betterton <carlb@uga.edu
Junior Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by Carl Betterton <carlb@uga.edu »

Posted by Carl Betterton <carlb@uga.edu>

Two points:

In the text book that we use for Operations Management, /Six Sigma/ is consistently capitalized. Wikipedia defines Six Sigma as ""a system of practices"" and uses capitals for the term. Not sure where this fits with the editorial rules.

How many of us on the listserv? Could we get 1,000 people to ""capitalize"" the Society (as John suggested) at a mere $50 each, in celebration of the 50th anniversary? That would be a start for the endowment. Of course, folks with bigger bankrolls would not have to be limited to $50!

Best regards,

Carl
Posted by Carl Betterton <carlb@uga.edu> posting date Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:46:46 -0400 _______________________________________________
Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jac
Senior Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jac »

Posted by Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jacques.lauble@wanadoo.fr>

Hi everybody.

Carl's suggestion is very appropriate.
But to increase the impact of such a 'capitalization', the SD society may find a use of the monney gathered able to inspire the people's 'generosity'.
Finding that use should be first voted so that the maximum of monney be gathered.
People are so much accustomed to pay for taxes with no idea of the use of them, that it would be a nice change to pay willingly for something known.
But I am not sure that it is a good idea.
The idea of capitalizing for the SD society is a good idea, but whether the use of the monney has to be defined or not, should be voted too.

Regards.
Jean-Jacques Laublé
Posted by Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jacques.lauble@wanadoo.fr> posting date Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:03:19 +0100 _______________________________________________
""Douglas Franco"" <dfranco@c
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ""Douglas Franco"" <dfranco@c »

Posted by ""Douglas Franco"" <dfranco@cantv.net>

Capitalize or not capitalize, that is not the question.
To be or not to be, that is the question.

As khalid has pointed out, there is more in SD that we are already using for better insights, threre are a lot of issues in heaven and earth that we should deal with. For instance, the story of the month by Barry.

I suggest a list of things that SD has, relevant to improve solutions, not fully used and a list of problems not even considered for solutions.

DOUGLAS FRANCO
Posted by ""Douglas Franco"" <dfranco@cantv.net> posting date Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:24:02 -0400 _______________________________________________
George Richardson <gpr@albany
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by George Richardson <gpr@albany »

Posted by George Richardson <gpr@albany.edu>

Lots if interesting, sophisticated thoughts here. I wonder if we might take a rather simple (unsophisticated?) instrumental approach.

Suppose we think that in something we are writing ""system dynamics"" (small S, small D) would be interpreted not as a field of scholarly study and practice but just as ""ups and downs in a
system."" But suppose we wanted to flag we're talking about a field.
Then it seems right to capitalize: ""System Dynamics."" The capitals would tell the reader that what we mean at that moment is a set of scholarly traditions, literature, professional practice, and tools.

If on the other hand, we don't think we'd run into that confusion of field vs. topic, then we just write the name of the field as ""system dynamics"" (small S, small D). Personally, I like the small letters, so that we look more like the way other (more established?) fields handle it. I'd like us to look established and confident in our excellence and place in the scholarly, professional panoply and feel that the small S, small D implicitly helps to send that sort of message.

This sort of an instrumental approach is probably what we're doing now, since sometimes we see the capitals and sometimes we don't.
And it would mean we could continue to be loose about it (which we probably will anyway) and feel good about that, as if that looseness had a plan, a rationale.

(On another hand, we could change the name. But that's another topic.)

..George
Posted by George Richardson <gpr@albany.edu> posting date Fri, 23 Mar 2007 10:07:26 -0400 _______________________________________________
ybarlas@boun.edu.tr <ybarlas@
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by ybarlas@boun.edu.tr <ybarlas@ »

Posted by ybarlas@boun.edu.tr <ybarlas@boun.edu.tr>

Dear friends,

This discussion on capitalizing is related to a larger/deeper issue: the very name system dynamics is too general and awkward for a methodology. We, as SD community are about two different levels of activity:

i- we study the dynamics of all sorts of (economic, environmental, social, business, manufacturing, ecological...) systems. Since we are not specialized in a *specific* sector, but dynamic feedback systems in general, it is proper to say that 'our field of inquiry is system dynamics' (i.e. dynamics of systems).
This is fine.

ii- but secondly we are also about a very *specific* modeling philosophy and
methodology: we use stock-flow models of problems using an endogenous, feedback perspective and focus on improving behavior patterns (policies) rather than point prediction, and we have a whole methodology of validity testing, analysis and design and software to support it. This, can NOT be called system dynamics anymore. Such a specific philosophy and methodology can not be given such a general name. (And terms like 'system dynamics approach' or 'system dynamics method' are semantically and linguistically wrong too).

I believe that this second mode of improper use (inadequacy) of 'system dynamics' periodically causes people to look for solutions (like 'capitalizing'
SD). Worse, people avoid using the term 'system dynamics model' (or method or
approach) altogether, or prefer 'STELLA or Vensim or Powersim 'model'
(outsiders sometimes call 'Forrester models/approach', etc).

I believe that capitalizing System Dynamics will not quite solve the problem. (It would be like using selectively statistics and Statistics, depending on how you use it). I think system dynamics is fine in its first usage above. BUT we need to adopt a more specific, (perhaps capitalized) name (and possibly an acronym as well) for our specific methodology. Like 'systemic feedback modeling' (SFM) or even an newly created word (like cybernetics). Monte Kietpawpan (SD6342) made a very important observation:
""...
1. Use single term as the fields' names
2. Be dictionary entries.

System dynamics, by contrast, lacks these properties.
Two words are used to name the field, and system dynamics has
not yet become an entry of general dictionaries like Webster's and Oxford.
Moreover, the term 'system dynamics' means different things to
different researchers, even among system dynamicists.
Using system dynamics as a key word for finding SD papers,
ones would obtain many results that are not SD papers..""

I think the observations above point to a serious problem, especially as we enter this new age of 'info explosion/pollution' where searching and finding the right information is becoming critical.
About ten years ago I did an informal library search and reached a similar conclusion. (I presented a little paper on it at ISDC). The last item of my
'98 President's talk was also about this problem. See:
http://www.systemdynamics.org/newslette ... tm#PresAdd
(For your convenience I pasted the last paragraph at the bottom of this message).

In these past ten years, I am afraid that the problem did not go away. John Gunkler just made a very similar observation (SD6340).
In conclusion, I think it is worth asking creative people in our field to come up with a unique term, terms, acronym,... that best describes our unique methodology and can enter dictionaries. Perhaps they can be submitted at the conference and the winner chosen as a result of a contest?
have a great weekend!
Yaman Barlas
...
And finally, a non-scientific observation of mine (shared by many friends): It seems that in many publications/presentations dealing with system dynamics, authors avoid using the term ""system dynamics."" Instead, they use various terms like ""STELLA"" or ""DYNAMO"" model, ""Simulation"" model, ""Forrester"" approach, ""Systems Thinking,"" etc. I am sure there are many different reasons why this is the case: practical convenience or other concerns, scientific/technical reasons, and some social, historical and psychological factors. From a purely technical perspective, system dynamics means ""dynamics of systems"" and it is a reasonable name for our Society in general. On the other hand, it seems like other specific usages like ""system dynamics model"" or ""system dynamics approach"" are awkward, non-descriptive, even linguistically incorrect. (For those interested, I have a small library of research on the various uses, misuses and ""non-use"" of ""system dynamics."") But whatever the reason, I believe that the current situation constitutes an unnecessary communication handicap for the Society. In particular, it is totally unacceptable for our models and methodology to be reduced to software names. I suggest that we should adopt a standard name for our models and methodology and urge all members to use it.
Examples of such terms descriptive of our methodology could be: ""systemic feedback"" model (method, approach) or ""systemic dynamic feedback"" model...
Alternatively, we could adopt an acronym (like SDFS, standing for ""systemic dynamic feedback simulation"") - although I am personally not a great fan of acronyms. The name does not have to be perfect; the critical issue is that it be accepted and consistently used by all members of the Society, as well as non-members involved in system dynamics.

Posted by ybarlas@boun.edu.tr
posting date Fri, 23 Mar 2007 20:26:31 +0200 _______________________________________________
John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.ED
Junior Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:39 am

QUERY Please Capitalize System Dynamics

Post by John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.ED »

Posted by John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.EDU>

Over the last week there have been many interesting comments about whether the words ""system dynamics"" should be capitalized, and a few comments supporting the real purpose of my post on this issue, capitalizing the field of system dynamics.

I'd like to endorse Carl Betterton's suggestion that folks involved in the field and on this list help us celebrate the 50th anniversary of the field by making a voluntary donation to the System Dynamics Society. No votes or policy decisions are needed; any individual can contribute whatever they desire. The society does a great job now providing services to the members, supporting a wide range of chapters and SIGS, and running wonderful conferences. We could do much more with your support. Any amount is most welcome; as a non- profit organization, any donations are US tax deductible (check with your accountant for the regulations for other nations).

Roberta Spencer informs me that donations can be made by check made out to the System Dynamics Society (US dollars drawn on a US bank), credit card or wire transfer. The Society mailing address is:

Roberta Spencer, Exec Dir
System Dynamics Society
Milne 300-Rockefeller College
University at Albany
Albany, NY 12222

For more information please contact Roberta at the Society office:
email address: system.dynamics@albany.edu
phone: 1 518 442-3865

We thank you all for your participation in the list and in moving the field of _ystem _ynamics forward (insert SD or sd per your personal preference).

John Sterman
Posted by John Sterman <jsterman@MIT.EDU> posting date Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:08:46 -0400 _______________________________________________
Locked