Content will be updated from time to time, so please refresh frequently. 1
We explore how organizations can use system dynamics as the core analytical technology to achieve mission-critical goals.
These books and models will be referenced throughout the course.
The two primary texts are:
Daniel H. Kim and Virginia Anderson, System Archetypes Basics from Story to Structure (SysArch reference) outlines with several examples the 8 system archetypes and the problems they can help managers solve. Examples and solutions abound in the book and in this course.
Juan Martín García’s SYSTEM DYNAMICS MODELLING WITH VENSIM (SysDynMod reference), available in paperback and ePub formats, will guide us throughout the course as we build causal loops and their associated stock and flow diagrams.]
The computational platform is the Vensim P L E (VensimPLE). In the past, conducting meaningful business analysis required computer science and programming skills.
Download a very useful, Vensim modeling reference here.
With Vensim business analysts and managers with diverse skill sets can use the Vensim self-service analytics platforms to model and simulate realistic decision environments in communities of complex organizations. Groups of decision makers can analyze data, trends, tipping points, and discover the leverage needed for policy intervention.
I rely on the system dynamics body of knowledge contained in Sterman’s comprehensive text, and beautifully explicated in Donella Meadows primer, as well as several articles and presentations in the course readings repository.
Donella Meadows, Thinking in Systems: A Primer, 2008 edition. Either begin the course or end it with this gem.
John Sterman’s Business Dynamics, 2013 is the baseline body of knowledge for system dynamics modeling, especially in social-ecological systems (SES). We will be reading excerpts as we begin to build models.
Course readings repository will house various articles and other materials we will draw on each week of the course.
Course Vensim models repository contains all of the Vensim files (*.mdl) I’ve collected recently along with Juan Martin Garcia’s (SysDynModVensim) case models (prefixed with case + number.)
The course is officially online. However optional live sessions each week (they will be video’d!) will help keep all of us awake to one another’s needs throughout the course.
There are six (6) assignments to be submitted through a course workbook (a Google form). In addition there is a participation grade.
Assignments 1 through 5 are each worth 13% of the final grade, that is, for a total of 65% of the final grade. These will be completed during weeks 1 through 5 of the course. They will typically include an upload of a model and a short interpretation of results.
Assignment 6 is worth 25% of the final grade and will be completed during weeks 6 and 7 of the course. This last assignment is designed to pull course concepts together into a comprehensive system dynamics model replete with interpretation and ready for policy analysis.
Participation is worth 10% of the final grade. This grade will be primarily evidenced through posted comments on the course blog site regarding modeling vignettes and issues.
We will work in teams and submit individual assignments and posts. Individual grades are A-F (integer ranges): A (>95), A- (90-94), B+ (85-89), B (80-84), C+ (75-79), C (70-74), D (65-69), F (<65).
The Manhattan College Academic Integrity Policy holds students accountable for the integrity of the work they submit. Students should be familiar with the Policy and know that it is their responsibility to learn about instructor and general academic expectations with regard to proper collection, usage, and citation of sources in written work. The policy also governs the integrity of work submitted in exams and assignments as well as the veracity of signatures on attendance sheets and other verifications of participation in class activities. For more information and the complete policy, see the Manhattan College Catalog.
If you need academic accommodations due to a disability, then you should immediately register with the Director of the Specialized Resource Center (SRC). The SRC at Manhattan College authorizes special accommodations for students with disabilities. If you have a documented disability and you wish to discuss academic accommodations, please contact me within the first week of class.
Getting Started
Together we review the course, formation of teams, logistics, requirements, ground rules. We will also download VensimPLE and play with a simple model to get a feel for the modeling platform. Along the way we will introduce ourselves to one another on THE WALL and wade into system archetypes.
Dates
Monday 2024-07-01 to Sunday 2024-07-07 online
Live session Saturday 2024-07-06 from 10:00 to 12:00 (Eastern Time; UTC -5) on Bill Foote’s Zoom link.
Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/9177353014
All videos are on the System Dynamics playlist on my Youtube channel. Here is the link to the playlist.
Video 1: Course Overview This 38+ minute video ranges across the syllabus, key concepts, and an example of the work of system dynamics. Here are notes I used during the video.
Video 2: Course Foundations Here we walk through the definition of system dynamics, stocks, flows and loops, all with a example from Jay W. Forrester and guided by Donella Meadows with John Sterman with Aristotle’s four causes.
Video 3: Getting started with VensimPLE Straight from Vensim central a simple model appears.
Video 4: A simple Vensim model of a joint venture We begin with a 5-step paper and pencil formulation of a model. We remember that with systems thinking, we will also give ourselves the opportunity to revise and change our models! Here we ask some pointed questions and then proceed to build our representation of a joint venture in Vensim.
Download joint-venture.mdl to a working directory locally then open the file in VensimPLE. While in VensimPLE go to Simulation > Start SyntheSim to see sliders appear. Now we can tickle those ivories a bit and watch the graphs dance around.
We will stick to some basics this week.
SysArch (= Kim and Alexander, System Archetypes), chapters 1-3 in the Readings repository.
SysModVensim (= Juan Marquez-Garcia, System Modelling with Vensim), chapter 1 (Population). Case01.mdl can be downloaded from the course Vensim models repository here. Try the population model on your own in Vensim and on paper. We can think about linking two populations together in a way similar to the joint venture model. We can also link youth, adults, elders in a cascade like we did with the production-backlog-orders model during the Foundations video session.
For those who are self-studying, you may access the Workbook, answer the questions, and upload your first model joint-venture.mdl. Consider the following:
What happens to Capital A and Capital B when their interactions (A2B and B2A) are zero and their ROI’s are equal to 0.10, with initial B = 50 and initial A = 100?
Describe as best you can the results of setting A2B = 0.1 and B2A = -0.1 again keeping ROI’s equal. Interpret in terms of the joint venture relationship.
Run a sensitivity analysis of Capital B to the parameters of this model using the scenario 2 above. Are you surprised, elated, deflated? Interpret, please.
Production, Sales, Inventory and Supply Chain Management
Vensim modeling throughout this and every week to follow. But first we start with paper and pencil. We continue with some more system archetypes. We then focus on the interactions among production, inventory, sales, work force. If that was not enough we will link our company’s model to those of two tiers of our suppliers. Expect oscillations!
Dates
Monday 2024-07-08 to Sunday 2024-07-14 online
Live session Saturday 2024-07-13 from 10:00 to 12:00 (Eastern Time; UTC -5) on Bill Foote’s Zoom link.
Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/9177353014
All videos are on the System Dynamics playlist on my Youtube channel. Here is the link to the playlist.
Video 1: Volatile workforce and production, smooth shipping, oscillations everywhere.
Video 2: Building a production-inventory-workforce model in Vensim.
Here are some notes for the two videos.
Here is the working model for all of the videos: workforce-prod-inv-ship-demo.mdl. Watch out for the STEP() function inputs as well as the other constant inputs. The Live Session demo includes a shadow variable which links two views.
We will stick to some basics this week.
SysArch chapters 4-5 in the Readings repository. We might consider the archetypes that are present in the video demonstration model.
SysModVensim chapter 10 (Production and Inventory). Case-10 in the Models repository. This model is the same model, with some vocabulary changes, as in the video demonstration. Certainly we should try to get through Model 2 (although Model 3 is more realistic – a stretch goal?).
Pruyt and Kwakkel, 2008 Combining System Dynamics and Ethics: Towards More Science?. We could well look especially at page 5 and section 3: System Dynamics, Ethics, Responsibility and Sustainable Development.
For those of you who are self-studying, you may access the Workbook, answer the questions, and upload your second model.
We build pre-fabricated housing units and sell these units to community foundations and relief NGOs. Our company faces severe inventory, production and workforce fluctuations following seemingly unpredictable sales movements. The CEO wants us to make a model to understand the interactions between production, inventory and workforce in order to be able to reduce these fluctuations.
Use the video model of production-inventory-sales-workforce (alternatively, SynModVensim’s chapter 10 model) to produce a sensitivity tornado graph and a causes strip for Inventory and Workforce. Let’s simulate the model over a period of 60 months. Does the model attain a dynamic equilibrium?
Now we change the sales after 20 months from 100 units per month to 150 units per month. We should make graphs to show the behavior of the sales, the inventory and the workforce accumulations. What traps might befall us (rummage a bit through SysArch)?
How long does it (more or less) take before the system settles down, that is, is back in dynamic equilibrium? Anticipate some questions from the CEO: formulate a few.
Project Dynamics
Vensim modeling will continue throughout this and every week to follow. But first we start with paper and pencil. We continue with some more system archetypes. Here we enter a world everyone has or will inhabit – project management.
Dates
Monday 2024-07-15 to Sunday 2024-07-21 online
Live session Saturday 2024-07-20 from 10:00 to 12:00 (Eastern Time; UTC -5) on Bill Foote’s Zoom link.
Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/9177353014
All videos are on the System Dynamics playlist on my Youtube channel. Here is the link to the playlist.
Video 1: Work, discovery of rework, and the inexorable pressure of schedules and work force management We paper and pencil our way through a more complicated model, richer in detail, but just on the edge of sanely managing, really juggling, several components at once. After all, this is system thinking, with an emphasis on endogenizing as much of the separate components as possible. What is not endogenized might be candidates for human intervention.
Video 2: Review of the Vensim project management model: Demo Part I. This is a model complicated by a rich set of components which link project work, work force, and productivity. We do not build anything in this first part, instead we walk through the model, its views (we can think worksheets in a spreadsheet workbook), stocks, flows, and some results. I demonstrate my approach to reviewing a model. In reverse (the dual of this primal activity) we can use this approach to shoot trouble when models simply seem to refuse to work.
Video 3: Paper and pencil design of the Vensim work-rework model(fairly short!). We rebuild the Vensim project dynamics model using simple pipes to connect remaining, accomplished, and rework stocks with interactive flows. Here is the design for the new model. The design includes a couple of more loops and a lookup table which drip into the next Video 4.
Video 4: We Vensim the paper and pencil model for work and rework. n this episode we build the Vensim model using our paper and pencil plan with simple pipes to connect remaining, accomplished and reworked project artifacts. Interactive flows connect these accruing levels of project activity. We deploy IF-THEN-ELSE rules and ask project participants to a graph which relates project completion to the time it takes to discover rework. A lookup equation implements their input. We finish with a custom graph and an insight.
Video 5: Link to Week 3 Live Session We saunter into a penultimate project management model with the pressure of project completion hanging over our heads like the proverbial sword of Damocles. What do we do? We model the sword with a look up table, graph, equation definition through a work quality variable (here’s the rest of the run-on sentence) which in turn breeds more rework, adds to the remaining project work and forces us to keep work force business with remedial work past the scheduled project completion time. Excursions into the triple bottom line, public-private partnerships, sensitivity analysis, table-top exercises complete our tour of Week 3.
Here is the working model we will continue to build in this series of videos: project-dynamics-demo-2.mdl We will work with views, look ups (non-linear functions), custom graphs, and dividing by zero in this week’s installment. Other than than we will simulate how it is that when we think the work on project is done, it might not be, yet.
This week we will also look into two types of delays, discrete and continuous (what we have done so far, eg, time to adjust), as well a building simple lookup tables. The problem of calibration will present itself. Where did we get a work quality constant of 0.9? This number is not simply dreamt up, it must be validated in the experience of project managers and their work history. We will discretely delay the exercise of calibration and ranges of potential calibrated values to System Dynamics 201, an extension of another 7 weeks with deployment in R and Bayesian inference. So much to learn together!
Here is the working model which inspired the videos: project-dynamics-all.mdl.
Note: When we first open the model, our figures should reflexively change the run name and then pull up, save, and print out the documentation for all the equations.
We will continue to build our knowledge of system archetypes while we wander into the wilderness of project management.
SysModVensim chapter 14 (Project Dynamics). Model 14 in the Models repository.
Donella Meadows, 1999. Leverage points: places to intervene in a system. She outlines 12 leverage points from least (constants like tax rates) to most useful (mind-sets / paradigms / transcending paradigms).
For those who are self-studying, you may access the Workbook, answer the questions for Week 3, and upload your model. This week we will use the project-dynamics-demo-2.mdl model (note well the -2!) to deal with these questions.
Describe how sensitive work force, rework and project completion are to changes in productivity.
What are the most influential causes of accomplished work? Why?
Some managers have noticed that schedule pressure decreases work quality. Build a lookup graph for work quality which depends on time to schedule completion. How sensitive is rework to this relationship?
Innovation and Finance
Vensim modeling will continue throughout this and every week to follow. But first we start with paper and pencil. We continue with some more system archetypes.
Monday 2024-07-22 to Sunday 2024-07-28 online
Live session Saturday 2024-07-27 from 10:00 to 12:00 (Eastern Time; UTC -5) on Bill Foote’s Zoom link.
All videos are on the System Dynamics playlist on my Youtube channel. Here is the link to the playlist.
Video 1: Expanding on Inventory We begin this week meandering around levels of inventory caused by a desire to recycle. With that in mind we begin to outline on the board an expansion of our work force - inventory model. Ultimately we will apply a three-pronged evaluation model to begin to address performance drivers, managerial trade-offs in the midst of markets and exhaustible resources. Somehow we will need to insert a model of innovation for the technological forces at work on people and planet.
Video 2: A short but very important digression about principal. Finance what? Innovation and the reliable provision of services and products! Even before we embark on the sigmoid curve of growth and innovation, we review a bit of finance. This function of an organization is one of the means by which physical goods and services can be reliably produced, provided and innovated. Good practice here will place finance in the instrumental back seat. A financial plan will match the physical business. We digress into an amortization process whereby money, or other units like books under a subscription at a library, are lent and returned along with a contribution to the lender for their trouble and expense. Thus we talk about principal, principal repayment, and interest on remaining principal in the context of going long on a perpetuity starting today and short on a perpetuity starting forward at future time t: Financial Engineering 101 at work here. We will challenge ourselves to try the exercise at the end on paper and in Vensim.
Video 3: Invasion of the Innovation Sigmoids! Now we get down to a Vensim model. But of course we have to do a little board work first to think through an innovation model. There is a system archetype called limits to success which may well apply to our model and thinking about the adoption of a new technology. The classic sigmoid, s-growth, curve asymptotically approaches a maximum level of adoption and in reverse a decline in potential adopters. Purchases take on the shape of an asymmetric Laplace distribution. When will the tables turn from exponential growth to exponential decline? Can management intervene?
Here is the model we have been working on: innovation.mdl. There are two views. The first is the one with potential and actual adopters and the traditional S-growth (sigmoid) curve. The second view is an experiment much along the lines of our very first model where we explored a joint venture. We replicate a model of open innovation advanced by Rivira Yuana and her colleagues in this article: System Dynamic and Simulation of Business Model Innovation in Digital Companies: An Open Innovation Approach. Our challenge will be to link Key Partners, Intellectual Property sharing with the adoption of a new product or service.
Video 4: Live Session: The many faces of innovation. After some course related housekeeping we dive into a model reminiscent of the joint venture we built during week 1. We sketched out together a consortium which provides shared services. For whom? Adopters. A glimpse into the business canvas value proposition and revenue side of a business plan and model provides us with grist for Week 5 where we will define performance in terms of societal, environmental, and financial goals. We have much to thank Rivira Yuana and her colleagues for positioning us on the right path.
Innovation, like epidemics, can be viral. We identify growth, its progress, inflection, and decline.
SysArch chapters 8-9 in the Readings repository. Stories of threatening escalation and over grazing (fishing, advertising) a common resource will regale us this week.
SysModVensim chapter 15 (Innovatory Companies). Model 15 in the Models repository. This is a more complex model than even the project dynamics one! But there are many stories and even more lessons here about the linkage between science, technology, and commercialization.
For those who are self-studying, you may access the Workbook, answer the questions, and upload your model. This week we will use the innovation.mdl model with two views.
Run the sensitivity analysis for the adopter view, one each for Adopters and Potential Market. Why do they make sense, or not? Are there any management levers you can think of which might take advantage of these sensitivities?
How might you design a connection between the adopter view and the innovation view? Support this with an additional sensitivity analysis of IP sharing.
Summarize three recommendations for management. Set out your assumptions based on your sensitivity analyses, criteria for prioritizing these recommendations, the recommendations themselves, including timing as remote, immediate, ongoing.
Quality and Vulnerability
Vensim modeling continues with quality control and the role of knowledge and vulnerability. But first we always start with paper and pencil and the questions we are asking. To help us with the questioning nature of management, we will development a closed loop design of a process called the quaestio disputatae, a realization of Socratic reasoning and dialogue. We continue with some more system archetypes.
Dates
Monday 2024-07-29 to Sunday 2024-08-04 online
Live session Saturday 2024-08-03 from 10:00 to 12:00 (Eastern Time; UTC -5) on Bill Foote’s Zoom link.
Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/9177353014
All videos are on the System Dynamics playlist on my Youtube channel. Here is the link to the playlist.
Video 1: First things first: Quaestiones Disputatae - the shape of management. In this episode we revert to day 1 where we start with paper and pencil and the questions we are asking. To help us with the questioning nature of management, we will development a closed loop design of a process called the quaestiones disputatae (QD), a realization of Socratic reasoning and dialogue from the Middle Ages, here depicted as a Closed Loop Diagram eventually leading to management action in an implemented decision. If we were to ask whether environmental choices affect the adoption of a new product or service, we would subject this business question to a QD. We preview the next video as we continue to coalesce our knowledge and practice from previous weeks and expand our horizons.
Video 2: Paper, Pencil, Stress and Quality. In this episode we use our 6 step modeling approach using a 4-Cause Analysis to build a Closed Loop Diagram of the impact of worker vulnerability on production. This model will use both qualitative and quantitative data to develop a way management might be able to intervene in times of stress. The next episode will take this model to Vensim. The episode after that will take the Vensim model to R for a solution of a 2nd order ordinary differential equation system, along with simulation plots and some further thoughts on sensitivity analysis.
Video 3: Taking Our Stress to Vensim - still on paper! Yes, another paper and pencil exercise, including a reprise of the Quaestio approach we developed, along with a quick detour into the mathematical model of limits to growth, finally reaching our goal of diagramming a Vensim model on paper. Dimensional analysis of variables is free of charge. In Video 4, we will indeed build this model in Vensim, I promise!
Video 4: Taking the Model to Vensim - in Vensim. Finally, in this episode we actually get down to implementing our paper and pencil model design in Vensim. We build lookup tables for stress and recovery. We enter parameters based on the Chapter 20 model by Juan Martin Garcia in his book System Modeling in Vensim (see the course site for Week 5 for details). We then modify planned production to hold a tabletop exercise session by changing what appears to be a key variable. We use a step function with increment and time of increment. A great exercise is to use the PULSE function (a Dirac indicator variable) to create a duration of increment (positive or negative) to planned production.
Video 5: Week 5 LIVE SESSION In this episode we review our work to date by trawling through my hand-written notes on green engineering paper and a number 2 Ticonderoga pencil. We discover some areas for improvement and begin to answer question 2 in this week’s exercise (the PULSE function) which addresses the impact of a short duration change in productivity on the dynamics of the model. Well, if that was not enough we also review the article by Leitao and colleagues on the impact of burnout on workplace performance (the reference is in the Week 5 Readings in the next section). We imagine now that we can input Quality from our system dynamics model directly into productivity. We can also imagine that the author’s trichotomy of stressors might be lookup tables feeding deterioration of quality. Much to do, much to learn.
Here is the Week 5 demo model hours-production-quality-demo.mdl and notes for the videos: Week 5 Notes.
While innovation can go viral, so can decline in quality and a steep increase in vulnerability. We again identify growth, its progress, inflection, and decline. This time we do so with a constraint called stress, implicating changes in quality, the need for more of the factors of production.
SysArch chapters 8-9 in the Readings repository. Re-read these two chapters and look at the Activities and their proposed solutions, especially for the Tragedy of the Commons.
SysModVensim chapter 16 (Fatigue). Model 20 in the Models repository. We use a version of this model throughout this week’s demonstration and in the Week 5 Assignment.
Here is an article on quality of life, productivity, and stress in the workplace by Leitao and colleagues: “Quality of Work Life and Contribution to Productivity: Assessing the Moderator Effects of Burnout Syndrome.” From the abstract: “This study is focused on assessing the effects of burnout as a moderator of the relationship between employees’ quality of work life (QWL) and their perceptions of their contribution to the organization’s productivity by integrating the QWL factors into the trichotomy of (de)motivators of productivity in the workplace. The empirical findings resulting from an OLS multiple regression, with interaction terms, applied to a survey administered at 514 employees in 6 European countries, point out two important insights: (i) QWL hygiene factors (e.g., safe work environment and occupational healthcare) positively and significantly influence the contribution to productivity; and (ii) burnout de-motivator factors (that is, low effectiveness, cynicism, and emotional exhaustion) significantly moderate the relationship between QWL and the contribution to productivity. Combining burnout with other QWL components, such as occupational health, safe work, and appropriate salary, new insights are provided concerning the restricting (i.e., low effectiveness and cynicism) and catalyzing (emotional exhaustion) burnout components of contribution to productivity. These findings are particularly relevant given the increased weight of burnout, mental disorders and absenteeism in the labor market, affecting individuals’ quality of life and organizations’ performance and costs.”
For those who are self-studying, you may access the Workbook, answer the questions, and upload your model.
After reading the article “Quality of Work Life and Contribution to Productivity: Assessing the Moderator Effects of Burnout Syndrome” by Leitao and colleagues, formulate three recommendations for enhancing the hours-production-quality-demo.mdl model. Offer at least one pro and one con for each recommendation, and your response to each pro and each con.
Modify the hours-production-quality-demo.mdl to include a pulse in productivity beginning at month 20 and lasting for 12 months. The equation for productivity will look a bit like this: productivity = initial productivity + PULSE(start, duration)*productivity increment , where the increment can be positive or negative. Comment on the change in dynamics this change produces.
B Corp Business
We begin by formulating a business question for a B Corp (see the Project tab on the navigation bar for some details) or NGO or not-for-profit organization. We will deploy all of the tools we have learned to use starting with the the 6-step paper and pencil framework question, 4-causes, closed loop diagram, stock-flow diagram, lookup tables and hoped for outcomes, system checks) and our growing library of system dynamics models (joint venture, project dynamics, inventory, work force, innovation, quality, and so much more) and system archetypes. We will use sectors based on a common business canvas, add some finance, and begin the penultimate stage of our journey together.
Dates
Monday 2024-07-05 to Sunday 2024-08-11 online
Live session Saturday 2024-08-10 from 10:00 to 12:00 (Eastern Time; UTC -5) on Bill Foote’s Zoom link.
Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/9177353014
Video 1: Project overview whilst financing a B Corp. We begin a two week workshop where we apply all of the modeling we have learned so far (joint venture, project dynamics, inventory, work force, innovation, and so much more) and add a finance module with a goal of minimizing cash flow volatility. Our job is to pick a not-for-profit organization, project, situation, begin to formulate what business question we would pose, and start to sketch the approach using our 6-step framework we have deployed during the course (question, 4-causes, closed loop diagram, stock-flow diagram, lookup tables and hoped for outcomes, system checks). Here are the notes for this video: Week 6: Video 1 notes.
Video 2: Business canvas, a system view. In this second episode of Week 6 festivities, we talk through a system view of a business canvas. Here we have several interlocking, closed looped, sectors, each of which is a component of the business model. We start to think about a business model NOT in a strictly financial framework here – we flip the script to subordinate finance, and environment, to societal goals. We conclude, only to create more questions, with an inventory of models directed by the connected sectors. This has been our definition of a system: collection, connected, coherent. We can, and will improve this canvas with its supporting sub-sector models. Notes for this video: Week 6 - Video 2 - Business Canvas System.
Video 3: Week 6 Live Session: reviewing the quaestio, a three-legged stool, and a multi-sector, multi-objective model. Yes, in this episode we review a 3-legged stool to help us prioritize our many questions, responses, recommendations, and decisions: gravitas (importance), adjunctes (circumstances), and auctoritas (warrants). This was but a prelude to an example of a model set in the several Vensim views of a business canvas. We model an NGO / B Corp providing services to a vulnerable segment of a community of workers, namely children who are indebted slaves. Not only is the model employing many sectors, there are several potentially competing objectives at work as well. We might be well on our way to answering some pressing questions.
Here is the Vensim model we will evolve to simulate a B Corp, Not-for-profit, family business, and a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO): evolving-b-corp.mdl. The premise of this model is that there is an unserved community of children who happen to be indebted slaves in mining operations. The simulation model works out a program into which children are enrolled, provided with various services, yet to be specified in the model, funded by donor funds. Stubbed views for societal impact and value proposition will be populated with appropriate variables, stocks, and flows. There is much room for provision quality, multiple donor classes, multiple segments of children, as well as scope for the process of completing a stream of provided services in a project dynamic framework.
While innovation can go viral, so can decline in quality and a steep increase in vulnerability. We again identify growth, its progress, inflection, and decline. We review the many ways managers can affect and effect change for those they serve.
SysModVensim chapter 17 (Business Plan). Model 17 in the Models repository.
(due Monday, 2024-08-17)
For those who are self-studying, you may access the Workbook.
These are the 1st and 2nd of 3 questions for the Project.
Choose a B-Corp, NGO or not-for-profit organization. Formulate a question. Perform a quaestiones disputatae around this question. This will be your frame for building a simulation.
Using the many models here, and with the business canvas, produce a sector system, within which reside an inventory of sub-sector models.
For example, the Key Partners sector (Givers), might be modeled as a consortium which offers shared services; or the Actions / Resources sub-sectors might be modeled with available Work, finished work, rework and a resource for the project.
You may use the evolving-b-corp.mdl model as a guiding template.
The Six-Step Model Development
Vensim Model Implementation
Project Recommendations
Vensim modeling continues with policy intervention, and understanding of leveragable options based on the system archetypes. The role of delays must be included and interpreted. Much to do; ever much to learn.
Dates
Monday 2024-08-12 to Sunday 2024-08-18 online
Live session Saturday 2024-08-02 from 10:00 to 12:00 (Eastern Time; UTC -5) on Bill Foote’s Zoom link.
Zoom: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/9177353014
All videos are on the System Dynamics playlist on my Youtube channel. Here is the link to the playlist.
Video 1: How are things trending? From an article by John Sterman in 1986. - EXPECTATION FORMATION IN BEHAVIORAL SIMULATION MODELS, Sterman (1986) John Sterman develops the model as well in Business Dynamics, p. 634-643, with case studies following the baseline model. Here is an implementation of the model to highlight the character of initial conditions, and a switch to modify the initial present perceived present condition to change with changing inputs: Notes on behavioral expectation formation. The Vensim implementation is here: sterman-1986-expectation-formation-behavioral-simulation.mdl
Video 2: Climbing that hill. Under Construction (the hill that is).
We are attempting to pull all of our modeling knowledge together. The archetypes can be the lynch pin. Also a Donella Meadows rank ordered list of leverages will inform our modeling from here on out.
SysModVensim chapter 17 again (Business Plan). Model 17 in the Models repository.
Donella Meadows, Thinking in Systems: A Primer especially the summaries at the end of the book. Then travel forward to the beginning and savor the rest.
Other background papers, and a model:
(due Sunday 2024-08-18)
For those are self-studying, you may access the Workbook. This is the 3rd of 3 questions for the Project.
Use the Vensim scenario runs to support at least 3 pros and 3 con(tra)s regarding your response.
In your discussion of pros and cons, be sure to include appropriate traps we encountered in our reading and reflections on system archetypes. Be sure to order your recommendations according to importance (gravitas), requirements (auctoritas), and circumstances (adjunctes).
Finally, add recommendations for further work as well as at least three limitations to this analysis.
Copyright 2024, William G. Foote, all rights reserved.↩︎