IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2019-23-3.html

Theory Development Via Replicated Simulations and the Added Value of Standards

Author

Abstract

Using the agent-based model of Miller et al. (2012), which depicts how different types of individuals’ memory affect the formation and performance of organizational routines, we show how a replicated simulation model can be used to develop theory. We also assess how standards, such as the ODD (Overview, Design concepts, and Details) protocol and DOE (design of experiments) principles, support the replication, evaluation, and further analysis of this model. Using the verified model, we conduct several simulation experiments as examples of different types of theory development. First, we show how previous theoretical insights can be generalized by investigating additional scenarios, such as mergers. Second, we show the potential of replicated simulation models for theory refinement, such as analyzing in-depth the relationship between memory functions and routine performance or routine adaptation.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonas Hauke & Sebastian Achter & Matthias Meyer, 2020. "Theory Development Via Replicated Simulations and the Added Value of Standards," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 23(1), pages 1-12.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2019-23-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/23/1/12/12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonas Hauke & Iris Lorscheid & Matthias Meyer, 2017. "Recent Development of Social Simulation as Reflected in JASSS Between 2008 and 2014: A Citation and Co-Citation Analysis," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(1), pages 1-5.
    2. Koen H. Heimeriks & Mario Schijven & Stephen Gates, 2012. "Manifestations of Higher-Order Routines: The Underlying Mechanisms of Deliberate Learning in the Context of Postacquisition Integration," Post-Print hal-00859930, HAL.
    3. Martha S. Feldman & Anat Rafaeli, 2002. "Organizational Routines as Sources of Connections and Understandings," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 309-331, May.
    4. Brian Heath & Raymond Hill & Frank Ciarallo, 2009. "A Survey of Agent-Based Modeling Practices (January 1998 to July 2008)," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(4), pages 1-9.
    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. Li An & Volker Grimm & Billie L. Turner II, 2020. "Editorial: Meeting Grand Challenges in Agent-Based Models," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 23(1), pages 1-13.
    2. Dehua Gao & Aliakbar Akbaritabar, 2022. "Using agent-based modeling in routine dynamics research: a quantitative and content analysis of literature," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 521-550, February.
    3. Grimm, Volker & Berger, Uta & Calabrese, Justin M. & Cortés-Avizanda, Ainara & Ferrer, Jordi & Franz, Mathias & Groeneveld, Jürgen & Hartig, Florian & Jakoby, Oliver & Jovani, Roger & Kramer-Schadt, S, 2025. "Using the ODD protocol and NetLogo to replicate agent-based models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 501(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peter Bryant & Nathalie Lazaric & Moustapha Niang, 2013. "Routines Resistance: How Conflicts within Transactive Memory Obstruct Routinization," Post-Print halshs-00908401, HAL.
    2. Holm, Morten & Kumar, V. & Plenborg, Thomas, 2016. "An investigation of Customer Accounting systems as a source of sustainable competitive advantage," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 18-30.
    3. Rolf Barth & Matthias Meyer & Jan Spitzner, 2012. "Typical Pitfalls of Simulation Modeling - Lessons Learned from Armed Forces and Business," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 15(2), pages 1-5.
    4. Julia Bodner & Laurence Capron, 2018. "Post-merger integration," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 7(1), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Léa Kaufmann & Ranaivo Razakanirina & Derek Groen & Bastien Chopard, 2018. "Impact of immigrants on a multi-agent economical system," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Darren Nel & Araz Taeihagh, 2024. "The soft underbelly of complexity science adoption in policymaking: towards addressing frequently overlooked non-technical challenges," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(2), pages 403-436, June.
    7. Krishnadas Nanath & R Radhakrishna Pillai, 2021. "Towards a framework for sustaining Green IT initiatives: an empirical investigation," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 193-206, September.
    8. Klein, Aleksandra, 2025. "Team structural control and team resilience: An empirical study of creative project-based teams," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    9. Nathalie Lazaric & Loubna Echajari & Dorota Leszczyńska, 2025. "The Multiplicity of Paths to Sustainability, Grand Challenges and Routine Changes: The Long Road for Bordeaux Winemakers," GREDEG Working Papers 2025-27, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    10. Ghiyoung Im & Arun Rai, 2014. "IT-Enabled Coordination for Ambidextrous Interorganizational Relationships," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 72-92, March.
    11. Anja Schulze & Stefano Brusoni, 2022. "How dynamic capabilities change ordinary capabilities: Reconnecting attention control and problem‐solving," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2447-2477, December.
    12. Wei Shi & Jiangyan Li & Gerry McNamara, 2024. "Non‐executive Employee Ownership and Target Selection in High‐Tech Mergers and Acquisitions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(5), pages 2033-2071, July.
    13. Li, Shenxue & Clark, Timothy & Sillince, John, 2018. "Constructing a strategy on the creation of core competencies for African companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 204-213.
    14. Trish Reay, 2019. "Family Routines and Next-Generation Engagement in Family Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 43(2), pages 244-250, March.
    15. Mickaël David & Frantz Rowe, 2015. "Enterprise Systems Contribution to Organizational Routines Evolution Potential [Le rôle des systèmes d’information d’entreprise dans l’évolutivité des routines organisationnelles]," Post-Print hal-01559512, HAL.
    16. Feim M. Blakçori, 2014. "The Role of Formal Routines in Organizational Innovation," International Journal of Business and Social Research, LAR Center Press, vol. 4(2), pages 56-70, February.
    17. Hassani-Mahmooei, Behrooz & Parris, Brett W., 2013. "Resource scarcity, effort allocation and environmental security: An agent-based theoretical approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 183-192.
    18. repec:plo:pone00:0223946 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Davila, Toni & Foster, George & Li, Mu, 2005. "Designing management control systems in product development: Initial choices and the influence of partners," IESE Research Papers D/598, IESE Business School.
    20. Bénédicte Reynaud, 2005. "The void at the heart of rules: Routines in the context of rule-following," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590855, HAL.
    21. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2015. "Tangible resources and the development of organizational capabilities," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 54-68.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jas:jasssj:2019-23-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.