Ventana software support forum

Posted: **Mon Apr 10, 1995 5:44 pm**

Open Letter to the System Dynamics Community:

I believe the System Dynamics Review should be reformatted
in the following way:
1) All main articles should include the following three items:
a) Target article
b) Open Peer Commentary on the target article.
c) Target article authors Reply to the commentary.
2) In subsequent SDR issues Continuing Commentary of the
various target articles should be published with the Reply
(if possible) of the author of the target article.

This format has been used with great success in the journal,
Behavioral and Brain Sciences. It has been very effective in
clarifying and integrating issues during the coelesence of fields
now going on among cognitive neuroscience, philosophy of the
mind, linguistics, and psychology.

System Dynamics models almost always experience resistance to
acceptance, particularly from outside the system dynamics
community. For that reason invitations for Open Peer Commentary
should include, not only relevant system dynamicists, but scientists
from the field of application. It is important to choose a few key
scientists and thinkers who are most opposed to the model and its
implications. Such commentary will bring out into the open unstated,
controversial, or negative opinions and ideas where they can be
analyzed and discussed.

.... Arlen Wolpert
awolpert@world.std.com

Posted: **Thu Apr 13, 1995 12:12 pm**

Regarding Arlen Wolperts proposal for reformatting the System Dynamics
Review:

I like this proposal. I think the value of this listserve is partially that
more discussion of the ideas can occur, and less "presentation" only of
them. Dialogue on the implementation of the ideas is a key need to make
system dynamics more in the main stream. Id like to see one of the target
articles be "use of microworlds" as a vehicle for change and introduction of
the ideas. Like Dan Kims and Peter Senges paper recently. Each of us who
are practitioners involved in trying to implement could talk about what we
are doing with microworlds, or other approaches at implementation, and
feedback what "works" and try to get at why. There needs to be a mix of
application and theory. I would be happy to write about what we in BP are
doing with the DuPont developed "Manufacturing Game" (c) in terms of
energizing both our TQM process in Chemicals, and introducing systems
thinking ideas to BP Oil and BP Exploration.

Paul Monus
BP Oil Lima Refinery
Lima Ohio
monuspa@olima.usaref.msnet.bp.com
419/226-2383 voice
419/226-2805 fax
----------

Posted: **Fri Apr 14, 1995 8:29 am**

I am a bit preturbed about the discussion on the SDR format. While there
are a number of publications serving the consulting and training
interests, SDR is one of the very few journals dedicated to SD aimed at
the academic community. There of course is a lot of room for improving its
quality, but changing SDR to a tatle publication would remove it
completely from the important niche it serves.

Khalid Saeed
saeed@ait.ac.th