Ventana software support forum

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> Kim, Jim, and others, Nice idea, Kim, to visionize about what outstanding achievements system dynamics might have made 20 years from now. This supports Jim’s idea, that “We hope to have some concrete steps that the Society can take to support the growth of...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> SDMAIL Bill Braun wrote: > Posted by Bill Braun <bbraun@hlthsys.com> > > Jack writes, ""Thanks. I don't understand what you mean by ""pump > different content through it."" What is ""it""? What is "&qu...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> SDMAIL Bill Braun wrote: > Posted by Bill Braun <bbraun@hlthsys.com> > I am curious about the high leverage points; they are both exogenous > parameters (bottom of page on DuelingLoops_Paper.htm). I interpret > this to mean that the structure is just fine,...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org>
posting date Thu, 20 Mar 2008 09:30:32 -0400
_______________________________________________

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> Jean-Jacques Laublé wrote: > Hi Jack > You write : > <This is because the field still clings to phrases > <like ""dynamic hypothesis"" of what is causing the problem instead of root > <cause and feels that if a model can reproduce the s...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> SDMAIL John Gunkler wrote: > Posted by ""John Gunkler"" <jgunkler@sprintmail.com> > > Root cause analysis is a foundation of the process improvement > methodologies (such as Six Sigma) in business. > > I am not speaking authoritatively ...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> Ulrey, Michael L wrote: > Jack, > > Thank you for your comments. They prompted me to do some more thinking > on my original post, for which I am grateful. First of all, the > ""prominent accident expert"" I referred to is the psychologi...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> SDMAIL Ulrey, Michael L wrote: > This thread is of particular interest to me because ""root cause"" is a > term which is very popular in the fields of system engineering in > general, and reliability and safety engineering in particular...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> Fabian Fabian wrote: > Jack, > If we refer to Donnella Meadows ""Places to intervene in a System"" , > one could assume that for designing powerful solutions/interventions > one should always dig down until reaching the paradigm level. ...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> Jean-Jacques, Your list of models is a worthy sample of what's available to help the aspiring modeler. It shows how lack of standards has hindered the field's development. Such differences between models and their supporting materials creates a Tower of Ba...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> Richard Dudley wrote: > > I see that the topic has switched from my question about questioning poor > models, to a discussion of how we proceed with a good modeling process. > Well, that's OK, but it does not really answer my question. My point is that &qu...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> SDMAIL Ralf Lippold wrote: > @Jack, I would be highly interested in a detailed analysis explaining your thoughts. See this unpublished paper: http://www.thwink.org/sustain/articles/005/DuelingLoops_Paper.htm Please note it does not emphasize the process, b...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> Richard raises a timely question. As society's need to solve complex social system problems increases, the results of the tools used is doing just the opposite, at least in the area of the ""dumbing down"" of system dynamics modeling. I...

Posted by Jack Harich <register@thwink.org> One way to handle the implementation aspect of the ""solution"" the model suggests is to not look at it that way. There is another viewpoint. This is to first decompose the one big problem into several little problems, each of which is ...