System dynamics: a methodological perspective

Keys, Paul

doi:10.1177/014233128801000406

Cited by 23 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…System dynamics is frequently misjudged as being an approach that conceptualises the social world as a machine (Keys 1988;Jackson and Keys 1984;Jackson 1994;Flood and Jackson 1991). Various terms are employed to make the point but the essential criticism is that system dynamics is ''deterministic''.…”

Section: The Criticism and Its Importancementioning

confidence: 99%

Rerum cognoscere causas: Part I — How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate?

Lane

2001

System Dynamics Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the first half of a two-part paper which deals with the social theoretic assumptions underlying system dynamics. The motivation is that clarification in this area can help mainstream social scientists to understand how our field relates to their literature, methods and concerns. Part I has two main sections. The aim of the first is to answer the question: How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories? The theoretic assumptions of the field are seldom explicit but rather are implicit in its practice. The range of system dynamics practice is therefore considered and related to a framework-widely used in both operational research (OR) and systems science-that organises the assumptions behind traditional social theoretic paradigms. Distinct and surprisingly varied groupings of practice are identified, making it difficult to place system dynamics in any one paradigm with any certainty. The difficulties of establishing a social theoretic home for system dynamics are exemplified in the second main section. This is done by considering the question: Is system dynamics deterministic? An analysis shows that attempts to relate system dynamics to strict notions of voluntarism or determinism quickly indicate that the field does not fit with either pole of this dichotomous, and strictly paradigmatic, view. Part I therefore concludes that definitively placing system dynamics with respect to traditional social theories is highly problematic. The scene is therefore set for Part II of the paper, which proposes an innovative and potentially fruitful resolution to this problem.Rerum cognoscere causas (''To know the causes of things'')

show abstract

Section: The Criticism and Its Importancementioning

confidence: 99%

Rerum cognoscere causas: Part I — How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate?

Lane

2001

System Dynamics Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Forrester () examines the methodologies followed by operations research, systems thinking and system dynamics practitioners to determine how these approaches overlap and what their unique contributions are to systems theory. Keys () concluded that even though the exact position of system dynamics remains unresolved, scientists from both domains can relate to it.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Combined Feedback–Feedforward Control‐Based Ordering Policies on Supply Chain Stability and Responsiveness

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The design of ordering policies for inventory management in supply chains has traditionally relied on the proportional feedback control structure as a foundation for the design process. Consequently, the impact of ordering policies that use both proportional-integral-derivative feedback control and feedforward control has been relatively unexplored. We evaluate the impact of ordering policies based on the combined control structure on supply chain stability and responsiveness.

show abstract

“…This last suggestion is, in fact, one way of implementing the previous three. By explaining the range of practices that was unearthed earlier, it offers a social theoretic grounding for system dynamics that does indeed break through the paradigmatic incommensurability arguments traditionally employed (Keys 1988).…”

Section: Suggestion 4: Develop An Agency/structure Integrative Groundingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rerum cognoscere causas: Part II—Opportunities generated by the agency/structure debate and suggestions for clarifying the social theoretic position of system dynamics

Lane

2001

System Dynamics Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the second half of a two-part paper dealing with the social theoretic assumptions underlying system dynamics. In the first half it was concluded that analysing system dynamics using traditional, paradigm-based social theories is highly problematic. An innovative and potentially fruitful resolution is now proposed to these problems. In the first section it is argued that in order to find an appropriate social theoretic home for system dynamics it is necessary to look to a key exchange in contemporary social science: the agency/structure debate. This debate aims to move beyond both the theories based only on the actions of individual human agents, and those theories that emphasise only structural influences. Emerging from this debate are various theories that instead aim to unite the human agent view of the social realm with views that concentrate solely on system structure. It is argued that system dynamics is best viewed as being implicitly grounded in such theories. The main conclusion is therefore that system dynamics can contribute to an important part of social thinking by providing a formal approach for explicating social mechanisms. This conclusion is of general significance for system dynamics. However, the over-arching aim of the two-part paper is to increase the understanding of system dynamics in related disciplines. Four suggestions are therefore offered for how the system dynamics method might be extended further into the social sciences. It is argued that, presented in the right way, the formal yet contingent feedback causality thinking of system dynamics should diffuse widely in the social sciences and make a distinctive and important contribution to them. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 17, 293-309, (2001) Recapitulation-the structure and aims of this paper This is the second half of a two-part paper dealing with the social theoretic assumptions of system dynamics. Two issues were considered in Part I. 1 Firstly, the implicit but underlying social theory of the field was probed. This was done by relating the range of system dynamics practice to a framework-widely used in both operational research (OR) and systems science-which organises the assumptions behind traditional social theoretic paradigms (Burrell and

show abstract

System dynamics: a methodological perspective

Cited by 23 publications

References 26 publications

Rerum cognoscere causas: Part I — How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate?

Rerum cognoscere causas: Part I — How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate?

Impact of Combined Feedback–Feedforward Control‐Based Ordering Policies on Supply Chain Stability and Responsiveness

Rerum cognoscere causas: Part II—Opportunities generated by the agency/structure debate and suggestions for clarifying the social theoretic position of system dynamics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About