Cited By
View all- Kunc MHuschka TChick S(2016)System dynamicsProceedings of the 2016 Winter Simulation Conference10.5555/3042094.3042110(53-64)Online publication date: 11-Dec-2016
Modeling skills for des and SD: an exploratory study on their development in new practitioners
Authors: 
Kathryn Hoad, Martin KuncAuthors Info & Claims
Kathryn Hoad, Martin KuncAuthors Info & ClaimsPages 3461 - 3468
Abstract
This paper compares widely employed simulation modeling approaches: System Dynamics (SD) and Discrete Event Simulation (DES). SD and DES follow two quite different modeling philosophies and can bring very different but complimentary insights in understanding to the same 'real world' problem. An exploratory study is undertaken to investigate the ability of new practitioners to assimilate and then put into practice both modeling approaches. We found evidence that new practitioners can master both simulation techniques but they developed skills at representing the tangible characteristics of systems, the realm of DES, easier than conceptualizing the intangible properties of systems such as feedback processes, the realm of SD. More emphasis should be made of helping new practitioners develop a deeper understanding of the links between the various stages of the modeling process, especially model conceptualization, as well as more practice in visualizing the conceptually difficult feedback processes so vital in SD modeling.
References
[1]
Akkermans, H. A. 1995. Modeling with Managers. Participative Business Modeling for Effective Strategic Decision-Making, PhD thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.
[2]
Brailsford S. C. and Hilton N. A. 2001. "A Comparison of Discrete Event Simulation And System Dynamics For Modeling Healthcare Systems". Proceedings from ORAHS 2000, Glasgow, Scotland, ed. J. Riley, 2001, pp 18--39.
[3]
Coyle, R. G. 1985. "Representing Discrete Events in System Dynamics Models: A Theoretical Application to Modeling Coal Production". Journal of the Operational Research Society 36(4): 307--318.
[4]
Eberlein, R. L. and Peterson, D. W. 1992. "Understanding Models with Vensim™". European Journal of Operational Research, 59: 216--219
[5]
Hoad, K., S. Robinson and R. Davies. 2010. "Automating Selection of The Number Of Replications for A Discrete-Event Simulation". Journal of the Operational Research Society, 61 (11): 1632--1644
[6]
Jahangirian, M., T. Eldabi, A., L. K. Stergioulas and T. Young. 2010. "Simulation in Manufacturing And Business: A Review". European Journal of Operational Research, 203: 1--13.
[7]
Kunc, M. 2012. "Teaching Strategic Thinking Using System Dynamics: Lessons from a Strategic Development Course". System Dynamic Review, 28: 28--45.
[8]
Kunc, M., and Morecroft, J. 2007. "System Dynamics Modeling For Strategic Development". In O'Brien, F and Dyson, R Supporting Strategy: Frameworks, Methods and Models, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 157--89.
[9]
Lane, D. C. 2000. You Just Don't Understand Me: Models of Failure and Success In the Discourse Between System Dynamics and Discrete Event Simulation. Working Paper 00.34:26: London School of Economics and Political Sciences.
[10]
Law, A. M. 2007. Simulation Modeling and Analysis, 4th ed. McGraw-Hill.
[11]
Morecroft, J. 2007. Strategic Modelling and Business Dynamics, A Feedback Systems Approach. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, West Sussex, England.
[12]
Morecroft, J. D. W. and Robinson, S. 2005. "Explaining Puzzling Dynamics: Comparing the Use of System Dynamics and Discrete-Event Simulation". In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Boston.
[13]
Morgan, J., Howick, S. and Belton, V. 2011. "Designs For Complementarity Use of System Dynamics and Discrete Event Simulation". In: Proceedings of the 2011 Winter Simulation Conference.
[14]
Pidd, M. 2004. Computer Simulation in Management Science, 5th ed. Wiley
[15]
Pidd, M. 2009. Tools for Thinking: Modeling in Management Science, 3rd Chichester, Wiley
[16]
Robinson, S. 2002. General Concepts of Quality For Discrete-Event Simulation. European Journal of Operational Research. 138, 103--107
[17]
Robinson, S. 2004. Simulation: The Practice Computer Simulation in Management Science of Model Development and Use, Wiley: Chichester.
[18]
Robinson, S. and R. Davies. 2010. "An Investigation of the Effect of Educational Background on Performance in Simulation Studies". Journal of the Operational Research Society, 61: 1685--1693.
[19]
Sargent, RG, 2013. "Verification and Validation of Simulation Models". Journal of Simulation. 7, 12--24
[20]
Simul8 Corporation 2013: http://www.simul8.com/
[21]
Stat::Fit Version2 2013: http://www.geerms.com/
[22]
Sterman, J. 2000. Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, Irwin/McGraw-Hill: Boston; London.
[23]
Sweetser, A. 1999. "A Comparison of System Dynamics and Discrete Event Simulation". Proceedings of 17th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society and 5th Australian & New Zealand Systems Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.
[24]
Tako, A. A. and S. Robinson. 2009. "Comparing Discrete-Event Simulation and System Dynamics: Users' Perceptions". Journal of the Operational Research Society 60: 296--312.
[25]
Tako, A. A. and Robinson, S. 2010. "Model Development in Discrete-Event Simulation and System Dynamics: An Empirical Study of Expert Modelers". European Journal of Operational Research, 207: 784--794.
[26]
Tako, A. A. and Robinson, S. 2012. "The Application of Discrete-Event Simulation and System Dynamics in the Supply Chain Context". Decision Support Systems, 52 (4): 802--815.
- Modeling skills for des and SD: an exploratory study on their development in new practitioners
Recommendations
Using simulation to measure the performance of a search operation for a man overboard
ANSS '18: Proceedings of the Annual Simulation SymposiumA man overboard is defined as a situation in which a person falls out at sea from a ship and is in need of rescue. In such cases, a quick and effective search and rescue (SAR) operation are crucial to increase the survival probability of the victim. If ...
A Practical Approach to Subset Selection for Multi-objective Optimization via Simulation
We describe a practical two-stage algorithm, BootComp, for multi-objective optimization via simulation. Our algorithm finds a subset of good designs that a decision-maker can compare to identify the one that works best when considering all aspects of ...
Addressing Regulatory Requirements on Explanations for Automated Decisions with Provenance—A Case Study
COVID-19 Commentaries and Case StudyAI-based automated decisions are increasingly used as part of new services being deployed to the general public. This approach to building services presents significant potential benefits, such as the reduced speed of execution, increased accuracy, lower ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
December 2015
4051 pages
ISBN:9781467397414
Sponsors
Publisher
IEEE Press
Publication History
Published: 06 December 2015
Check for updates
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
WSC '15
Sponsor:
Acceptance Rates
WSC '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 202 of 296 submissions, 68%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 3,413 of 5,075 submissions, 67%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 25Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 13 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Kunc MHuschka TChick S(2016)System dynamicsProceedings of the 2016 Winter Simulation Conference10.5555/3042094.3042110(53-64)Online publication date: 11-Dec-2016
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in