SD and other modelling approaches
Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:41 pm
Posted by ""Stefan.Grösser"" <stefan.groesser@web.de>
Dear Colleagues,
I am very interested in the grey zone questions about System Dynamics and other modeling technologies. The questions raised and partially answered in this thread deviated from the initial question about advantages and drawback of SD on other modeling approaches; it turned to the question about the low acceptance of SD in the scientific community and the question about when to apply different modeling approaches.
For me, the deviation from the original question about advantages and drawbacks of SD on other modeling approaches towards the question when to use SD indicates the strong connection between the two issues. Only when SD is applied in the correct problem situation, it can be used to the most benefit and thus SD can unfold its advantages.
However, in order to have a clear idea about when the SD-method is applicable, it is useful, especially for junior researchers who have not much experience in modeling, to learn also basics about other modeling approaches. By this comparison approach, it is possible to draw sharper distinctions for the fields of applications for each modeling approach. In other words, the fussy and implicit criteria when to apply SD will become more tangible. Within this thread, several scholars and practitioners have stated the same idea, e.g. Coyle, Laublé, and Gill. Lane shows with his ‘magnetic hexagon’-approach a possibility to reduce biases which arise due to method pre-selection during a consulting project (Lane, 1992, The road not taken, System Dynamics Review).
The problem about ‘How to select the appropriate research method’ is not unique to the simulation modeling science. I would argue that the question about method selection is important in every branch of sciences and practice. For the social science, I know it with a high degree of certainty. Andreas Diekmann, not a SD-modeler, but a famous Sociologist in the German speaking countries briefly addresses the question about method selection in his book ‘Empirical Research in the Social Science’ (Diekmann, 2005, Empirische Sozialforschung). According to him (my translation), ‘if it is the task of the Social Sciences to solve scientific or practical problems, then the problem should guide the choice of the method and not vice versa. This attitude assumes that the social researcher does not concentrate on one method only, but has the competence to handle the most important and most common instruments in his field of science (p. 18).’
At least for me, it is obvious why it is important for simulation modelers (like SD-modelers) to have a certain knowledge about several simulation approaches and not only about SD. The argument of Tony Gill (‘It takes time to be proficient in the use of tools. So most modelers settle for a tool set that works for them most of the time…’ (Tony Gill 24. Dec 2005, this thread) is also convincing, but can be weakened by the following: when the selection criteria for the available simulation approaches would be elicited from the vast amount of literature available and would be represented in a condensed way, the search and information costs could be reduced significantly. Thereby, it would be possible to create a battery of decision criteria for each simulation approach and thus a modeler could enlarge his or her toolbox within a relatively small amount of time.
I have to admit that my statement represents an academic point of view. The client in the business world normally does not care about the method used (this was stated by some members of this list). Here I am a bit critical and hope to trigger some feedback.
* Is it not the consultant’s task to explain, not in detail but in
principle, the clients the methods used, especially when logic and accessible white-box SD models have been used, in order to foster the understanding and implementation of the research results?
* Will this not build a connection of trust between client and
consultant?
* Will this not lead to follow-up projects?
* And finally, would this not lead to a better recognition of System
Dynamics in the business world with the overall effect of increasing demand for SD-projects?
In my opinion due to my limited but existing experience with top level managers, it is possible to convey the fundamentals of System Dynamics and its use within several hours, especially when they participate in a group model building session. However, the aforementioned is only successful, if the situation at hand fits to the field of application of the method, e.g. SD. Hence, it is evident why a sound understanding about the question ‘When shall I use SD and when not?’ is important.
Questions:
Does anyone know about publications which develop selection criteria, i.e., when to apply which method?
(One is, for instance, Flood, 1991, Creative Problem Solving, but I would argue this could be more detailed).
Does anyone know about a summary about simulation approaches, their fields of application, and their advantages and disadvantages?
(One is Meadows et al., 1985, The Electronic Oracle, is it very well written, but by no means comprehensive.)
I want to pick up the question Lorenz asked several weeks ago. (‘I was thinking, might one not propose a session upon these topics?, Tobias Lorenz, 6. Jan 2006, this thread). The System Dynamics website does not indicate if a workshop about multi-methodology or related simulation approaches (or whatever the label will be) will take place. Therefore the following question is posed:
* Is someone experienced, with regards to several simulation
approaches or other simulation approaches than SD, willing to moderate, or participate and contribute to such a multi-methodology workshop? Is this topic of interest for more members of the society (this list-server) or just for a small quantity?
Thanks for your time and I am hoping for feedback,
Best regards,
Stefan Groesser
University of St. Gallen, Switzerland
University of Berne, Switzerland
Posted by ""Stefan.Grösser"" <stefan.groesser@web.de>
posting date Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:22:30 +0200
Dear Colleagues,
I am very interested in the grey zone questions about System Dynamics and other modeling technologies. The questions raised and partially answered in this thread deviated from the initial question about advantages and drawback of SD on other modeling approaches; it turned to the question about the low acceptance of SD in the scientific community and the question about when to apply different modeling approaches.
For me, the deviation from the original question about advantages and drawbacks of SD on other modeling approaches towards the question when to use SD indicates the strong connection between the two issues. Only when SD is applied in the correct problem situation, it can be used to the most benefit and thus SD can unfold its advantages.
However, in order to have a clear idea about when the SD-method is applicable, it is useful, especially for junior researchers who have not much experience in modeling, to learn also basics about other modeling approaches. By this comparison approach, it is possible to draw sharper distinctions for the fields of applications for each modeling approach. In other words, the fussy and implicit criteria when to apply SD will become more tangible. Within this thread, several scholars and practitioners have stated the same idea, e.g. Coyle, Laublé, and Gill. Lane shows with his ‘magnetic hexagon’-approach a possibility to reduce biases which arise due to method pre-selection during a consulting project (Lane, 1992, The road not taken, System Dynamics Review).
The problem about ‘How to select the appropriate research method’ is not unique to the simulation modeling science. I would argue that the question about method selection is important in every branch of sciences and practice. For the social science, I know it with a high degree of certainty. Andreas Diekmann, not a SD-modeler, but a famous Sociologist in the German speaking countries briefly addresses the question about method selection in his book ‘Empirical Research in the Social Science’ (Diekmann, 2005, Empirische Sozialforschung). According to him (my translation), ‘if it is the task of the Social Sciences to solve scientific or practical problems, then the problem should guide the choice of the method and not vice versa. This attitude assumes that the social researcher does not concentrate on one method only, but has the competence to handle the most important and most common instruments in his field of science (p. 18).’
At least for me, it is obvious why it is important for simulation modelers (like SD-modelers) to have a certain knowledge about several simulation approaches and not only about SD. The argument of Tony Gill (‘It takes time to be proficient in the use of tools. So most modelers settle for a tool set that works for them most of the time…’ (Tony Gill 24. Dec 2005, this thread) is also convincing, but can be weakened by the following: when the selection criteria for the available simulation approaches would be elicited from the vast amount of literature available and would be represented in a condensed way, the search and information costs could be reduced significantly. Thereby, it would be possible to create a battery of decision criteria for each simulation approach and thus a modeler could enlarge his or her toolbox within a relatively small amount of time.
I have to admit that my statement represents an academic point of view. The client in the business world normally does not care about the method used (this was stated by some members of this list). Here I am a bit critical and hope to trigger some feedback.
* Is it not the consultant’s task to explain, not in detail but in
principle, the clients the methods used, especially when logic and accessible white-box SD models have been used, in order to foster the understanding and implementation of the research results?
* Will this not build a connection of trust between client and
consultant?
* Will this not lead to follow-up projects?
* And finally, would this not lead to a better recognition of System
Dynamics in the business world with the overall effect of increasing demand for SD-projects?
In my opinion due to my limited but existing experience with top level managers, it is possible to convey the fundamentals of System Dynamics and its use within several hours, especially when they participate in a group model building session. However, the aforementioned is only successful, if the situation at hand fits to the field of application of the method, e.g. SD. Hence, it is evident why a sound understanding about the question ‘When shall I use SD and when not?’ is important.
Questions:
Does anyone know about publications which develop selection criteria, i.e., when to apply which method?
(One is, for instance, Flood, 1991, Creative Problem Solving, but I would argue this could be more detailed).
Does anyone know about a summary about simulation approaches, their fields of application, and their advantages and disadvantages?
(One is Meadows et al., 1985, The Electronic Oracle, is it very well written, but by no means comprehensive.)
I want to pick up the question Lorenz asked several weeks ago. (‘I was thinking, might one not propose a session upon these topics?, Tobias Lorenz, 6. Jan 2006, this thread). The System Dynamics website does not indicate if a workshop about multi-methodology or related simulation approaches (or whatever the label will be) will take place. Therefore the following question is posed:
* Is someone experienced, with regards to several simulation
approaches or other simulation approaches than SD, willing to moderate, or participate and contribute to such a multi-methodology workshop? Is this topic of interest for more members of the society (this list-server) or just for a small quantity?
Thanks for your time and I am hoping for feedback,
Best regards,
Stefan Groesser
University of St. Gallen, Switzerland
University of Berne, Switzerland
Posted by ""Stefan.Grösser"" <stefan.groesser@web.de>
posting date Thu, 6 Apr 2006 08:22:30 +0200
