The Simulation Project Life-Cycle: Models and Realities

Sargent,; Nance,; Overstreet,; Robinson, Stewart; Talbot,

doi:10.1109/wsc.2006.323169

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of authors, usually seasoned modellers in DES, describe the modelling process in what they often call simply models or life cycle models providing also guidelines for modellers to follow through the steps prescribed (Balci and Nance 1987;Nance 1994;Pidd 2004;Robinson 2004;Sargent et al 2006;Law 2007;Sargent 2010;Balci 2012). Others provide advice on common pitfalls and modelling principles for others to follow based on their wide experience as modellers (Shannon 1998;Pidd 1999;Sanchez 2007).…”

Section: Existing Work On Model Development Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the model development process in discrete-event simulation: insights from six expert modellers

Tako

2015

Journal of the Operational Research Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Existing Work On Model Development Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the model development process in discrete-event simulation: insights from six expert modellers

Tako

2015

Journal of the Operational Research Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The form of project life cycle definition varies by industry, but also within the same industry it is different for various organizations and businesses, says Korecký & Trkovský (2011, p. 61) and Sargent et al (2006). This is also confirmed by Doležal et al (2009, p. 155), who states that "each organization should, according to its nature and the nature of each project, identify its own life cycle, or the characteristic life cycle of the projects, which realizes."…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Specifics of Educational Projects in the Context of Slovak Education Environment

Bočková¹,

Gabrhelová²,

Lajčin³

2020

Vadyba

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding of the project life cycle is one of the key areas of project manager knowledge. The primary reasons are the different requirements of project management in individual phases of the project reflected in the expectations of stakeholders, in project settings in within the activities scheduling, in subsequent execution of activities and in related involvement and workload of project team members, in cost management and time schedule. A frequent problem is therefore that the project itself is often perceived only through its implementation phase and omits the period and activities before and after outputs completion, which also have their specificities requiring attention and management. In addition to different perceptions of the project life cycle, the question is also its standardization in terms of breakdown into phases with more precise description of their content. Each methodology has its own view and rationale for the breakdown, and from the point of view of the bestknown standards and norms we encounter a breakdown from three to six phases. It is important to add that it is not possible to apply individual methodologies across all types of implemented projects, which increases the importance of the role of the project manager in the whole process. He should understand and correctly apply appropriate project management methods in conjunction with the expected inputs and outputs for the relevant project phase. Requirements for inputs and outputs are identically included in standards and norms differently -from basic recommendations to comprehensive definitions of the content of prepared documents and applied procedures. One of the possible criteria for the classification of educational projects is the type of financing. This is an important determinant of the assumption of life cycle deviations for projects financed by the EU Structural Funds, projects financed by private sources and otherwise financed projects. The essential of this paper is to evaluate the life cycle of educational projects financed by the European Union Structural Funds and to propose recommendations primarily aimed at improving project management from the perspective of the contractors entering the projects. The essential will be developed through the following sub -objectives: To identify (from the perspective of the contractor) the life cycle specificities in educational projects financed by the European Union Structural Funds. To identify (from the perspective of the contractor) the life cycle specificities in educational projects financed by the European Union Structural Funds against the chosen methodological basis. To propose recommendations for improving the project management of contractors entering educational projects based on identified similarities and deviations. In the theoretical part of the paper we will use the content-causal analysis, in which we will concentrate on literary resources dealing with the issues of project life cycle. In the analytical part we pay attention to the identification of the life cycle...

show abstract

“…That being said, seasoned modelers and experts provide general approaches for transforming real world problems into useful models and eventually information for decision makers. Often, experts prescribe use of lifecycle models which provide a series of steps, phases or guidelines that enable model developers to proceed in an organized fashion [46,48,[52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59].…”

Section: Simulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using LIWC to choose simulation approaches: A feasibility study

McHaney

Tako

Robinson

2018

Decision Support Systems

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can language usage help determine which model approach is best suited to provide decision makers with desired insights? This research addresses that question through an investigation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC), which calculates the presence of more than 80 language dimensions in text samples, and permits construction of custom dictionaries. This article demonstrates use of LIWC to ensure better problem/model fit within the context of selecting a decision support tool. We selected two simulation tools as research instruments to investigate a broader question on the usefulness of LIWC to guide choice of DSS tool. The tools selected were System Dynamics (SD) and Discrete Event Simulation (DES). First, we tested LIWC to analyze practitioners' language use when developing models. LIWC pointed out significant linguistic differences consistent with prior theoretical work, based on model development approach in a number of dimensions. These differences provided a basis for developing a custom dictionary for use on the second part of our study. The second part of the study focused on language used by decision makers in problem statements and used the linguistic clues identified in the first part of the study to ensure problem/model fit. Results indicated problem statements contained linguistic clues related to the type of information desired by problem solvers. The article concludes with a discussion about how LIWC and similar tools can help determine which DSS tools are suited to particular applications.

show abstract

The Simulation Project Life-Cycle: Models and Realities

Abstract: The co-chairs of this panel have developed a set of questions from which the panelists have formed their responses in this paper. Section 2 of the paper contains the questions and subsequent sections present the responses of the panelists. The last section is the Summary.

Cited by 16 publications

References 16 publications

Exploring the model development process in discrete-event simulation: insights from six expert modellers

Exploring the model development process in discrete-event simulation: insights from six expert modellers

Life Cycle Specifics of Educational Projects in the Context of Slovak Education Environment

Using LIWC to choose simulation approaches: A feasibility study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About