Closing the loop: promoting synergies with other theory building approaches to improve system dynamics practice

This paper contributes to the development of better methods for the conceptualization of system dynamics models. It does so by looking at the model building process as a theory building process and by reviewing theory building approaches in other social sciences, such as grounded theory and case study research. Concepts of these modes of qualitative research constitute a tool set to build relevant system dynamics models, grounded in data, and with higher potential to provide rigorous and relevant generic structures. The deductive capability of simulation models, on the other hand, helps to close the loop in the theory building process, putting together the inductive and deductive stages in theory building. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  David N. Ford,et al.  System Dynamics Applied to Project Management: A Survey, Assessment, and Directions for Future Research , 2007, System Dynamics.

[2]  L. Dooley.  Case Study Research and Theory Building , 2002 .

[3]  Yaman Barlas,et al.  Formal aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics , 1996 .

[4]  Edwin D. Mares,et al.  Integrating critical thinking and systems thinking: from premises to causal loops , 2004 .

[5]  B. Meeker,et al.  Computer Simulation for Exploring Theories: Models of Interpersonal Cooperation and Competition , 1995 .

[6]  Fran Ackermann,et al.  Linking event thinking with structural thinking: Methods to improve client value in projects , 2006 .

[7]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Generalizing Generalizability in Information Systems Research , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[8]  J. Wacker.  A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building research methods in operations management , 1998 .

[9]  Rogelio Oliva,et al.  The greater whole: Towards a synthesis of system dynamics and soft systems methodology , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  S. Turnbull,et al.  Social Construction Research and Theory Building , 2002 .

[11]  Baiyin Yang,et al.  Meta-Analysis Research and Theory Building , 2002 .

[12]  Yaman Barlas,et al.  Model simplification and validation with indirect structure validity tests , 2006 .

[13]  Jac A. M. Vennix,et al.  Group model-building: tackling messy problems , 1999 .

[14]  Steven Patrick,et al.  The Dynamic Simulation of Control and Compliance Processes in Material Organizations , 1995 .

[15]  David C. Lane,et al.  Can we have confidence in generic structures? , 1998, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[16]  Marianne W. Lewis,et al.  Metatriangulation: Building Theory from Multiple Paradigms , 1999 .

[17]  David C. Lane,et al.  Rerum cognoscere causas: Part I — How do the ideas of system dynamics relate to traditional social theories and the voluntarism/determinism debate? , 2001 .

[18]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Group model building: problem structuring, policy simulation and decision support , 2007, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[19]  Jack Homer,et al.  Why we iterate: scientific modeling in theory and practice , 1996 .

[20]  Anthony M. Cresswell,et al.  Anatomy of a group model‐building intervention: building dynamic theory from case study research , 2006 .

[21]  David C. Lane,et al.  Reinterpreting 'generic structure': evolution, application and limitations of a concept , 1996 .

[22]  José Ramón Gil-García,et al.  Collaborative digital government in Mexico: Some lessons from federal Web-based interorganizational information integration initiatives , 2007, Gov. Inf. Q..

[23]  S. Lynham.  The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines , 2002 .

[24]  S. Lynham.  Theory building in the human resource development profession , 2000 .

[25]  T. Egan.  Grounded Theory Research and Theory Building , 2002 .

[26]  Roger I. Hall,et al.  Causal policy maps of managers: Formal methods for elicitation and analysis , 1994 .

[27]  David N. Ford,et al.  Expert knowledge elicitation to improve formal and mental models , 1998 .

[28]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Scripts for group model building , 1997 .

[29]  Dennis A. Gioia,et al.  Multiparadigm Perspectives on Theory Building , 1990 .

[30]  Jay W. Forrester,et al.  System dynamics, systems thinking, and soft OR , 1994 .

[31]  E. F. Wolstenholme,et al.  Towards the definition and use of a core set of archetypal structures in system dynamics , 2003 .

[32]  Luis F. Luna-Reyes,et al.  Collecting and analyzing qualitative data for system dynamics: methods and models , 2003 .

[33]  Yaman Barlas,et al.  Philosophical roots of model validation: Two paradigms , 1990 .

[34]  David C. Lane,et al.  Rerum cognoscere causas: Part II—Opportunities generated by the agency/structure debate and suggestions for clarifying the social theoretic position of system dynamics , 2001 .

[35]  J. Meredith,et al.  Alternative research paradigms in operations , 1989 .

[36]  David C. Lane,et al.  Should system dynamics be described as a ‘hard’ or ‘deterministic’ systems approach? , 2000 .

[37]  Khalid Saeed,et al.  Slicing a complex problem for system dynamics modeling , 1992 .

[38]  David C. Lane,et al.  With a little help from our friends: How system dynamics and soft OR can learn from each other , 1994 .

[39]  Khalid Saeed,et al.  Articulating Developmental Problems for Policy Intervention: A System Dynamics Modeling Approach , 2003 .

[40]  Paul R. Carlile,et al.  A Dynamic Theory of Expertise and Occupational Boundaries in New Technology Implementation: Building on Barley's Study of CT Scanning , 2004 .