Reinterpreting 'generic structure': evolution, application and limitations of a concept

This paper traces the evolution of the generic structure concept in system dynamics and discusses the different practical uses to which they have been put. A review of previous work leads to the identification of three different views of what a generic structure is and, hence, what transferability means. These different views are distinguishable in application as well as in theory. Examination of these interpretations shows that the assumptions behind them are quite distinct. From this analysis it is argued that it is no longer useful to treat generic structure as a single concept since the unity it implies is only superficial. The conclusion is that the concept needs unbundling so that different assumptions about transferability of structure can be made explicit, and the role of generic structures as generalisable theories of dynamic behaviour in system dynamics theory and practice can be debated and clarified more effectively.

[1]  Barry Richmond,et al.  Systems thinking/system dynamics: Let's just get on with it , 1994 .

[2]  D. Meadows,et al.  Beyond the Limits , 1992 .

[3]  Jay W. Forrester,et al.  Industrial Dynamics---A Response to Ansoff and Slevin , 1968 .

[4]  Keith Tizzard,et al.  Management System Dynamics , 1977 .

[5]  Eliot R. Smith,et al.  Research methods in social relations , 1962 .

[6]  Stafford Beer,et al.  Decision and Control: The Meaning of Operational Research and Management Cybernetics , 1966 .

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

[8]  David C. Lane,et al.  Modeling growth strategy in a biotechnology startup firm , 1991 .

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

[10]  P. Senge,et al.  The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook , 1994 .

[11]  D. Meadows,et al.  Dynamics of Commodity Production Cycles. , 1973 .

[12]  Carlos A. Boloña.  Donella H. Meadows, Denis L. Meadows, Jorgen Randers y William W. Behrens III, 1972, The Limits to Growth. New York, Potomac Associates Book - Universe Books , 1973 .

[13]  John D. W. Morecroft,et al.  System dynamics and microworlds for policymakers , 1988 .

[14]  J. Forrester.  System Dynamics and the Lessons of 35 Years , 1993 .

[15]  David C. Lane,et al.  The folding star: a comparative reframing and extension of validity concepts in system dynamics , 1995 .

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

[17]  Ari Ginsberg,et al.  The dynamics of resource sharing: A metaphorical model , 1995 .

[18]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Soft Systems Methodology in Action , 1990 .

[19]  P. Senge.  The fifth discipline : the art and practice of the learning organization/ Peter M. Senge , 1991 .

[20]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Introduction to System Dynamics Modeling with DYNAMO , 1981 .

[21]  John N. Warfield,et al.  World dynamics , 1973 .

[22]  Michael R. Goodman,et al.  Study Notes in System Dynamics , 1974 .

[23]  Khalid Saeed.  Development Planning and Policy Design: A System Dynamics Approach , 1994 .

[24]  David C. Lane,et al.  On a Resurgence of Management Simulations and Games , 1995 .

[25]  Stafford Beer,et al.  The Viable System Model : its provenance , development , methodology and pathology * Stafford Beer = President of the World Organization for Systems and Cybernetics , 2000 .

[26]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Feedback Thought in Social Science and Systems Theory , 1991 .

[27]  George P. Richardson,et al.  Problems with causal‐loop diagrams , 1986 .

[28]  Jay Wright Forrester,et al.  Urban Dynamics , 1969 .