1 / 58

Advances in System Dynamics Group Model Building

Advances in System Dynamics Group Model Building. George P. Richardson Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany, SUNY. Outline of Remarks. Origins of the current work System dynamics group model building Recent work with Eden and Ackermann

vellag
Download Presentation

Advances in System Dynamics Group Model Building

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Advances in System DynamicsGroup Model Building George P. Richardson Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany, SUNY

  2. Outline of Remarks • Origins of the current work • System dynamics group model building • Recent work with Eden and Ackermann • Scottish Health System • Transportation Security Administration • The Emerging Approach

  3. Colleagues • Colin Eden and Fran Ackermann, Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow • John Bryson, Humphrey Institute, University of Minnesota • David Andersen, Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy, University at Albany • Thirteen years of collaborations and thought, enlivened by skiing and hiking together

  4. Recent Fruits of our Efforts • Andersen, DF, JM Bryson, GP Richardson, C Eden, F Ackermann, C Finn, 2006. Integrating Models of Systems Thinking into Strategic Planning Education and Practice: The Thinking Persons Institute Approach.Journal of Public Affairs Education,12,3 (Summer 2006): 265-293. • C Eden, F Ackermann, JM Bryson, GP Richardson, DF Andersen, 2008. Integrating modes of policy analysis and strategic management practice: requisite elements and dilemmas.Journal of the Operational Research Society (forthcoming 2008).

  5. Patterns of Behavior System Structure A Glimpse of the Systems Perspective Reactive Events and Decisions Adaptive Increasing leverage Generative

  6. New York, Chicago & Philadelphia, 1800-2000

  7. Prejudice and Minority Achievement (Myrdal, Merton) + (R) Hope or despair Aspirations of the minority – Prejudice – + Minority perceptions of the gap Achievements of the minority (B) Striving Discrimination + (R) Prejudice + + Opportunities for the minority Minority efforts to achieve – +

  8. Stocks, Flows, and Feedback Loops in a Gasoline Crisis

  9. What is Group Modeling? • A form of group decision support, involving a group of stakeholders with a complex problem • Group facilitation • Model building and refinement in public • Simulation of scenarios and options • Extensive facilitated discussion and analysis • Facilitated policy design and decisions

  10. The Albany Teamwork Approach • Facilitator / Elicitor • Modeler / Reflector • Process coach • Recorder • Gatekeeper

  11. Components of the Process • Problem definition meeting • Group modeling meeting • Formal model formulation • Reviewing model with model building team • Rolling out model with the community • Working with flight simulator • Making change happen

  12. A Typical Room GMB Session

  13. Strathclyde Group Explorer Approach • Facilitator / Elicitor • “Chauffer” / Analyst • Participants at networked computers

  14. Group Explorer Facilitated Strategic Planning • Issue elicitation • Laddering up to “Own Goals” • Stakeholder power and interest grid • Stakeholder goals and sanctions • Prioritizing strategic priorities • Key performance indicators • Agreed policies and strategies in context

  15. Strategy Workshop in Scotland • Borders Region of Scotland concerned with provision of care for persons with Dementia • Consortium of 28 Health Care Practitioners and Managers formed the strategy planning team • Workshop in January of 2007 Explored Innovation approaches integrating • Workshops designed and used innovative Group Model Building scripts that integrate two different approaches to strategy making

  16. Scotland Workshop: a View of the Room

  17. Scotland Workshop: a View of the Room

  18. Picturing Complexity

  19. Picturing Complexity

  20. Picturing Complexity

  21. The Initial GE Issues Map

  22. Themes in the Issue Map

  23. Graphs Over Time to Focus the Discussion

  24. Linking Comments on Graphs Over Time

  25. Contributing a Systems View:Screens for the model (right) and DE (left)

  26. Flow of People in the Dementia Health System

  27. Pressure Points: “Who would do what”?

  28. “Who would do what?” to decrease inflow to community care

  29. “Who Would Do What?” in Three Pressure Points

  30. More Possible Pressure Points to Discuss

  31. Summary of Synergies in the Scotland Workshop • Issue maps began the effort to focus the conversation • Graphs-over-time pulled thinking about issues toward long-term patterns • Stock-and-flow map stimulated system-wide understandings, taking thinking across boundaries • DE maps captured detailed observations, insights, and claims throughout the entire process

  32. TSA Aviation Security Simulator • Contract Between Transportation Security Administration and Argonne National Labs • Argonne, Sandia, and Los Alamos as part of Tri-Labs collaboration • UAlbany as “special teams” subcontractor for Group Model Building • Eden and Ackermann invited to expand team

  33. Initial Issues identified

  34. Issues from Stakeholder Perspectives

  35. Initial Policy Priorities

  36. Graphs over time drawn by the participants

  37. Collecting Comments on Graphs Over Time

  38. Concept Model

  39. Concept Model

  40. Concept Model

  41. Concept Model Behaviors

  42. Eliciting TSA Model Structure • “Seed” for elicitation was backbone stock and flow structure from Concept Model as elaborated by group • Used “variable” pack available from “key variable” list made up in the morning • Ability to link model structure to Group Explorer issue elicitation and key variable list explicitly

  43. Final Policy Priorities (red=short term, green=long term)

  44. Summary of Synergies in TSA Workshop • GE maps used to elicit initial issues • Graphs-over-time defining the problem dynamically • GE used to map stakeholders and scenarios • GE phrases turned into variables to seed dynamic model structure • GE creating rich micro view; SD creating holistic macro view • GE used to create rich documentation as modeling discussion developed

  45. Where is This Leading? • Duality of Vensim and Decision Explorer Maps • Seamless approach to client groups • Ability to “zoom lenses” between micro and macro views • New support for model formulation and documentation • New products that enhance value to clients • Eventually perhaps integrated software suites

More Related