In the March, 1968, issue of Management Science, Ansoff and Slevin discuss industrial dynamics [2]. Although the authors acknowledge writing without having used industrial dynamics, their paper contributes by raising important questions which need discussion. The rapidly increasing domestic and international interest in industrial dynamics makes especially timely their paper and an opportunity to respond. The authors base their viewpoint on information available from the published literature. I respond from the viewpoint of one familiar with much additional work in the field which has not yet reached the public press. This may account for some of our differences. Between glimpsing early results and seeing these in print, five or more years can elapse. The work must be consolidated and improved, articles written, and publication delays awaited. Access through publication is also impeded by proprietary restrictions placed on some of the more important and exciting applications of industrial dynamics in industry. Although space limits discussion to those points where I differ, the authors have developed many important ideas in their paper. They have performed a valuable service for industrial dynamics. The comments that follow are grouped by subject and not in the sequence of their article.
[1]
Thomas H. Naylor,et al.
Verification of Computer Simulation Models
,
1967
.
[2]
H. Igor Ansoff,et al.
An Appreciation of Industrial Dynamics
,
1968
.
[3]
J. Forrester.
The Structure Underlying Management Processes.
,
1964
.
[4]
Charles C. Holt,et al.
Critique of: “Verification of Computer Simulation Models”
,
1967
.
[5]
Jay W. Forrester,et al.
Industrial Dynamics---After the First Decade
,
1968
.
[6]
Russell L. Ackoff,et al.
Management misinformation systems
,
1967
.
[7]
Jay W. Forrester,et al.
Common foundations underlying engineering and management
,
1964,
IEEE Spectrum.
[8]
J. Bruner.
The Process of Education
,
1960
.