IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v55y2004i6d10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601720.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the nature of discontinuities in system dynamics modelling of disrupted projects

Author

Listed:
  • S Howick

    (University of Strathclyde)

  • C Eden

    (University of Strathclyde)

Abstract

When complex projects result in large-cost over-runs, managers want to understand why this happened. There may be the possibility of making a claim against another party, or managers may simply wish to learn from any mistakes made. When using system dynamics (SD) models to analyse the reasons for project over-runs as a part of a litigation or organizational learning process, there is a strong focus on explaining historical aspects precisely. This leads to a need for the inclusion of discontinuous variables. This paper discusses the nature of discontinuities in SD models of project over-runs. Examples are given to demonstrate that the modelling of such discontinuities needs to be an integral part of the continuous simulation modelling process. Their inclusion helps to improve model validity and also, by forcing validity, uncover the important drivers of project behaviour. The examples given in this paper are significant drivers and suggest important learning about the behaviour of disrupted complex projects.

Suggested Citation

  • S Howick & C Eden, 2004. "On the nature of discontinuities in system dynamics modelling of disrupted projects," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(6), pages 598-605, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:55:y:2004:i:6:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601720
    DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601720
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601720?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fran Ackermann & Colin Eden & Terry Williams, 1997. "Modeling for Litigation: Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 48-65, April.
    2. S Howick & C Eden, 2001. "The impact of disruption and delay when compressing large projects: going for incentives?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 52(1), pages 26-34, January.
    3. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    4. S Howick, 2003. "Using system dynamics to analyse disruption and delay in complex projects for litigation: can the modelling purposes be met?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(3), pages 222-229, March.
    5. Mark Paich & John D. Sterman, 1993. "Boom, Bust, and Failures to Learn in Experimental Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(12), pages 1439-1458, December.
    6. Diehl, Ernst & Sterman, John D., 1995. "Effects of Feedback Complexity on Dynamic Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 198-215, May.
    7. Kenneth G. Cooper, 1980. "Naval Ship Production: A Claim Settled and a Framework Built," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 20-36, December.
    8. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    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. Morgan, Jennifer Sian & Howick, Susan & Belton, Valerie, 2017. "A toolkit of designs for mixing Discrete Event Simulation and System Dynamics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(3), pages 907-918.

    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. S Howick, 2003. "Using system dynamics to analyse disruption and delay in complex projects for litigation: can the modelling purposes be met?," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(3), pages 222-229, March.
    2. Howick, Susan, 2005. "Using system dynamics models with litigation audiences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 239-250, April.
    3. Gibson, Faison P., 2000. "Feedback Delays: How Can Decision Makers Learn Not to Buy a New Car Every Time the Garage Is Empty?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 141-166, September.
    4. Atun, Rifat A. & Lebcir, Reda M. & McKee, Martin & Habicht, Jarno & Coker, Richard J., 2007. "Impact of joined-up HIV harm reduction and multidrug resistant tuberculosis control programmes in Estonia: System dynamics simulation model," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(2-3), pages 207-217, May.
    5. Strohhecker, Jürgen & Leyer, Michael, 2019. "How stock-flow failure and general cognitive ability impact performance in operational dynamic control tasks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(3), pages 1044-1055.
    6. Repenning, Nelson P. (Nelson Peter), 1998. "The transition problem in product development," Working papers WP 4036-98., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    7. Lurie, Nicholas H. & Swaminathan, Jayashankar M., 2009. "Is timely information always better? The effect of feedback frequency on decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 315-329, March.
    8. Atkins, Paul W. B. & Wood, Robert E. & Rutgers, Philip J., 2002. "The effects of feedback format on dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(2), pages 587-604, July.
    9. Villa, Sebastián, 2022. "Competing for supply and demand: Understanding retailers' ordering decisions," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    10. Schnier, Kurt E. & Anderson, Christopher M., 2006. "Decision making in patchy resource environments: Spatial misperception of bioeconomic models," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 234-254, October.
    11. Arango, Santiago & Castañeda, Jaime A. & Larsen, Erik R., 2013. "Mothballing in power markets: An experimental study," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 125-134.
    12. Arango, Santiago & Moxnes, Erling, 2012. "Commodity cycles, a function of market complexity? Extending the cobweb experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 321-334.
    13. F Ackermann & C Eden & T Williams & S Howick, 2007. "Systemic risk assessment: a case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(1), pages 39-51, January.
    14. U Benzion & Y Cohen & R Peled & T Shavit, 2008. "Decision-making and the newsvendor problem: an experimental study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1281-1287, September.
    15. Anne M. Farrell & Joan Luft & Michael D. Shields, 2007. "Accuracy in Judging the Nonlinear Effects of Cost and Profit Drivers," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 1139-1169, December.
    16. John Hey & Tibor Neugebauer & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2009. "An Experimental Analysis of Optimal Renewable Resource Management: The Fishery," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(2), pages 263-285, October.
    17. Yang, Y. & Lin, J. & Liu, G. & Zhou, L., 2021. "The behavioural causes of bullwhip effect in supply chains: A systematic literature review," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    18. Thomke, Stefan H., 1998. "Simulation, learning and R&D performance: Evidence from automotive development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 55-74, May.
    19. Navid Ghaffarzadegan & Richard C. Larson, 2018. "SD meets OR: a new synergy to address policy problems," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 327-353, January.
    20. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & Ali Kerem Saysel, 2017. "Role of Information Feedback in Soil Nitrogen Management: Results from a Dynamic Simulation Game," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 424-439, July.

    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:pal:jorsoc:v:55:y:2004:i:6:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601720. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.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.