IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v22y2011i5p1195-1202.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Computational Modeling for What-Is, What-Might-Be, and What-Should-Be Studies---And Triangulation

Author

Listed:
  • Richard M. Burton

    (Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708)

  • Børge Obel

    (Aarhus School of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus University, DK-8210 Aarhus, Denmark)

Abstract

In this essay, we examine what-is, what-might-be, and what-should-be computational models where the purpose is to explore new concepts, ideas, boundaries, and limitations going beyond what we know at the moment. Computational models complement well with other approaches: ethnographies, field studies, human subject lab studies, and surveys in novel triangulations. Triangulation of two or more complementary approaches permits us to broaden and deepen our understanding and insights.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 2011. "Computational Modeling for What-Is, What-Might-Be, and What-Should-Be Studies---And Triangulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1195-1202, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:22:y:2011:i:5:p:1195-1202
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0635
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0635
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1100.0635?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raymond E. Levitt, 2004. "Computational Modeling of Organizations Comes of Age," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 127-145, July.
    2. Zhiang (John) Lin & Xia Zhao & Kiran M. Ismail & Kathleen M. Carley, 2006. "Organizational Design and Restructuring in Response to Crises: Lessons from Computational Modeling and Real-World Cases," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(5), pages 598-618, October.
    3. Chris P. Long & Richard M. Burton & Laura B. Cardinal, 2002. "Three Controls are Better than One: A Computational Model of Complex Control Systems," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 197-220, October.
    4. Michael J. Lenox & Scott F. Rockart & Arie Y. Lewin, 2007. "Interdependency, Competition, and Industry Dynamics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 599-615, April.
    5. Jerker Denrell & James G. March, 2001. "Adaptation as Information Restriction: The Hot Stove Effect," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(5), pages 523-538, October.
    6. Michael J. Prietula & Harry S. Watson, 2000. "Extending the Cyert-March Duopoly Model: Organizational and Economic Insights," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(5), pages 565-585, October.
    7. Nelson P. Repenning, 2002. "A Simulation-Based Approach to Understanding the Dynamics of Innovation Implementation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 109-127, April.
    8. Burton, Richard M. & Obel, Borge, 1988. "Opportunism, incentives, and the m-form hypothesis : A laboratory study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 99-119, July.
    9. Michael J. Lenox & Scott F. Rockart & Arie Y. Lewin, 2006. "Interdependency, Competition, and the Distribution of Firm and Industry Profits," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(5), pages 757-772, May.
    10. Jan W. Rivkin, 2001. "Reproducing Knowledge: Replication Without Imitation at Moderate Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 274-293, June.
    11. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    12. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Speed and Search: Designing Organizations for Turbulence and Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 101-122, April.
    13. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2009. "Hoping for A to Z While Rewarding Only A: Complex Organizations and Multiple Goals," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 4-21, February.
    14. Kathleen M. Carley, 2009. "Computational modeling for reasoning about the social behavior of humans," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 47-59, March.
    15. Laura B. Cardinal & Sim B. Sitkin & Chris P. Long, 2004. "Balancing and Rebalancing in the Creation and Evolution of Organizational Control," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 411-431, August.
    16. Laura B. Cardinal & Scott F. Turner & Michael J. Fern & Richard M. Burton, 2011. "Organizing for Product Development Across Technological Environments: Performance Trade-offs and Priorities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 1000-1025, August.
    17. Richard M. Burton, 2003. "Computational Laboratories for Organization Science: Questions, Validity and Docking," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 91-108, July.
    18. Michael J. Lenox & Scott F. Rockart & Arie Y. Lewin, 2010. "Does interdependency affect firm and industry profitability? an empirical test," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 121-139, February.
    19. Thorbjørn Knudsen & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2007. "Two Faces of Search: Alternative Generation and Alternative Evaluation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 39-54, February.
    20. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2003. "Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 650-669, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    2. Juha Uotila, 2018. "Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 131-148.
    3. Hart E. Posen & Dirk Martignoni & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2013. "E Pluribus Unum: Organizational Size and the Efficacy of Learning," DRUID Working Papers 13-09, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    4. Mo Chen & Aseem Kaul & Brian Wu, 2019. "Adaptation across multiple landscapes: Relatedness, complexity, and the long run effects of coordination in diversified firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(11), pages 1791-1821, November.
    5. Cha Li & Felipe A. Csaszar, 2019. "Government as Landscape Designer: A Behavioral View of Industrial Policy," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 175-192, September.
    6. Sheen S. Levine & Michael J. Prietula, 2012. "How Knowledge Transfer Impacts Performance: A Multilevel Model of Benefits and Liabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1748-1766, December.
    7. Friederike Wall, 2016. "Agent-based modeling in managerial science: an illustrative survey and study," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 135-193, January.
    8. Helmut M. Dietl & Markus Lang & Eric Lucas & Dirk Martignoni, 2012. "Learning Through Inaccurate Replication," Working Papers 312, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    9. Stephan Billinger & Nils Stieglitz & Terry R. Schumacher, 2014. "Search on Rugged Landscapes: An Experimental Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 93-108, February.
    10. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    11. Christina Fang & Jeho Lee & Melissa A. Schilling, 2010. "Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Through Structural Design: The Isolation of Subgroups and Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 625-642, June.
    12. Dirk Martignoni & Thomas Keil & Markus Lang, 2020. "Focus in Searching Core–Periphery Structures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 266-286, March.
    13. Daniel A. Levinthal & Maciej Workiewicz, 2018. "When Two Bosses Are Better Than One: Nearly Decomposable Systems and Organizational Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 207-224, April.
    14. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    15. Hazhir Rahmandad, 2008. "Effect of Delays on Complexity of Organizational Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1297-1312, July.
    16. Chris P. Long & Sim B. Sitkin & Laura B. Cardinal & Richard M. Burton, 2015. "How controls influence organizational information processing: insights from a computational modeling investigation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 406-436, December.
    17. Feiz Abadi, Javad & Gligor, David M. & Alibakhshi Motlagh, Somayeh & Srivastava, Raj, 2024. "When and under what conditions ambidextrous supply chains prove effective? Insights from simulation and empirical studies," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    18. Stephan Leitner & Friederike Wall, 2015. "Simulation-based research in management accounting and control: an illustrative overview," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 105-129, August.
    19. Ganco, Martin, 2017. "NK model as a representation of innovative search," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1783-1800.
    20. Felipe A. Csaszar & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2016. "Mental representation and the discovery of new strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2031-2049, October.

    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:inm:ororsc:v:22:y:2011:i:5:p:1195-1202. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.