Development and use of simulation models in Operational Research : a comparison of discrete-event simulation and system dynamics

The thesis presents a comparison study of the two most established simulation approaches in Operational Research, Discrete-Event Simulation (DES) and System Dynamics (SD). The aim of the research implemented is to provide an empirical view of the differences and similarities between DES and SD, in terms of model building and model use. More specifically, the main objectives of this work are: 1. To determine how different the modelling process followed by DES and SD modellers is. 2. To establish the differences and similarities in the modelling approach taken by DES and SD modellers in each stage of simulation modelling. 3. To assess how different DES and SD models of an equivalent problem are from the users’ point of view. In line with the 3 research objectives, two separate studies are implemented: a model building study based on the first and second research objectives and a model use study, dealing with the third research objective. In the former study, Verbal Protocol Analysis is used, where expert DES and SD modellers are asked to ‘think aloud’ while developing simulation models. In the model use study a questionnaire survey with managers (executive MBA students) is implemented, where participants are requested to provide opinions about two equivalent DES and SD models. The model building study suggests that DES and SD modelling are different regarding the model building process and the stages followed. Considering the approach taken to modelling, some similarities are found in DES and SD modellers’ approach to problem structuring, data inputs, validation & verification. Meanwhile, the modellers’ approach to conceptual modelling, model coding, data inputs and model results is considered different. The model use study does not identify many significant differences in the users’ opinions regarding the specific DES and SD models used, implying that from the user’s point of view the type of simulation approach used makes little difference if any. The work described in this thesis is the first of its kind. It provides an understanding of the DES and SD simulation approaches in terms of the differences and similarities involved. The key contribution of this study is that it provides empirical evidence on the differences and similarities between DES and SD from the model building and model use point of view. Albeit the study does not provide a comprehensive comparison of the two simulation approaches, the findings of the study, provide new insights about the comparison of the two simulation approaches and contribute to the limited existing comparison literature.

[1]  David C. Lane,et al.  You just don't understand me: modes of failure and success in the discourse between system dynamics and discrete event simulation , 2000 .

[2]  John Patrick,et al.  Process tracing of complex cognitive work tasks , 2004 .

[3]  David J. Silverman,et al.  Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook , 1999 .

[4]  Stewart Robinson,et al.  Modes of simulation practice: approaches to business and military simulation , 2002, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.

[5]  N. Stchedroff,et al.  Modelling a continuous process with discrete simulation techniques and its application to LNG supply chains , 2003, Proceedings of the 2003 Winter Simulation Conference, 2003..

[6]  Peter M. Senge,et al.  Modeling For Learning Organizations , 1994 .

[7]  Albert T. Jones,et al.  Enterprise simulation: a hybrid system approach , 2005, Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf..

[8]  Feniosky Peña-Mora,et al.  Comparative Study of Discrete-Event Simulation and System Dynamics for Construction Process Planning , 2005 .

[9]  Andrew Greasley,et al.  A comparison of system dynamics and discrete event simulation , 2009 .

[10]  Jac A. M. Vennix,et al.  Group model building effectiveness: a review of assessment studies † , 2002 .

[11]  Gerald Keller,et al.  Statistics for Management and Economics , 1990 .

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

[13]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[14]  Stewart Robinson,et al.  Conceptual modelling for simulation Part I: definition and requirements , 2008, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[15]  Michael Pidd,et al.  Distributed discrete event simulation using the three-phase approach and Java , 2001, Simul. Pract. Theory.

[16]  Thomas R. Willemain,et al.  Model Formulation: What Experts Think About and When , 1995, Oper. Res..

[17]  John D. W. Morecroft,et al.  Strategic Modelling and Business Dynamics: A Feedback Systems Approach , 2007 .

[18]  John Bynner,et al.  Social Research: Principles and Procedures , 1980 .

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

[20]  Ralf Hieber,et al.  Impacts of SCM order strategies evaluated by simulation-based 'Beer Game' approach: The model, concept, and initial experiences , 2003 .

[21]  John D. Sterman,et al.  System Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World , 2002 .

[22]  R G Coyle,et al.  System Dynamics Modelling: A Practical Approach , 1996 .

[23]  Jonathan F. Bard,et al.  The use of simulation in criminal justice policy evaluation , 1978 .

[24]  Tim Baines,et al.  A consideration of modelling techniques that can be used to evaluate manufacturing strategies , 1998 .

[25]  Jay W. Forrester,et al.  System dynamics—a personal view of the first fifty years , 2007 .

[26]  L. Giacomini,et al.  Development of a hybrid simulator for manufacturing processes , 1998 .

[27]  Will Maden,et al.  The conceptual model of a distribution warehouse simulation , 2008 .

[28]  Jørgen Randers,et al.  Elements of the System Dynamics Method , 1997 .

[29]  Yun Bae Kim,et al.  Supply chain simulation with discrete-continuous combined modeling , 2002 .

[30]  N. Fisher Graphical Methods in Nonparametric Statistics: A Review and Annotated Bibliography , 1983 .

[31]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Process Tracing Methods in Decision Support Systems Research: Exploring the Black Box , 1987, MIS Q..

[32]  S. Chick,et al.  A taxonomy of model structures for economic evaluation of health technologies. , 2006, Health economics.

[33]  Terri Gullickson Social Research Methods (3rd ed.). , 1995 .

[34]  A. Oyarbide,et al.  MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS MODELLING USING SYSTEM DYNAMICS: FORMING A DEDICATED MODELLING TOOL , 2003 .

[35]  Averill M. Law,et al.  Simulation Modeling and Analysis , 1982 .

[36]  R. Gnanadesikan,et al.  Probability plotting methods for the analysis of data. , 1968, Biometrika.

[37]  Muhittin Oral,et al.  The facets of the modeling and validation process in operations research , 1993 .

[38]  Douglas McKelvie,et al.  The use of SD methodology to develop services for the assessment and treatment of high risk serious offenders in England and Wales. , 2007 .

[39]  Sally C. Brailsford,et al.  Emergency and on-demand health care: modelling a large complex system , 2004, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[40]  O. Pala,et al.  Validation in soft OR, Hard OR and system dynamics: a critical comparison and contribution to the debate , 1999 .

[41]  Jean-Louis Malouin,et al.  Model validation in operations research , 1983 .

[42]  Alan P. French,et al.  Computer Simulation in Management Science (3rd Edition) , 1998 .

[43]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[44]  Natasa Rupcic,et al.  The fifth discipline-the art and practice of the learning organisation , 2002 .

[45]  Stewart Robinson,et al.  Soft with a hard centre: discrete-event simulation in facilitation , 2001, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[46]  A. N. Oppenheim Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement , 1966 .

[47]  John R. Olson,et al.  Extending product profiling through simulation , 2002 .

[48]  Sally C. Brailsford,et al.  A comparison of discrete event simulation and system dynamics for modelling health care systems , 2001 .

[49]  K. D. Tocher,et al.  The art of simulation , 1967 .

[50]  Stewart Robinson,et al.  Discrete-event simulation: from the pioneers to the present, what next? , 2005, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[51]  Drago Matko,et al.  Combined simulation for process control: extension of a general purpose simulation tool , 1999 .

[52]  Rommert Dekker,et al.  An analytic model for capacity planning of prisons in the Netherlands , 2000, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

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

[54]  David J. Sheskin,et al.  Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures , 1997 .

[55]  D. Lane,et al.  Simulation Applied to Health Services: Opportunities for Applying the System Dynamics Approach , 1998, Journal of health services research & policy.

[56]  Thomas R. Willemain,et al.  Insights on Modeling from a Dozen Experts , 1994, Oper. Res..

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

[58]  Peter Saunders,et al.  The survey methods workbook : from design to analysis , 2004 .

[59]  R. G. Coyle Representing Discrete Events in System Dynamics Models: A Theoretical Application to Modelling Coal Production , 1985 .

[60]  Bhakti Stephan Onggo Towards a unified conceptual model representation , 2007 .

[61]  Stewart Robinson,et al.  Simulation: The Practice of Model Development and Use , 2004 .