IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v249y2016i3p945-958.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Critical Learning Incidents in system dynamics modelling engagements

Author

Listed:
  • Thompson, James P.
  • Howick, Susan
  • Belton, Valerie

Abstract

This paper reports in-depth behavioural operational research to explore how individual clients learned to resolve dynamically complex problems in system dynamics model-based engagements. Consultant-client dyads involved in ten system dynamics consulting engagements were interviewed to identify individual clients' Critical Learning Incidents—defined as the moment of surprise caused after one's mental model produces unexpected failure and a change in one's mental model produces the desired result. The cases, which are reprised from interviews, include assessments of the nature of the engagement problem, the form of system dynamics model, and the methods employed by consultants during each phase of the engagement. Reported Critical Learning Incidents are noted by engagement phase and consulting method and constructivist learning theory is used to describe a pattern of learning. Research outcomes include descriptions of: the role of different methods applied in engagement phases (for example, the role of concept models to commence problem identification and to introduce iconography and jargon to the engagement participants); how model form associates with the timing of Critical Learning Incidents; and the role of social mediation and negotiation in the learning process.

Suggested Citation

  • Thompson, James P. & Howick, Susan & Belton, Valerie, 2016. "Critical Learning Incidents in system dynamics modelling engagements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 945-958.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:249:y:2016:i:3:p:945-958
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.09.048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221715008905
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erling Moxnes, 1998. "Not Only the Tragedy of the Commons: Misperceptions of Bioeconomics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1234-1248, September.
    2. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    3. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, May.
    4. Schaffernicht, Martin & Groesser, Stefan N., 2011. "A comprehensive method for comparing mental models of dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(1), pages 57-67, April.
    5. Tako, Antuela A. & Robinson, Stewart, 2010. "Model development in discrete-event simulation and system dynamics: An empirical study of expert modellers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 784-794, December.
    6. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    7. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    8. Sterman, John & Booth Sweeney, Linda, 2002. "Cloudy Skies: Assessing Public Understanding of Global Warming," Working papers 4361-02, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    9. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elsawah, Sondoss & McLucas, Alan & Mazanov, Jason, 2017. "An empirical investigation into the learning effects of management flight simulators: A mental models approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(1), pages 262-272.
    2. repec:eee:ejores:v:268:y:2018:i:3:p:1178-1191 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:eee:ejores:v:265:y:2018:i:2:p:673-684 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:249:y:2016:i:3:p:945-958. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.