Ventana software support forum

Posted: **Fri Apr 02, 1999 10:33 pm**

Re: Jim Hines, then Stephen Wehrenberg mail:

>Two thoughts: first, I agree wholeheartedly that certifying programs
>might be possible, while certifying individuals would be near
>impossible, That said, Id like to put a big stake in the ground in
>favor of "accessibility." Any such program should have a strong
>distance learning component. Not only does modern technology make that
>both possible and attractive, but the inaccessibility of todays
>programs to most working folks presents a real challenge to diffusing
>the knowledge/skill.

Until now I have been on the sidelines processing the thoughts
written on this list and learning a great deal. I am new
to systems dynamics and systems thinking, was a session assistant
at the Pegasus Systems Thinking in Action conference last
September, and just returned from Singapore where I spent
two days with the Police Force learning about their shared
visioning process.

Im a doctoral student in Workforce Education at Ohio State
University, and there are no courses for me in systems
thinking. It is hard to envision a program that
does not include increasing my systems learning and
experience substantially.

Accessibility is the issue here, and in lieu of a program
in systems dynamics here at the university, I would relish
the opportunity for distance education - or an internship
or mentoring opportunity - to deepen my level of knowledge
and experience in systems thinking.

A certified program at the university level would be a vehicle
for those seeking community in learning what we are struggling
to absorb independently.

It cant happen soon enough.

Tina Overtoom
From: Christine Overtoom <overtoom.1@osu.edu>

_______________________________________________________
Christine Overtoom, OSU Campus Collaborative
Community Outreach Partnership Center
020 Mershon Center
1501 Neil Avenue
Columbus, OH 43201

614-688-8410 phone
614-292-2407 fax
614-291-2931 home office
614-292-2407 fax

Posted: **Sat Apr 03, 1999 9:16 am**

On Sat, 1 May 1999, Stephen Wehrenberg wrote:

> Second, and perhaps more easily done, Id like to see some way for us to
> communicate what we are working on/with ... particularly practitioners
> and dilettantes (such as ... oh, say ... me!). Perhaps a section in the
> Journal that might have entries like: . . .
>

There is no reason that I know of that the current Notes and Insights
section of the journal couldnt be used this way for announcements that
contain some substance about the ongoing activity -- dynamics of the
program, scope of the modeling effort, emergin insights and so on. For
straight announcements of ongoing work such as the paragraph above, the
Announcements and Reviews section of the Review should be perfect. If the
journal editors got enough of these, a special subsection of Announcements
and Reviews could be labled to flag these netoworking announcements.

So I guess the right response here is applause and enthusiastic support
for the idea, and the urging to just do it!

...GPR

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Richardson G.P.Richardson@Albany.edu
Chair of Public Administration and Policy Phone: 518-442-5258
University at Albany - SUNY, Albany, NY 12222 Fax: 518-442-5298
http://cnsvax.albany.edu/~gr383/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: **Sat Apr 03, 1999 9:59 am**

Jack Pughs posting raised a number of good discussions on the Societys
future directions. Two things come to my mind which,I think, we should
address seriously:

One, enhancing the prestige or reputation of SD teaching. At the moment, SD
subjects are offered by various universities and a more formal degree by
WPI. There should be an international effort in offering a formal degree in
SD. Mature-age students from various countries can take advantage of
distance education technologies and learn system dynamics. Mature-age
students (and hopefully with interdisciplinary background) are more likely
to put SD in practice than any other student group. Can System Dynamics
Society in association with other universities around the world offer such
a course? If it is possible, then I am sure the outside world would take SD
teaching seriously.

Two, System Dynamics Societys role as a regulator or education developer.
At the moment we seem to be concentrating on educational development and, I
think, we should go on that path. The Society should continue to encourage
courses development, chapter formation, group activities, etc., but promote
these activities vigorously. The Societys role as a regulator (for
differentiation between experts and learners, various membership status,
etc) may be addressed later. With such a low number of members we would be
wasting our resources if we put very high stress on regulatory matters.

Purnendu Mandal.
From: Purnendu Mandal <purnendu@deakin.edu.au>

Dr. Purnendu Mandal,
Senior Lecturer and
Coordinator, Technology Systems Research Group,
School of Engineering and Technology
Deakin University
Geelong, VIC 3217 Australia.
Tel: 61-3-5227 1245; Fax: 61-3-5227 2167.

Posted: **Mon Apr 05, 1999 9:32 am**

I just wanted to take issue with Jay Forresters inclusion of learning
environments in approaches limited to providing only "a softer understanding
of systems". I agree with Jays main contention that the Society should
strive to distinguish between system dynamics and "...activities where
systems thinking means thinking about systems, talking about systems, and
believing that systems are important, but without any deep understanding of
systems". However, a well-designed learning environment based on a rigorous
system dynamics model can make system dynamics insights accessible to a
larger audience of people who do not have the skills to develop models
themselves. Simulations with the model give people rapid feedback about how
systems work and can help them build real understanding. Positive
experiences with learning environments may lead people into more extensive
study of system dynamics.

To be effective, these learning environments must make model structure
transparent and emphasize the relationship between structure and behavior.
Learning environments should also include curricula that lead people through
experiences with a model such as alternative policy tests and sensitivity
analyses that teach rather than just entertain.

I agree that we should not try to grow the field at too fast a rate by making
system dynamics something it is not. However, we can provide bridges that
expose people to system dynamics, help to draw people into the field, and
support appropriate growth. Well-designed learning environments can be one
such bridge.

Gary Hirsch
GBHirsch@aol.com

Posted: **Wed Apr 07, 1999 6:58 pm**

I appreciate Jays concern about a shallow treatment of System Dynamics =
under the title of "system thinking". I agree that when system thinking =
amounts to trying to solve a high-order nonlinear feedback systems by =
intuition, it could lead into wrong conclusions.=20
However, although it is not enough but certainly it is good to have =
many people think about systems, talk and believe that systems are =
important, even without a deep understanding of systems and system =
dynamics. A wide spread interest in systems and systems thinking can be =
considered as an opportunity for the society and growth of system =
dynamics at the same time that it could degrade the image of System =
Dynamics Society.=20
Perhaps the first stage in getting serious in system dynamics is being =
attracted by the concepts of systems and systems thinking and flow into =
a stock of people who believe that these concepts are important and can =
help them to get a better and deeper understanding of the world around =
them. May be many of those who studied system dynamics experienced and =
went through that first stage. However, it will not be good and perhaps =
damaging to the field if people stop in that first stock and get a wrong =
impression that by knowing that systems are important and by being able =
to draw and present causal loops they are systems experts to recommend =
policies based on system understanding.=20
If the society can help people interested in systems to become aware of =
different learning stages that they should go through and open different =
avenues to learn more deeply about system dynamics, then the real growth =
of the society can benefit considerably from the large number of people =
who get into the first stage. The challenge for the society is to =
increase the flow of people from the first stage into the next and =
higher stages of skill and knowledge in system dynamics. Growth of =
information and communication technology has made distance learning a =
very great potential to increase this flow as Jay noted. Development of =
teaching materials and text books is another area which can be very =
helpful but little has been done in it yet. In this regard, we should =
appreciate what John Sterman has been recently doing in creating a =
valuable new text book for the field. Promotion and encouragement of =
writing more text books and teaching materials will be another effective =
way to increase the flow from the first stage to higher stages of =
systems thinking rather than to a sink and out of a community who =
believe that system perspective understanding is crucial for a better =
management of our society. We should look for other leverages to =
increase the right rate out of the stock that represents the first =
stage.=20

=20

Ali N. Mashayekhi
From: "Ali N. Mashayekhi" <mashayek@sina.sharif.ac.ir>
Professor of Management=20
Department of Industrial Dynamics,
Sharif University of Technology,
Azadi Avenue,
Tehran, Iran.

Posted: **Mon Apr 12, 1999 11:57 am**

I have been following the responses that followed Jacks query on (new?)
priorities.
I will offer my own prirorities and then ask a "procedural" question.
My own priorities would follow directly from the "four challenges" that I
list in the 1998 Presidents talk:
1- The first challenge has to do with choosing a good problem.
2- The next challenge is about the role of models in analysis and design.
3- This takes me to the third challenge: Low record of scientific publications.
4- Finally, the last challenge is improving our communication links.
These imply three areas of priority:
1- Promote/support "good" modeling -methodologically and in practical
problem solving.
2- Promote publishing in SDR and other journals.
3- Work on improving our communication links -between different groups
within Society and between our Society and other disciplines.

Now each of the above three would imply various operational tools and
objectives, which may be premature now. But this brings me to my question:
There has already been another moderated, web-based discussion of
priorities and operational objectives. At the end of several rounds of
structured debate, several priorities and activities emerged just a few
months ago. These "concrete" targets and activities are already
communicated to PC members and many Society members. Now, people (like me)
may be confused as to how this new discussion differs from the older one.
Are we intending to end up with a set of results that will be compared with
the older one? Will the two be merged? Or, is this new procedure intending
something different that I am missing?
best regards

Yaman Barlas
From: Yaman Barlas <ybarlas@boun.edu.tr>

Posted: **Tue Apr 27, 1999 8:29 am**

The System Dynamics Society has been in existence 13 years. We have achieved=20
most of our initial priorities. Now it is time for the society to review the=20
purposes for which it was organized and perhaps to set new priorities.=20
Participation by the whole society necessary if we are to generate as many=20
new ideas as possible and for the membership to "own" the new goals that com=
e=20
from this process.

Our Articles of Organization states that:

The System Dynamics Society, Inc. is a professional society promoting system=20
dynamics through conventions, publications, journals and other activities.=20
The objectives of the Society shall be:
1) to identify, extend and unify knowledge contributing to the understanding=20
of feedback control systems,=20
2) to promote the design of structures and policies to improve the behavior=20
of such systems,=20
3) to promote the development of the field of system dynamics and the free=20
interchange of information about systems as they are found in all fields of=20
endeavor,=20
4) to promote the dissemination of information on such topics to the general=20
public, and=20
5) to encourage and develop educational programs in the behavior of systems.=20

To these ends, the Society proposes=20
=B7 to conduct meetings;=20
=B7 to publish journals, books and other materials;=20
=B7 to cooperate with other organizations interested in the advancement of t=
he=20
practice of system dynamics;=20
=B7 to stimulate research;=20
=B7 to promote high professional standards;=20
=B7 to promote the growth of system dynamics and=20
=B7 to improve its practice throughout the world.=20
=20
Initially, our top priorities were to establish a refereed journal and to=20
place the organization of our conferences on a firmer basis. I will assert=20
that these goals have been achieved. We should look at what is new or change=
d=20
in and around system dynamics and decide what the societys current role=20
should be.
=20
I will start the process by noting the following list of activities which=20
the society might be part of:
=B7 promoting all forms of systems thinking broadly,
=B7 promoting the teaching of SD in more colleges and universities,
=B7 developing college curricula,
=B7 identifying and teaching the skills honed and used by the best=20
practitioners,
=B7 expanding the teaching SD in K-12 schools,
=B7 promoting the exchange of experiences among practitioners in industry,
=B7 publishing more success stories from industry, and
=B7 defending SD against the onslaught of incompetent consultants=20

The next steps are to add to this list and to identify what the society migh=
t=20
or should do in these areas. You are invited to submit your ideas whether a=20
member of the society or not. (If you are not a member, please consider=20
joining by contacting Roberta Spencer at System.Dynamics@Albany.edu.)

Jack Pugh
President, System Dynamics Society
JandJpugh@aol.com

Posted: **Wed Apr 28, 1999 10:41 am**

Jack, I think we should now start thinking of operational means to achieve
our stated objectives. I think the goal of creating a social sciences
university that applies SD accross board for teaching and research is
appropriate. Also a certification process for practitioners is a natural
operational counterpart of formal training in a university. These might
constitute a tall order, but I think once we have set our sights, we can
find ways to achieve those goals.

Khalid
From: Khalid Saeed <saeed@WPI.EDU>

_____________________________________
Khalid Saeed
Professor and Department Head
Social Science and Policy Studies
W. P. I., 100 Institute Road
Worcester, MA 01609, USA

Ph: 508-831-5563; fax: 508-831-5896

http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Depts/SSPS/

Posted: **Wed Apr 28, 1999 12:45 pm**

Thanks for this. I have heard others remark at conferences that the
population of SD-awares has proved pretty tough to drive forward (if we
take everyone as our aspiration). In our activities at London Business
School, John Morecroft and I are having some success with the Strategy
field by what I think is a kind of reversing of the effort. Rather than
saying, I wonder what SD has to say about Strategy, we seem
(accidentally) to have arrived at Heres thinking in the Strategy field -
oh look! Its full of SD. I believe something similar has been
accomplished rather more rigorously by Anjali Sastry in Organisational
Behaviour, and probably by others in other fields. From this base, it seems
it may be possible to drive forward and wrap our arms around a much larger
community than those who might otherwise have thought they had any interest
in SD.
If all this makes sense, an aspiration such as Study thinking in other
fields for existing, implicit SD understanding, and formalise these
insights to reach out to everyone in those fields. My be helpful. [Wording
and everything is probably all wrong, but I hope the sentiment is
understandable.]
PS - Thinking some more about the Strategy field for a moment... Perhaps
the problem has been that, though there is indeed reinforcing feedback from
SD-awares to stimulate new joiners to their own stock, the out-flow of
people losing interest has simply persisted at such a high rate that this
reinforcement never gets anything moving. Sound familiar in any other
field?
Kim Warren - London Business School
From: kim warren <kim@farthing.globalnet.co.uk>

Posted: **Wed Apr 28, 1999 11:28 pm**

Jack Pughs proposal is very important.

Could I suggest two areas of work which complement his list: the elaboration of
the core body of knowledge (taking as an example the Project Management
Institutes PMBoK) and the elaboration of core competencies (at the individual
and team level) desirable for professional work.

(Some might regard the BoK and Core Competencies to be reductionism and hence the
antithesis of systems thinking ... if so Im open to suggestions on how else one
designs an appropriate undergraduate program.)

Keith Linard
From: Keith Linard <k-linard@adfa.edu.au>

Posted: **Thu Apr 29, 1999 11:14 am**

Hi there,

Can i suggest an annual scholarship for work experience / study in system =
dynamics?=20

I am a keen SDer in Australia, i want to focus on design of LEs and there =
arent many people here involved in SD. Those that are, generally do =
modeling not LEs. So, i am teaching myself LE design with the help of =
mentors throughout the world (thankyou, thankyou, thankyou to everyone who =
is doing this). It would be really handy to be able to travel to a SD =
hotspot and work with experts to build up skill levels.=20

I am proposing to do such a trip but it is a very expensive proposition =
due not only to the cost of travel and accomodation but the cost of paying =
to do the work experience. I am currently trying to gain a scholarship to =
enable me to do a trip, but it is likely that due to cost i will only be =
able to be away for just over a month and the scholarship will only cover =
part of the costs.=20

Ideally it should be a longer trip, say a 3- 6 month training / work =
experience scholarship. My investigations have shown that there are lots =
of people who have the expertise and are willing to take on a work =
experience student. (The SD family are so supportive and helpful its a =
shame not to be able to access it.)

I think it would be great if a scholarship enabling students to travel and =
learn with SD experts would be made possible.

Please consider!!!
Best wishes
Jodi
From: "Jodi-Anne Smith" <jodis@wtcc.sa.gov.au>

Jodi Smith
BAppSc(EnvHealth), PGDipNatResMgmt, now doing Phd
Corporate Development
City of West Torrens
165 Burbridge Rd, Hilton,=20
Sth Australia 5022
Ph: (61) 8 8416 6292
Fax: (61) 8 8443 9099
Email: jodis@wtcc.sa.gov.au

Posted: **Thu Apr 29, 1999 1:26 pm**

Jack raises a good, tough question--one that has the power to
surface unquestioned assumptions. I hope serious debate will be
triggered about new concepts and opportunities for action. Here at
the beginning of that discussion, Id like to understand more clearly
one point.

Jack wrote:
> Initially, our top priorities were to establish a refereed journal and
to place the organization of our conferences on a firmer basis. I will
assert that these goals have been achieved. We should look at what
is new or changed in and around system dynamics and decide what
the societys current role should be.

I do not disagree, but wonder where we stand regarding the other
original priorities that were quoted:

> =B7 to cooperate with other organizations interested in the advancement =
of the
practice of system dynamics;
> =B7 to stimulate research;
> =B7 to promote high professional standards;
> =B7 to promote the growth of system dynamics and
> =B7 to improve its practice throughout the world.

From: "William Steinhurst" <wsteinhu@psd.state.vt.us>
William Steinhurst, Dir. for Regulated Utility Planning
Department of Public Service
112 State St, Drawer 20, Montpelier VT 05620
802 828 4006 Fax 802 828 2342 tty/ttd 1 800 734 8390
wsteinhu@psd.state.vt.us http://www.state.vt.us/psd

Posted: **Fri Apr 30, 1999 10:46 am**

Kahlid,

I like Khalids suggestion. The society should now encourage
university-level **programs** in system dynamics. I think the society could
come up with a set of courses that should be included in a certified SD
program. I think the promise of certification would encourage universities
to move from stand-alone courses to offering true programs in the field.
Further, I think that a number of universities could easily qualify by
combining current courses in SD (O.K, maybe adding another course two) with
other courses currently taught elsewhere in the university (e.g.
programming, psychology (decision theory), and differential equations
(control theory)). WPI is a prime example of how this can be done.

Incidentally, the desirability of certifying **programs** contrasts with
what I think is the **impossibility** of certifying individuals. I doubt we
could agree on the skills that a certified practitioner should possess; I
doubt we could create a certification exam, and I doubt we could find enough
SD experts willing to review applicants for certification.

Regards,
Jim Hines
From: "Jim Hines" <jhines@MIT.EDU>

Posted: **Fri Apr 30, 1999 11:21 am**

Jodi-Anne Smith wrote:
> Can i suggest an annual scholarship for work experience / study in system dynamics?

I would like to support this idea, plus the encouragement of mentoring.
Like Jodi, Im also removed from SD practitioners/experts and have felt
a sense of isolation during my studies. At one stage I posted to this
list asking for anyone who would be prepared to act as a mentor.
However, the request was intercepted by list management and all I
received was a list of Society members in Australia. It did not give me
what I was after, which was a reputable person, prepared to act as a
mentor, who has extensive practical experience in SD modelling and
consulting.

The Society must be able to cater to people learning SD in areas where
there are few, if any, other practitioners. The sense of isolation, and
doubts about the validity of your models and techniques, is very real!

The other area of the original post, by Jack Pugh, that I would like to
comment on is the call for publishing more success stories from
industry. In addition to this we need to publish more failure stories
from industry, together with analysis of why they failed. These are just
as valuable as success stories.

See you all in NZ, where I hope to reduce the isolation!

Bruce Campbell

--
Bruce Campbell
Joint Research Centre for Advanced Systems Engineering
Macquarie University 2109
Australia

E-mail: Bruce.Campbell@mq.edu.au
Ph: +61 2 9850 9107
Fax: +61 2 9850 9102

Posted: **Sat May 01, 1999 2:06 pm**

Jim Hines comment prompts my thoughts:
> I like Khalids suggestion. The society should now encourage
> university-level **programs** in system dynamics. I think the society could
> come up with a set of courses that should be included in a certified SD
> program. I think the promise of certification would encourage universities

Two thoughts: first, I agree wholeheartedly that certifying programs
might be possible, while certifying individuals would be near
impossible, That said, Id like to put a big stake in the ground in
favor of "accessibility." Any such program should have a strong
distance learning component. Not only does modern technology make that
both possible and attractive, but the inaccessibility of todays
programs to most working folks presents a real challenge to diffusing
the knowledge/skill.

Second, and perhaps more easily done, Id like to see some way for us to
communicate what we are working on/with ... particularly practitioners
and dilettantes (such as ... oh, say ... me!). Perhaps a section in the
Journal that might have entries like:

"Steve Wehrenberg, Coast Guard and George Washington University, is
working with senior USCG leaders toward a "shared model" of key flows
of skills in the CGs human resource system. Goal is to develop a
learning environment for policy testing and educating new crops of HR
system managers--given a military organization, a new generation of
general managers (a.k.a. managers with no particular knowledge of HR
systems) arrives every three years. (contact info)."

This list serves that function somewhat, but a section in the Journal
might make it easier for practitioners, and those who are remote from
academic circles, to feel like they are part of the Society. I once
exchanged some mail with Rick Karash on this idea (a practitioner
journal) but, like most good ideas, this one went nowhere. At least not
that I know of.

Afterthought: some occasional ties to broader issues within the
discipline of systems thinking would be a welcome addition to both the
Journal and the purpose of the Society. Its nice to get your head up
out of the foxhole once in a while to see whats going on.

Collegially,
Steve
-
Stephen B. Wehrenberg, Ph.D.
HR Capability Development, US Coast Guard
Administrative Sciences, The George Washington University
wstephen@erols.com
"Born empowered."

Posted: **Sun May 02, 1999 1:54 pm**

Dear Colleagues;
Let me share with you a vision for our society that can make a =
difference in post-secondary education. I have been involved in the =
development and the delivery of SD-type courses at various Departments =
at my University: Faculty of Engineering, Department of Civil and =
Geological Engineering (second year course in Civil Engineering Systems; =
graduate course on Water Resources Systems Modeling); Faculty of =
Architecture, City Planning Department (graduate courses in Planning =
Methods and Techniques); Faculty of Management (fourth year course on =
System Simulations - not offered any more); and Natural Resources =
Institute (graduate course on Systems View of Resources Management). My =
experience includes also development and delivery of short courses for =
professionals in the field of water and environmental systems (UNESCO =
supported courses in former Yugoslavia, Italy, Austria, China, Brazil, =
and Thailand).=20
In order to make the systems thinking of value to a broader audience I =
have been trying for a long period of time to introduce a general =
systems thinking course at the first year level that can serve almost =
all the Faculties (I have a paper written on the subject). Up to know I =
did not succeed. However, with the more emphasis on environmental =
education, cutting across Faculties of Science, Arts, Engineering, =
Agriculture, Architecture and Natural Resources, chances are that =
course like this will be introduced in the near future. Our University =
has introduced a year ago so called University One as the main =
entrance point for all the students. The role of University One is to =
even the preparation of students for the continuation of their studies =
in different disciplines. My wish is to use the University One as a =
potential mechanism for exposing students to systems thinking as an =
efficient approach for addressing complex problems in various =
disciplines.
I would be very interested to see the contribution of the SD Society in =
developing course like that, and an effort to promote offering of such a =
course at the beginning of University education. Looking forward to =
hear your comments and suggestions.
Cheers
Slobodan P. Simonovic
Professor and Director
Natural Resources Institute
The University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Canada, R3T 2N2
phone (204)474-6443 or 474-8375
fax (204)261-0038
e-mail simon@ce.umanitoba.ca
web site http://www.ce.umanitoba.ca/~simon

Posted: **Sun May 02, 1999 6:40 pm**

The program described below, which will begin its third year next fall, has
been quite successful and is a first step in distance learning in system
dynamics.

>Two thoughts: first, I agree wholeheartedly that certifying programs
>might be possible, while certifying individuals would be near
>impossible, That said, Id like to put a big stake in the ground in
>favor of "accessibility." Any such program should have a strong
>distance learning component. Not only does modern technology make that
>both possible and attractive, but the inaccessibility of todays
>programs to most working folks presents a real challenge to diffusing
>the knowledge/skill.
>
=====================================

The Guided Study Program is conducted by the System Dynamics in Education
Project (SDEP) in the system dynamics group of the Sloan School at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The Program is suitable for any
person who wants to acquire a foundation in the the field of system
dynamics. The third annual Program will start in September 1999. About
twelve participants enrolled in the first 1997-98 session and some twenty
in the 1998-99 session.

The Guided Study Program is organized around the "Road Maps" series and
some of the "classics" in system dynamics literature. Weekly (and
occasionally biweekly) assignments include readings from papers in Road
Maps, exercises based on those papers, additional questions on the topics
of study, readings from the classic system dynamics literature, and
modeling exercises. (Road Maps is a series of chapters on system dynamics
and can be found at this home page.)

Progress of participants is monitored by a team composed of MIT
undergraduates with experience working for the System Dynamics in Education
Project. Members of the team, the GSP tutors, are authors of many of the
papers included in Road Maps. Each week the team reports back to the System
Dynamics in Education Project group meeting with Prof. Forrester to relate
progress of participants and discuss questions that arise.

The Program is customized to interests and aptitudes of participants.
Length and difficulty of assignments varies depending on performance of
participants on previous assignments. Participants can reach tutors
individually through e-mail and get feedback on questions and concerns.

The next MIT Guided Study Program in System Dynamics will begin in early
September 1999 and run until June 2000. Participants must possess a
computer and have access to the Internet, and be willing to devote at least
fifteen hours per week to the Program. To cover the costs, each participant
will be expected to pay US$5,000 in advance. Applications will be taken in
the order of submission, excepting our right to decide that the Program may
not be appropriate for some applicants. The Program will also admit a few
full-time K-12 teachers and school administrators for a much smaller fee of
$500.

The second year of the Guided Study Program ends in July 1999. Tutors and
participants found the Program to be a rewarding and educational
experience. The System Dynamics in Education Project will be holding a
similar Guided Study Program for the 1999-2000 school year. Material
covered will be similar to the past years, but experience gained this past
year will serve to improve next years Program.

Anyone who is interested in participating in the 1999-2000 System Dynamics
in Education Project Guided Study Program should contact us at
<gsp-info@sysdyn.mit.edu> as soon as possible and certainly before August
1st. Please include some personal background and describe your present work
(about one page).

For additional information about the Guided Study Program, please contact
us at <gsp-info@sysdyn.mit.edu>

The following documents may be useful, they are available through our web site:
http://sysdyn.mit.edu/
or directly at:
http://sysdyn.mit.edu/DistanceLearning/

o A paper about the GSP for the System Dynamics Society Quebec City
Conference in July 1998
o Quotes from past participants in the GSP
o A sample assignment
o A sample solution

---------------------------------------------------------
Jay W. Forrester
From: "Jay W. Forrester" <jforestr@MIT.EDU>
Professor of Management, Emeritus
and Senior Lecturer, Sloan School
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room E60-389
Cambridge, MA 02139
tel: 617-253-1571
fax: 617-258-9405

Posted: **Mon May 03, 1999 7:19 pm**

There have been many interesting and promising suggestions for the future
of the System Dynamics society since the April 27 posting by Jack Pugh. On
the other hand, some of the suggestions seem undesirable or beyond the
means of the Society.

1. Jack suggested "promoting all forms of systems thinking broadly," and
also "defending SD against the onslaught of incompetent consultants."
These two are inconsistent with one another. Systems thinking, without a
solid basis in system dynamics and simulation, can lead to self-appointed
experts who may degrade the image of the System Dynamics Society. I
believe that the Society should focus on a solid, fundamental understanding
of systems and not try to increase the numbers of members faster than that
understanding can be achieved. We should leave systems thinking and
learning environments to those who are satisfied with a softer
understanding of systems, and try to keep a clear separation of the Society
from activities that do not reach, or even aspire to, the standards that
the Society should be promoting. Of course, there may be many different
definitions and intents when people refer to "systems thinking" in this
discussion; my rather negative comments refer to what I see in many
activities where systems thinking means thinking about systems, talking
about systems, and believing that systems are important, but without any
deep understanding of systems; such a treatment of systems will often lead
to the wrong conclusions. Indeed, systems thinking should be a result of
a system dynamics understanding. However, when taken alone, systems
thinking amounts to trying to solve high-order nonlinear feedback systems
by intuition; that can not be done, but people will believe they can if the
intuitive solutions are not tested against actual modeling.

2. There have been suggestions for awarding scholarships for study of
system dynamics. Although desirable, such would not be a high-leverage use
of Society funds. A one-year scholarship is not sufficient to create full
competence, it would be useful to an individual, but it would not be likely
to have great effectiveness in further spread of system dynamics competence
beyond the one person who receives an introduction to system dynamics. The
Society should concentrate its very limited resources of money and talent
on activities that promise a high multiplier in effectiveness.

3. I support the idea of more emphasis on distance learning. That should
be encouraged as a part of system dynamics programs in universities. The
Guided Study Program in System Dynamics that we are conducting at MIT is
not an official part of the Sloan School academic offering, and it does not
give academic credit. Instead, it is an experiment by me and a group of
undergraduates. I believe that it does demonstrate that such an approach
is possible. Our program focuses on the underlying principles and
philosophy of system dynamics with heavy emphasis of simulation modeling.
Participants must devote about 15 hours a week to the assignments, which is
a very heavy load for people who are otherwise occupied. After 30 weeks at
15 hours per week, participants reach a point where the are taking simple
descriptions of systems, as from the business press, and doing models of
four to six levels. After some 450 hours of work, we find that many of the
participants have discovered how much there is to learn and that they then
feel that they should continue for an advanced year. So far, we have not
been able to handle more than the beginning year, but may possibly offer an
advanced year in the fall of 2000 for those from the first three years who
want to continue. It has been a challenge to create a coherent and
internally consistent program at the level of intensity that we have been
conducting. The Society could encourage other such programs and should
endorse only programs that have a high quality of content. There is danger
here of propagating rather superficial impressions about systems that could
be harmful to the reputation of the Society.

---------------------------------------------------------
Jay W. Forrester
Professor of Management, Emeritus
and Senior Lecturer, Sloan School
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Room E60-389
Cambridge, MA 02139
tel: 617-253-1571
fax: 617-258-9405
From: "Jay W. Forrester" <jforestr@MIT.EDU>

Posted: **Thu May 06, 1999 7:37 am**

Gary H beat me to it. Had I been quicker, I would have written something
very close to Garys words on the role of LEs in making SD insights
accessible. Thanks, Gary.

Phil Odence
High Performance Systems
podence@hps-inc.com

Posted: **Thu May 06, 1999 9:35 am**

Gentlemen!

I feel obligated to surface an alternative perspective to the role and
future of system dynamics.

I am troubled by the concept of System Dynamics and the System Dynamics
Society defining itself in a way which isolates them from the broader (and
less rigorous) community of "systems thinking". While I, like many of you,
am appalled by the lack of rigor, knowledge, and professionalism of the
broader community, and would gladly argue that practitioners should learn
system dynamics before being allowed to do causal maps, I am concerned that
a policy of isolation will do little more than isolate the system dynamics
community to the loss of both system dynamics and the broader community.

In looking to the future I would urge the community to seek to identify a
singular goal/vision for the field and the society. And to ask yourselves
whether being an open, or closed, society/field is supportive or
counterproductive to that vision. The answer may not be perfectly clear,
for there are both reinforcing and balancing loops that are active in my
views, and I suspect others views, of this situation.

For me there are two KEY relationships that encourage an open society and
field.
1) Isolation seems likely to reduce the dissemination of good sd thinking
to the broader community (which is desperately needed).
2) Isolation seems likely to further insulate the sd community from the
good thinking that is occurring in the broader community, limiting
advancement in the sd community.

Many factors will decide the future of system dynamics and the role of
systems thinking in business, government, and problem solving. Somehow I
have to feel that "success" ( or failure with clients/students) is likely
to be the most significant factor. For me a more important question is "How
can system dynamics increase the success of clients?" A related question
might be "How can I increase the value of system dynamics/systems thinking
to clients?" And then, "Does isolation of system dynamics from other
systems thinking enhance or diminish the field?"

Thank you!
Jay Forrest

11606 Highgrove Drive
Houston, Texas 77077
Tel: 713-503-4726
Fax: 281-558-3228
E-mail: jayf@sdsg.com

Posted: **Fri May 07, 1999 12:25 pm**

Jay Forrest wrote:

>Gentlemen!
>
>I feel obligated to surface an alternative perspective . . . .

While Id estimate that we still remain a male-dominated field, Ill bet
some of the excellent female SD practitioners and researchers (Dana Meadows,
Anjali Sastry, Liz Krahmer Keating, Kris Wile, Beth Sawin, Laura Peterson,
Laura Black, Leslie Martin, Janet Gould, Denise Johnston, Lindsey Gannon,
Mary Ann Anderson, Jodi House, Babette Wils, and Deborah Campbell all come
to mind) would appreciate Jays alternative perspective too!

Sure would like to find a way to break the positive loop (few female
students, few female grads, few female teachers, few female mentors and role
models, therefore few female students) that I bet is hampering the growth in
the female fraction of system dynamicists.

Drew Jones
apjones@cheta.net

Posted: **Fri May 07, 1999 12:38 pm**

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

Upon reading Jay Forrests e-mail, I was prompted to write and put
my two cents into the discussion. I am not a professional system
dynamicist, but have had the privilege of working with the best over the
last seven years toward our mutual goal of introducing system dynamics and
learner-centered learning into K-12 schools. What I have seen over seven
years reinforces what Jay Forrest just said. I have seen teachers grasp
the "softer" and "easier" system thinking tools- but go on further and
start to use dynamic modeling because they have been consistently exposed
to it through the untiring work of such people as Jay Forrester and George
Richardson, Deb and Jim Lyneis, to mention a few. We have gotten as far as
we have in K-12 because we did not isolate system dynamics from systems
thinking. On the contrary we have tried desperately to keep the
conversation going.
That said, I am all for the greatest possible rigor in the field of
system dynamics. You can only move the flywheel if you have incredibly
high standards, a lot of energy and keep a clear vision of something far
beyond the status quo.

Lees Stuntz

Lees N. Stuntz
Creative Learning Exchange Phone- 978-287-0070
1 Keefe Road Fax- 978-287-0080
Acton, MA 01720 e-mail- stuntzln@tiac.net
http://sysdyn.mit.edu/cle/

Ventana software support forum

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities

System Dynamics Societys Priorities