IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2019-23-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Trish Reay, 2019. "Family Routines and Next-Generation Engagement in Family Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 43(2), pages 244-250, March.
    3. Bénédicte Reynaud, 2005. "The void at the heart of rules: Routines in the context of rule-following," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590855, HAL.
    4. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2015. "Tangible resources and the development of organizational capabilities," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 54-68.
    5. Hossein Sabzian & Mohammad Ali Shafia & Ali Maleki & Seyeed Mostapha Seyeed Hashemi & Ali Baghaei & Hossein Gharib, 2019. "Theories and Practice of Agent based Modeling: Some practical Implications for Economic Planners," Papers 1901.08932, arXiv.org.
    6. Dehua Gao & Flaminio Squazzoni & Xiuquan Deng, 2018. "The role of cognitive artifacts in organizational routine dynamics: an agent-based model," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 473-499, December.
    7. Bert, Federico E. & Rovere, Santiago L. & Macal, Charles M. & North, Michael J. & Podestá, Guillermo P., 2014. "Lessons from a comprehensive validation of an agent based-model: The experience of the Pampas Model of Argentinean agricultural systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 273(C), pages 284-298.
    8. Per Magnus Mæhle & Ingrid Kristine Small Hanto & Sigbjørn Smeland, 2020. "Practicing Integrated Care Pathways in Norwegian Hospitals: Coordination through Industrialized Standardization, Value Chains, and Quality Management or an Organizational Equivalent to Improvised Jazz," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-32, December.
    9. Bazin, Yoann, 2013. "Understanding organisational gestures: Technique, aesthetics and embodiment," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 377-393.
    10. Bianchi, Federico & Grimaldo, Francisco & Squazzoni, Flaminio, 2019. "The F3-index. Valuing reviewers for scholarly journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 78-86.
    11. Ye-Chan Park & Paul Hong, 2022. "Knowledge Sharing Practices for Corporate Sustainability: An Empirical Investigation of Sharing Economy Firms in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    12. Stav Fainshmidt & Amir Pezeshkan & M. Lance Frazier & Anil Nair & Edward Markowski, 2016. "Dynamic Capabilities and Organizational Performance: A Meta-Analytic Evaluation and Extension," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(8), pages 1348-1380, December.
    13. Wang, Yu & Chen, Yongqiang & Wang, Wenqian & Tang, Yinqiu, 2019. "Differentiating two types of learning in contract design: Evidence from the construction industry," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-11.
    14. Vincze, János & Varga, Gergely, 2016. "Megtakarítási típusok - egy adaptív-evolúciós megközelítés [Types of saving - an adaptive-evolutionary approach]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 162-187.
    15. Schriber, Svante & Löwstedt, Jan, 2018. "Managing asset orchestration: A processual approach to adapting to dynamic environments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 307-317.
    16. Frangeskou, Marianna & Erthal, Alice & Ndibalema, Rweyemamu, 2024. "Managing the tensions of standardized work processes in healthcare operations: The job crafting lens," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    17. Arie Y. Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2011. "Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 81-98, February.
    18. Huikkola, Tuomas & Kohtamäki, Marko & Rabetino, Rodrigo & Makkonen, Hannu & Holtkamp, Philipp, 2022. "Overcoming the challenges of smart solution development: Co-alignment of processes, routines, and practices to manage product, service, and software integration," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    19. Roberto Grandinetti, 2022. "A Routine-Based Theory of Routine Replication," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-23, July.
    20. Cohendet Patrick & Llerena Patrick & Simon Laurent, 2014. "The Routinization of Creativity: Lessons from the Case of a Video-game Creative Powerhouse," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 234(2-3), pages 120-141, April.

    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.