IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlogis/v6y2022i2p37-d835998.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Minimum Viable Model (MVM) Methodology for Integration of Agile Methods into Operational Simulation of Logistics

Author

Listed:
  • Zichong Lyu

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, Kirkwood Ave, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand)

  • Dirk Pons

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, Kirkwood Ave, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand)

  • Yilei Zhang

    (Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Canterbury, Kirkwood Ave, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand)

  • Zuzhen Ji

    (Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Zhejiang University, Zheda Ave, Hangzhou 310027, China)

Abstract

Background : Logistics problems involve a large number of complexities, which makes the development of models challenging. While computer simulation models are developed for addressing complexities, it is essential to ensure that the necessary operational behaviours are captured, and that the architecture of the model is suitable to represent them. The early stage of simulation modelling, known as conceptual modelling (CM), is thus dependent on successfully extracting tacit operational knowledge and avoiding misunderstanding between the client (customer of the model) and simulation analyst. Objective : This paper developed a methodology for managing the knowledge-acquisition process needed to create a sufficient simulation model at the early or the CM stage to ensure the correctness of operation representation. Methods : A minimum viable model (MVM) methodology was proposed with five principles relevant to CM: iterative development, embedded communication, soliciting tacit knowledge, interactive face validity, and a sufficient model. The method was validated by a case study of freight operations, and the results were encouraging. Conclusions : The MVM method improved the architecture of the simulation model through eliciting tacit knowledge and clearing up communication misunderstandings. It also helped shape the architecture of the model towards the features most appreciated by the client, and features not needed in the model. Originality: The novel contribution of this work is the presentation of a method for eliciting tacit information from industrial clients, and building a minimally sufficient simulation model at the early modelling stage. The framework is demonstrated for logistics operations, though the principles may benefit simulation practitioners more generally.

Suggested Citation

  • Zichong Lyu & Dirk Pons & Yilei Zhang & Zuzhen Ji, 2022. "Minimum Viable Model (MVM) Methodology for Integration of Agile Methods into Operational Simulation of Logistics," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-28, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlogis:v:6:y:2022:i:2:p:37-:d:835998
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2305-6290/6/2/37/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2305-6290/6/2/37/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. K Kotiadis & A A Tako & C Vasilakis, 2014. "A participative and facilitative conceptual modelling framework for discrete event simulation studies in healthcare," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(2), pages 197-213, February.
    2. Thomas R. Willemain, 1995. "Model Formulation: What Experts Think About and When," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 43(6), pages 916-932, December.
    3. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    4. Yu Liu & Pauline Folz & Shenle Pan & Fano Ramparany & Sébastien Bolle & Eric Ballot & Thierry Coupaye, 2021. "Digital Twin-Driven Approach for Smart City Logistics: The Case of Freight Parking Management," Post-Print hal-03388874, HAL.
    5. Elbert, R. & Knigge, J. & Friedrich, A., 2019. "Analysis of decentral platoon planning possibilities in road freight transport using an agent-based simulation model," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 117226, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    6. Christos Zikopoulos, 2019. "Determination of freight rates under stochastic demand and freight consolidation savings," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(17), pages 5556-5573, September.
    7. Anh Nguyen-Duc & Khan Khalid & Sohaib Shahid Bajwa & Tor Lønnestad, 2019. "Minimum Viable Products for Internet of Things Applications: Common Pitfalls and Practices," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, February.
    8. Ghezzi, Antonio, 2019. "Digital startups and the adoption and implementation of Lean Startup Approaches: Effectuation, Bricolage and Opportunity Creation in practice," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 945-960.
    9. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    10. S Robinson, 2008. "Conceptual modelling for simulation Part II: a framework for conceptual modelling," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(3), pages 291-304, March.
    11. S Robinson, 2008. "Conceptual modelling for simulation Part I: definition and requirements," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(3), pages 278-290, March.
    12. O Balci & W F Ormsby, 2007. "Conceptual modelling for designing large-scale simulations," Journal of Simulation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(3), pages 175-186, August.
    13. Robinson, Stewart & Worthington, Claire & Burgess, Nicola & Radnor, Zoe J., 2014. "Facilitated modelling with discrete-event simulation: Reality or myth?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(1), pages 231-240.
    14. Tako, Antuela A. & Kotiadis, Kathy, 2015. "PartiSim: A multi-methodology framework to support facilitated simulation modelling in healthcare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(2), pages 555-564.
    15. Dornbusch, Friedrich & Neuhäusler, Peter, 2015. "Composition of inventor teams and technological progress – The role of collaboration between academia and industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1360-1375.
    16. K Kotiadis & J Mingers, 2006. "Combining PSMs with hard OR methods: the philosophical and practical challenges," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 856-867, July.
    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. Zuzhen Ji & Dirk Pons & Zhouyang Su & Zichong Lyu & John Pearse, 2022. "Integrating Occupational Health and Safety Risk and Production Economics for Sustainable SME Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Zichong Lyu & Dirk Pons & Yilei Zhang, 2023. "Emissions and Total Cost of Ownership for Diesel and Battery Electric Freight Pickup and Delivery Trucks in New Zealand: Implications for Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.

    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. Alireza Moumivand & Adel Azar & Abbas Toloie Eshlaghy, 2022. "Combined soft system methodology and agent‐based simulation for multi‐methodological modelling," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 200-217, March.
    2. Tako, Antuela A. & Kotiadis, Kathy, 2015. "PartiSim: A multi-methodology framework to support facilitated simulation modelling in healthcare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(2), pages 555-564.
    3. Harper, Alison & Mustafee, Navonil & Yearworth, Mike, 2021. "Facets of trust in simulation studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 197-213.
    4. Nguyen, Le Khanh Ngan & Howick, Susan & Megiddo, Itamar, 2024. "A framework for conceptualising hybrid system dynamics and agent-based simulation models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(3), pages 1153-1166.
    5. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    6. Baril, Chantal & Gascon, Viviane & Miller, Jonathan & Côté, Nadine, 2016. "Use of a discrete-event simulation in a Kaizen event: A case study in healthcare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 327-339.
    7. Martin Comis & Catherine Cleophas & Christina Büsing, 2021. "Patients, primary care, and policy: Agent-based simulation modeling for health care decision support," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 799-826, December.
    8. Proudlove, N.C. & Bisogno, S. & Onggo, B.S.S. & Calabrese, A. & Levialdi Ghiron, N., 2017. "Towards fully-facilitated discrete event simulation modelling: Addressing the model coding stage," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(2), pages 583-595.
    9. Kotiadis, K. & Tako, A.A., 2018. "Facilitated post-model coding in discrete event simulation (DES): A case study in healthcare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(3), pages 1120-1133.
    10. Lane, David & Husemann, Elke & Holland, Darren & Khaled, Abdul, 2019. "Understanding foodborne transmission mechanisms for Norovirus: A study for the UK's Food Standards Agency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 721-736.
    11. Henao, Felipe & Franco, L. Alberto, 2016. "Unpacking multimethodology: Impacts of a community development intervention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 681-696.
    12. Guillaume Lamé & Oualid Jouini & Julie Stal-Le Cardinal, 2020. "Combining Soft Systems Methodology, Ethnographic Observation and Discrete-Event Simulation: A Case Study in Cancer Care," Post-Print hal-02095031, HAL.
    13. Robinson, Stewart & Kotiadis, Kathy, 2016. "Can involving clients in simulation studies help them solve their future problems? A transfer of learning experimentAuthor-Name: Monks, Thomas," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 919-930.
    14. Elias Hartvigsson & Erik Oscar Ahlgren & Sverker Molander, 2020. "Tackling complexity and problem formulation in rural electrification through conceptual modelling in system dynamics," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 141-153, January.
    15. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    16. Gerrit Muller, 2021. "Applying Roadmapping and Conceptual Modeling to the Energy Transition: A Local Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-16, March.
    17. Esposito Amideo, A. & Scaparra, M.P. & Kotiadis, K., 2019. "Optimising shelter location and evacuation routing operations: The critical issues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(2), pages 279-295.
    18. Sondoss Elsawah & Elena Bakhanova & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "A Competency Framework for Participatory Modeling," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 569-601, June.
    19. Jason Madan & Meghan Bruce Kumar & Miriam Taegtmeyer & Edwine Barasa & Swaran Preet Singh, 2020. "SEEP-CI: A Structured Economic Evaluation Process for Complex Health System Interventions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-12, September.
    20. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.

    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:gam:jlogis:v:6:y:2022:i:2:p:37-:d:835998. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.