IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v15y2009i3d10.1007_s10588-009-9059-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficient experimental design tools for exploring large simulation models

Author

Listed:
  • Regine Pei Tze Oh

    (DSO National Laboratories)

  • Susan M. Sanchez

    (Naval Postgraduate School)

  • Thomas W. Lucas

    (Graduate School of Operational and Information Sciences)

  • Hong Wan

    (Purdue University)

  • Mark E. Nissen

    (Naval Postgraduate School)

Abstract

Simulation experiments are typically faster, cheaper and more flexible than physical experiments. They are especially useful for pilot studies of complicated systems where little prior knowledge of the system behavior exists. One key characteristic of simulation experiments is the large number of factors and interactions between factors that impact decision makers. Traditional simulation approaches offer little help in analyzing large numbers of factors and interactions, which makes interpretation and application of results very difficult and often incorrect. In this paper we implement and demonstrate efficient design of experiments techniques to analyze large, complex simulation models. Looking specifically within the domain of organizational performance, we illustrate how our approach can be used to analyze even immense results spaces, driven by myriad factors with sometimes unknown interactions, and pursue optimal settings for different performance measures. This allows analysts to rapidly identify the most important, results-influencing factors within simulation models, employ an experimental design to fully explore the simulation space efficiently, and enhance system design through simulation. This dramatically increases the breadth and depth of insights available through analysis of simulation data, reduces the time required to analyze simulation-driven studies, and extends the state of the art in computational and mathematical organization theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Regine Pei Tze Oh & Susan M. Sanchez & Thomas W. Lucas & Hong Wan & Mark E. Nissen, 2009. "Efficient experimental design tools for exploring large simulation models," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 237-257, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:15:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s10588-009-9059-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-009-9059-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-009-9059-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-009-9059-1?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. 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. Mark E. Nissen, 2007. "Computational experimentation on new organizational forms: Exploring behavior and performance of Edge organizations," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 203-240, September.
    3. Hong Wan & Bruce E. Ankenman & Barry L. Nelson, 2006. "Controlled Sequential Bifurcation: A New Factor-Screening Method for Discrete-Event Simulation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 54(4), pages 743-755, August.
    4. Raymond E. Levitt & Jan Thomsen & Tore R. Christiansen & John C. Kunz & Yan Jin & Clifford Nass, 1999. "Simulating Project Work Processes and Organizations: Toward a Micro-Contingency Theory of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(11), pages 1479-1495, November.
    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. Hua Shen & Hong Wan & Susan M. Sanchez, 2010. "A hybrid method for simulation factor screening," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 45-57, February.
    2. Nicola Rossi & Mario Bačić & Lovorka Librić & Meho Saša Kovačević, 2023. "Methodology for Identification of the Key Levee Parameters for Limit-State Analyses Based on Sequential Bifurcation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Cansu Kandemir & Holly A. H. Handley, 2019. "Work process improvement through simulation optimization of task assignment and mental workload," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 389-427, December.
    4. Iris Lorscheid & Bernd-Oliver Heine & Matthias Meyer, 2012. "Opening the ‘black box’ of simulations: increased transparency and effective communication through the systematic design of experiments," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 22-62, March.
    5. Alexia P. Payan & Dimitri N. Mavris, 2016. "Multilevel Probabilistic Morphological Analysis for Facilitating Modeling and Simulation of Notional Scenarios," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 3-23, January.
    6. Thiele, Jan C, 2014. "R Marries NetLogo: Introduction to the RNetLogo Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 58(i02).

    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. Kent Wickstrøm Jensen & Dorthe Døjbak Håkonsson & Richard M. Burton & Børge Obel, 2010. "The effect of virtuality on the functioning of centralized versus decentralized structures—an information processing perspective," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 144-170, June.
    2. Wen Shi & Xi Chen & Jennifer Shang, 2019. "An Efficient Morris Method-Based Framework for Simulation Factor Screening," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 745-770, October.
    3. Timothy N. Carroll & Thomas J. Gormley & Vincent J. Bilardo & Richard M. Burton & Keith L. Woodman, 2006. "Designing a New Organization at NASA: An Organization Design Process Using Simulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(2), pages 202-214, April.
    4. Haberstroh, Martin & Wolf, Joachim, 2005. "Individuelle Autonomie in Projektteams," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 585, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    5. Rupak Rauniar & Greg Rawski & Donald Hudson, 2017. "Antecedents And Consequences Of Ippd Effectiveness," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(07), pages 1-38, October.
    6. Nasrallah, Walid F. & Qawasmeh, Suleiman J., 2009. "Comparing multi-dimensional contingency fit to financial performance of organizations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(3), pages 911-921, May.
    7. Nicolay Worren & Tore Christiansen & Kim Verner Soldal, 2020. "Using an algorithmic approach for grouping roles and sub-units," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Hutzschenreuter, Thomas & Horstkotte, Julian, 2013. "Managerial services and complexity in a firm’s expansion process: An empirical study of the impact on the growth of the firm," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 137-151.
    9. 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.
    10. Walid F. Nasrallah & Raymond E. Levitt, 2001. "An Interaction Value Perspective on Firms of Differing Size," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 113-144, August.
    11. Nadia Bhuiyan & Donald Gerwin & Vince Thomson, 2004. "Simulation of the New Product Development Process for Performance Improvement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1690-1703, December.
    12. Muethel, Miriam & Hoegl, Martin, 2010. "Cultural and societal influences on shared leadership in globally dispersed teams," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 234-246, September.
    13. Shi, Wen & Kleijnen, Jack P.C. & Liu, Zhixue, 2014. "Factor screening for simulation with multiple responses: Sequential bifurcation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(1), pages 136-147.
    14. Rauniar, Rupak & Rawski, Greg, 2012. "Organizational structuring and project team structuring in integrated product development project," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(2), pages 939-952.
    15. Tamaki Horii & Yan Jin & Raymond E. Levitt, 2005. "Modeling and Analyzing Cultural Influences on Project Team Performance," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 305-321, January.
    16. Timothy N. Carroll, 2008. "Mark E. Nissen: Harnessing Knowledge Dynamics: Principled Organizational Knowing & Learning," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 52-55, March.
    17. Jürgen Mihm & Christoph Loch & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2003. "Problem--Solving Oscillations in Complex Engineering Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(6), pages 733-750, June.
    18. Walid Nasrallah & Raymond Levitt & Peter Glynn, 2003. "Interaction Value Analysis: When Structured Communication Benefits Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(5), pages 541-557, October.
    19. 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.
    20. To, Chester K.M. & Fung, Hon-Kwok & Harwood, Raymond J. & Ho, K.C., 2009. "Coordinating dispersed product development processes: A contingency perspective of project design and modelling," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 570-584, August.

    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:spr:comaot:v:15:y:2009:i:3:d:10.1007_s10588-009-9059-1. 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.springer.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.