QUERY Adoption Dynamics

[""Colin Beveridge""]

Posted by ""Colin Beveridge"" <colin@colin.beveridge.name> Following discussion in the Business SIG at the last two SDS annual conferences, I have been quietly working on an ""adoption dynamics"" model since the Nijmegen conference, with a view to submitting a brief paper or workshop session for SDS07 in Boston. Basically, my focus is on the generic dynamics facing adoption of new management methodologies/ management tools, although I intend to use SD as the case/ premise.

Welcome any feedback on validity of this approach, given the ""difficulty""
that my ""model"" is not based on data of any kind so is probably unlikely to meet acceptance criteria!

ColinB
Posted by ""Colin Beveridge"" <colin@colin.beveridge.name> posting date Thu, 4 Jan 2007 13:00:43 -0000 _______________________________________________

[""Kim Warren""]

Posted by ""Kim Warren"" <Kim@strategydynamics.com>

Hi Colin .. I guess you know of the Bass Diffusion model as one possible start point. This would treat people as being either users or not, so there may be something closer to the marketing choice pipeline at work instead - I found this fit quite well in a couple of cases where there is an adoption dynamic of staff needing to become aware, informed, using and committed to a new approach or process.

Kim Warren
Posted by ""Kim Warren"" <Kim@strategydynamics.com> posting date Fri, 5 Jan 2007 13:10:06 -0000 _______________________________________________

[""Alan Graham""]

Posted by ""Alan Graham"" <Alan.Graham@paconsulting.com>

Precedents: Peter Milling's fine article in SDR generalizing the Bass model, and others. Jack Homer's MIT thesis and article in Technology Forecasting and Social Change on diffusion of Medical Technology.

Approach: No data of any kind? Well, how about a purpose? The phrase ""building a model of"" (rather than ""building a model for"") is usually a prelude to much thrashing and wasted effort. You can only tell what kind of data you want when it's relative to some purpose.

Cheers,

Alan


Alan K. Graham, PhD
Federal and Defense Services
PA Consulting Group
Posted by ""Alan Graham"" <Alan.Graham@paconsulting.com> posting date Sat, 6 Jan 2007 18:26:45 -0500 _______________________________________________

[""Colin Beveridge""]

Posted by ""Colin Beveridge"" <colin@colin.beveridge.name>

Kim

Thanks, the Bass Diffusion model is extremely useful for working with products and artefacts (which could be SD consultancy services) in a formal adoption/ procurement context.

I am not so sure that the Bass model fits knowledge and methodology adoption, however. For sure some Bass aspects may well apply to the diffusion of a management methodology but my present interest lies beyond the formal/ conscious organisational adoption process, towards those informal initiatives within the organisation which can often mature to critical mass without formal approval.

There are many instances of ""underground innovation"" and ""skunkworks""
product development in manufacturing companies and I strongly suspect that many management methodologies/ approaches are adopted (or developed) as informal initiatives, driven by individuals or groups within the organisation. These informal channels often run in parallel to [or perhaps contra] formally adopted management tools.

SD would appear to be a prime candidate for the informal route to adoption, building on the evidence of the first 50 years of practice, because it can be adopted without major capital investment and targeted towards problems of real importance, using relatively inexpensive [labour costs and opportunity time excepted] resource.

I don't know if there has been any research on the routes to organisational adoption of System Dynamics and, if so, the relative balance between formal and informal initiatives.

I believe we need to recognise and understand both routes to organisational adoption of SD before we can each determine our own local response to the challenges facing adoption.

I hope others will appreciate the likely value of applying Systems Thinking and Systems Dynamics to SD itself...

ColinB
Posted by ""Colin Beveridge"" <colin@colin.beveridge.name> posting date Sat, 6 Jan 2007 19:57:22 -0000 _______________________________________________

[Jean-Jacques Laublé]

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

Hi Colin

Building a model without any data is ate the same time easier technically (no cumbersome calibration) and much more difficult conceptually without the guidance of experiences.

To my opinion there are fundamentally two kinds of simulation: the ones with experiences of the past with data and the other without data where you are left with your imagination and your dreams too. These two kinds of simulation must probably be conducted in a very different way.

I have looked in the SD literature if somebody has tried to study the subject but did not find any reference. I would be glad to have one if somebody knows something about the subject.

Aldo Zagonel once separated SD simulations into 5 kinds, the third one being the classical SD with past data. He must have probably studied the question.
Kim Warren in his book is more oriented with simulation of the second kind, without data that is to my opinion more adapted to the business environment where it is more difficult to use past data due to the more changing environment.

The second kind of simulation without past data is difficult because you can build as many very different sort of models that are not better than the others. It is necessary to consider a lot of different scenarios. But it is too somewhat more interesting because you are more free to invent new solutions that can too be better applied having not too deal with the weight of the past.

As to the objective of studying the adoption dynamic it is not an easy one that has many parameters to be considered. The objective to my opinion should not to give any solution that could be pretentious but to help thinking about the problem.

After the discussion about the adoption of SD by American authorities which is a process of adoption too, I have tried to make a model of the growth of SD a bit like the one you can find in the Vensim examples but I stopped because it was too difficult.

I tried with something like the Bass diffusion model.
It is very simple but unfortunately relying on parameters very difficult to evaluate and at the end you finish with something not credible.
I have changed my objective and started a model that tries to understand the policy of development of a new SD consultant.
Policy meaning for example what problems to accept.
Faced with a client's problem, the question is:
Will I accept the problem knowing that I know that the added value of my work may be weak?
Will I spent time looking for customers with more added value?
What are the consequences of this choice on the dynamic of my development?
This kind of model is much more easy than a general model of the growth of the field although less complete. But it can help understand some of the difficulties of the field.
I think that one of the difficulty of the field is the lack of consultants which is mainly due to the difficulty of the field.

It is the case in France where you do not only find any consultants but nobody who ever heard about SD.

I will be glad to help you in your endeavour if you are interested.
Regards.

Jean-Jacques Laublé
Strasbourg France
Posted by Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jacques.lauble@wanadoo.fr> posting date Sat, 6 Jan 2007 19:21:16 +0100 _______________________________________________