Unlocking Organizational Potential: A Computational Platform for Investigating Structural Interdependence in Design

An organization’s design– the structuring of its resources and flows of knowledge– is an important element determining its effectiveness. An essential element to achieving an organization’s problem-solving potential is the role that interdependence, in both the task and the organization, plays in determining the dynamic and emergent system level properties of the organization. In this paper, we present a computational platform for experimentally investigating the structural dependencies found in the design of a complex system, and exploring their role in determining system behaviors and performance. The approach presented in this paper is a multiagent simulation of the conceptual design of space mission plans by Team X, an advanced projects design group at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The algorithm is composed of rich, descriptive models of both the team- types and timing of interactions, collaborative methods, sequencing, rates of convergence- and the task- primary variables, their behaviors and relations, and the approaches used to resolve them. The objective is to create an environment of interaction representative of that found in actual design sessions. Better understanding how the dynamics arising from organizational and domain interdependencies impact an organization’s ability to effective resolve its task should lead to the development of guidelines for better coping with task complexities, suggest ways to better design organizations, as well as suggest ways for improving the search for innovative solutions.© 2006 ASME

[1]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  A PCANS Model of Structure in Organizations , 1998 .

[2]  Michael J. Prietula,et al.  Computational organization theory , 1994 .

[3]  Christopher Alexander Notes on the Synthesis of Form , 1964 .

[4]  Jay R. Galbraith Designing Complex Organizations , 1973 .

[5]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[6]  Paul S. Adler,et al.  Interdepartmental Interdependence and Coordination: The Case of the Design/Manufacturing Interface , 1995 .

[7]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Landscape Design: Designing for Local Action in Complex Worlds , 1999 .

[8]  Christoph H. Loch,et al.  Communication and Uncertainty in Concurrent Engineering , 1998 .

[9]  Karl T. Ulrich,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[10]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[11]  Kathleen M. Carley STRUCTURAL CHANGE AND LEARNING WITHIN ORGANIZATIONS , 2001 .

[12]  Krishna R. Pattipati,et al.  Normative design of organizations. II. Organizational structure , 2002, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[13]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Identifying Modular and Integrative Systems and Their Impact on Design Team Interactions , 2003 .

[14]  James D. Thompson Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[15]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994 .

[16]  Kathleen M. Carley Intra-Organizational Computation and Complexity , 2003 .

[17]  J. A. Barnes Graph Theory and Social Networks: A Technical Comment on Connectedness and Connectivity , 1969 .