To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

System dynamics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dynamic stock and flow diagram of model New product adoption (model from article by John Sterman 2001 - True Software)

System dynamics (SD) is an approach to understanding the nonlinear behaviour of complex systems over time using stocks, flows, internal feedback loops, table functions and time delays.[1]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    228 130
    89 384
    41 129
    19 417
    177 532
  • Introduction to System Dynamics: Overview
  • Introduction to System Dynamics Models
  • A Philosophical Look at System Dynamics
  • John Sterman on System Dynamics
  • System Dynamics and Control: Module 4 - Modeling Mechanical Systems

Transcription

PROFESSOR: This is a full semester class divided into two half semester pieces. 15.871 is the six unit H-1 class. That's what probably most of you are thinking about doing. What I would urge you to do is to take both halves, because you and I will co-teach the fall semester. The second half is called 15.872. And although we think this first half is good, the real value in terms of developing a meaningful capability for you to be able to use system dynamics and systems thinking effectively will come if you take the full semester. You don't have to exercise that real option today. You can wait make that decision a little later. But think about it for right now for your semester planning. There are five assignments over the course of this semester. So the good news is there are no exams. The bad news is that there are five assignments and this class has a reputation that I believe is reasonably well deserved for having a heavy workload. The reason for that is clear. I can't teach you anything. I know you're giggling over there. But it's absolutely true. I can't teach you anything. All that I can do-- all that we can do is create an opportunity for you to learn for yourself. You have to do it, try it, practice it, if you're going to develop the capability. That is not going to happen by coming to class. Now, you need to come to class, and participation is part of the grade. But that's not sufficient. It's also necessary for you to try everything out. And that is why we have those assignments. You also are going to need to read the textbooks. So this is the book. And it's pretty fat and heavy. You're not going to be asked to read the whole thing. The bad news on that is I wrote it. So I can tell you that it'll definitely cure your insomnia. I don't care if you buy it. Although I always say, if you buy two, then you can kind of go like this all day, and you can save money by quitting your gym membership. But I don't care if you buy it. I do care that you read it. You can't do well on the assignments unless you read the material in the book carefully, and work through some of those examples. Chapter one is what you need to be reading first. The syllabus tells you what to read for every day. In addition, from time to time, we are asking you to read a couple of short case studies or other material. And we'll provide follow up articles from the professional literature from time to time as well. So the question is why? Why do we need something like system dynamics and systems thinking? And I think the answer is not simply that the world is changing faster and faster. Things are accelerating. Everybody knows that. That's kind of the price of admission to the world today. It's that, despite all the tools and methods that we've got, all the analytic power and our cleverness, things are getting harder and harder. And more and more of the policies that we implement are failing to solve the pressing challenges that we face. And this is not what I'm saying this is what the senior leaders and organizations with whom I work, what they tell me. And the thoughtful ones-- the most thoughtful ones-- they say it's not just the things are getting harder and more difficult, despite our cleverness and our analytic power, but because of it. That we're too clever for our own good. And I illustrate this traditionally with this picture of one of the leaders of an organization that I've worked with. And here is the poor guy in this office. Now many of you have seen this before, but I think it's just a great representation of what's going on. Like most senior managers or lower level managers, he is completely squeeze by pressures on all sides. Can't breathe. Claustrophobic. And what you're asked to do as a manager is to be decisive. You've got to make decisions. Boo. Things are now much better for you. Now you can begin to breathe more easily, see out to the side. Relief. Things are great. But as you may suspect, there could be some unanticipated side effects. Now, the reason I like this and the reason I'm showing it to you again, so I think it's a great way to capture the core of what a lot of systems thinking is about. Why does this happen? Why does this happen? And why don't people learn? So it's not just that it happens once, but people do it over and over again. So why? That's a real question for you. So what do think? Why might this happen? And why might this phenomenon persist? Yeah go ahead. AUDIENCE: It's only in the short term, and the short-term implications of that action. PROFESSOR: Great. So short-term time rise and not thinking about what might happen later. So apres-moi le deluge. I don't care. I'll do what's good for me in the short run. I don't care if it destroys the world later. OK great. What else? Yeah go ahead. AUDIENCE: Feedback loops. So you would get some feedback and you won't really consider it the way that it really is. PROFESSOR: So there's definitely a feedback loop here, right? And the problem is that it takes too much time for that to happen. So the time delay in getting the feedback-- maybe missing feedback-- is connected to the short time horizon. In fact, what's going to happen in most organizations to this manager right about now? He solved the problem, right? So what happens to him. AUDIENCE: He gets promoted. PROFESSOR: Of course. He gets promoted. You get to sit in the chair. It's a combination of short time horizon, and not only by that guy, but the people who are evaluating his performance and maybe encouraging him to have a short time horizon. That's not going to be good for anybody in this situation. What else? What else might be going on? We get somebody over on this side? [? Argoff, ?] what do you think? AUDIENCE: I think it's also, like you said it was, when you're thinking only short term, you find that can you make a decision without thinking about what the impact of-- PROFESSOR: This is a really important point. And let me put it into our terms. When people say, it wasn't my fault, the reason we failed was some outside effect, some unanticipated side effect, something that came from out there. It wasn't my fault. They're trying to persuade you that they, in fact, are great managers and shouldn't be held responsible for the bad outcome. In fact, almost all the time, it is at least partially the result of their own past decisions. Feedback they didn't understand and didn't recognize. And what they're actually trying to do is persuade you that it wasn't their fault. But what they're really communicating is how narrow and blinkered and inadequate is their understanding of the system in which they're embedded, what we would call their mental model. I think that's where you were going. So that's a really important idea in what we're going to be about. So one of the mental models that I think is the most damaging out there is this open loop mental model. And here's the question. In a project that you've been involved in or that you were reviewing, how many times have you seen this picture? Can I see hands? Who's seen it? Almost everybody. Who's drawn it in one of their project proposals? About 3/4 of the same hands. This is a very interesting, unintended revelation of mental models that people hold about complex dynamical systems. And it basically says, there's a beginning and middle and end to the project. We're going to identify the issue. We're going to gather the data, evaluate our choices, select the optimal solution, and then implement. And of course, the students in the last class when I said, what's wrong with this picture? They all said, oh well. You know. You're a professor. So you've never implemented anything in your life. OK. Now, in fact, a lot of my research is devoted to the question of why implementation so often fails. We're going to talk about that. System dynamics isn't useful unless you can actually make things different. If you can't catalyze change in your organizations in which you're engaged, none of this is meaningful. You might as well become a professor. So we're going to talk a lot about-- and I mean that in all the negative senses that you're laughing about. We're going to talk about system dynamics in action, especially in the second half of the class. You're going to see a lot of case studies of how people have been able to use these tools effectively in difficult political organizational settings. So that's an issue. But it's not the real problem. The real problem with this is that it has this open loop one-way sequential perspective that says there's a beginning, middle and end to the project. I don't know about you, but no project I ever been involved in has ever gone that way. There's always iteration, feedback. We have to go back to the beginning, almost always unintended, unplanned iteration, because we go through and we find out as we gather the data, we interview the folks that are engaged. And we evaluate our technologies, supply chain for the new product or whatever it is. We really didn't understand the situation. We really didn't understand what the real problem is. We have to loop back to the beginning. This happens continually all the way through the project. And it's that feedback that's critical here. So this is the metaphor that I want you to fix in your mind. You make decisions. Your decisions change the world. And then that creates new information which changes your next decision in a continual, emergent, iterative set of feedback processes. Now let me make this a little more formal. Again, this is a slight review for those of you who have had me in orientation. But it's worth it, especially if you haven't seen this for awhile. So here's that open loop perspective. People say, I know my goals. I want better market share. I want more profitability. I want a bigger house, or a nicer car, whatever it is. That's going to motivate my decisions. And then my decisions are going to change the state of the world, state of the system, problem solved. That's wrong. I can't know what decisions to make just because I know where I want to be. I have to also know where I am right now. There has to be a feedback. So the example I always give is that, I'm a bicycle commuter, and as I was riding into MIT from Lexington this morning, as every day, I must keep my bike on the right hand side of the path. If I don't, I'm going to have a crash. So just knowing that I need to be on the right hand side is not enough for me to know how to turn the handlebars. I have to have the feedback from where my bicycle actually is in order to know which way to turn the handlebars. It is the same for you, driving your car or flying an aircraft. Now if flying your organization through hostile skies, dog fighting with the competition, keeping investors happy and calm in the back, and serving them nice drinks and hors d'oeuvres-- if flying your company was just as easy as flying an aircraft, which isn't that easy by the was. It doesn't take much bad weather, fatigue, or substances in your bloodstream to degrade your abilities so much that you're going to crash the plane, crash your car, or crash your bicycle. But if it was as easy to run your company as it is to ride a bike, no problem. We wouldn't need this class. But it's not. And it's not easy in part, because that feedback loop, which represents the intended effects of your decisions, but doesn't capture the unintended effects. It's only piece of the system. So you're embedded in a much more intricate complex system in which that's what's going on for you. That represents mental models of what you ought to do. But mental models are limited. And all the impacts of your decisions-- all the effects of your decisions that you didn't think about in advance, and that aren't part of your mental model, they're going to manifest as so-called side effects. Remember there's no such thing as a side effect. There's just the effects that are in your mental model that you were counting on and everything else is going to manifest as a so-called side effect. And they're usually going to feedback in a way that's opposite to your goals. Much more interesting, you're not the only player in the world. So there's all the other actors out there, all the other agents out there. And they have their own goals, which are typically different from your goals. You want more market share, so do they. There is only 100% to divide up. And every time you make decisions, even if they're efficacious that pulled the world closer to your goals, they're necessarily going to be pulling the world farther away from those other folks goals-- your customers, your suppliers, your employees, the investors, the competitors, the communities in which you operate, the natural world in which all of that is embedded. That's all going to be there. And those goals are going to motivate them to take action, to try to bring the state of the world back to what they want it to be. Their mental models are limited too. And so they're going to generate unintended so-called side effects. And now this is getting to be a fairly complex thing to manage-- not as easy as riding a bicycle. The whole story here is about expanding the boundaries of your mental models so that more and more of this structure is something that you can begin to think about and try to take into account when you make decisions. You're never going to get it all, because all models are wrong. Model is not the real system. Only the reality is the reality. And everything in your head is a limited, filtered, imperfect representation. But we can do a lot better than the mental models that we have now. So what are we going to do? What we're going to do is develop tools in this class to elicit your mental models, articulate them, and do that in the context of busy people in organizations. We're going to explicitly account for feedback, and stocks and foils, and time delays, and non-linearities, and the other elements of complex dynamical systems. And then we're going to use simulation to figure out what that means. Not because the model is going to give us the answer-- all models are wrong-- because the simulation models are going to give us insight that improves our mental models and the mental models of all the people who need to be involved in order for change to happen, so that people are empowered with high leverage, effective policies to go out there and make a difference. You can read in the syllabus how we're going to do that. But I think there are three core ideas I'd like to leave you with before we break for today. The first is that it's the structure of complex systems that generates their behavior. That structure consists of the physics of the system, the information that's available to you, and then the decision rules that you used to turn that information into action. All three of those are relevant here. Mental models matter a lot. It is not enough just to come up with the right answer. And it's not enough just to change the physics of the system, or the information with a new IT system, or the incentives that people face. All those are important, but they aren't generally sufficient. And one of the very powerful mental models that's out there is what we call the fundamental attribution error in psychology. And this is an idea you should have learned at the beer game. And it's the idea that if you ask me why I've screwed up, I've got reasons known as excuses. It was the customer's fault. It was somebody else's fault. The sun was in my eyes. But if I'm asked to explain why use screwed up, It's because you're not capable. You don't have what it takes, you and everybody like you. And that is almost always wrong. And it's low leverage. It doesn't help. So to put that into practice in this class, when we come in here, and you work with us this semester, we're going to make the following basic assumption. We believe that everybody in this room is intelligent, is capable, cares about doing their best, and wants to learn.

Overview

System dynamics is a methodology and mathematical modeling technique to frame, understand, and discuss complex issues and problems. Originally developed in the 1950s to help corporate managers improve their understanding of industrial processes, SD is currently being used throughout the public and private sector for policy analysis and design.[2]

Convenient graphical user interface (GUI) system dynamics software developed into user friendly versions by the 1990s and have been applied to diverse systems. SD models solve the problem of simultaneity (mutual causation) by updating all variables in small time increments with positive and negative feedbacks and time delays structuring the interactions and control. The best known SD model is probably the 1972 The Limits to Growth. This model forecast that exponential growth of population and capital, with finite resource sources and sinks and perception delays, would lead to economic collapse during the 21st century under a wide variety of growth scenarios.

System dynamics is an aspect of systems theory as a method to understand the dynamic behavior of complex systems. The basis of the method is the recognition that the structure of any system, the many circular, interlocking, sometimes time-delayed relationships among its components, is often just as important in determining its behavior as the individual components themselves. Examples are chaos theory and social dynamics. It is also claimed that because there are often properties-of-the-whole which cannot be found among the properties-of-the-elements, in some cases the behavior of the whole cannot be explained in terms of the behavior of the parts.

History

System dynamics was created during the mid-1950s[3] by Professor Jay Forrester of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1956, Forrester accepted a professorship in the newly formed MIT Sloan School of Management. His initial goal was to determine how his background in science and engineering could be brought to bear, in some useful way, on the core issues that determine the success or failure of corporations. Forrester's insights into the common foundations that underlie engineering, which led to the creation of system dynamics, were triggered, to a large degree, by his involvement with managers at General Electric (GE) during the mid-1950s. At that time, the managers at GE were perplexed because employment at their appliance plants in Kentucky exhibited a significant three-year cycle. The business cycle was judged to be an insufficient explanation for the employment instability. From hand simulations (or calculations) of the stock-flow-feedback structure of the GE plants, which included the existing corporate decision-making structure for hiring and layoffs, Forrester was able to show how the instability in GE employment was due to the internal structure of the firm and not to an external force such as the business cycle. These hand simulations were the start of the field of system dynamics.[2]

During the late 1950s and early 1960s, Forrester and a team of graduate students moved the emerging field of system dynamics from the hand-simulation stage to the formal computer modeling stage. Richard Bennett created the first system dynamics computer modeling language called SIMPLE (Simulation of Industrial Management Problems with Lots of Equations) in the spring of 1958. In 1959, Phyllis Fox and Alexander Pugh wrote the first version of DYNAMO (DYNAmic MOdels), an improved version of SIMPLE, and the system dynamics language became the industry standard for over thirty years. Forrester published the first, and still classic, book in the field titled Industrial Dynamics in 1961.[2]

From the late 1950s to the late 1960s, system dynamics was applied almost exclusively to corporate/managerial problems. In 1968, however, an unexpected occurrence caused the field to broaden beyond corporate modeling. John F. Collins, the former mayor of Boston, was appointed a visiting professor of Urban Affairs at MIT. The result of the Collins-Forrester collaboration was a book titled Urban Dynamics. The Urban Dynamics model presented in the book was the first major non-corporate application of system dynamics.[2] In 1967, Richard M. Goodwin published the first edition of his paper "A Growth Cycle",[4] which was the first attempt to apply the principles of system dynamics to economics. He devoted most of his life teaching what he called "Economic Dynamics", which could be considered a precursor of modern Non-equilibrium economics.[5]

The second major noncorporate application of system dynamics came shortly after the first. In 1970, Jay Forrester was invited by the Club of Rome to a meeting in Bern, Switzerland. The Club of Rome is an organization devoted to solving what its members describe as the "predicament of mankind"—that is, the global crisis that may appear sometime in the future, due to the demands being placed on the Earth's carrying capacity (its sources of renewable and nonrenewable resources and its sinks for the disposal of pollutants) by the world's exponentially growing population. At the Bern meeting, Forrester was asked if system dynamics could be used to address the predicament of mankind. His answer, of course, was that it could. On the plane back from the Bern meeting, Forrester created the first draft of a system dynamics model of the world's socioeconomic system. He called this model WORLD1. Upon his return to the United States, Forrester refined WORLD1 in preparation for a visit to MIT by members of the Club of Rome. Forrester called the refined version of the model WORLD2. Forrester published WORLD2 in a book titled World Dynamics.[2]

Topics in systems dynamics

The primary elements of system dynamics diagrams are feedback, accumulation of flows into stocks and time delays.

As an illustration of the use of system dynamics, imagine an organisation that plans to introduce an innovative new durable consumer product. The organisation needs to understand the possible market dynamics in order to design marketing and production plans.

Causal loop diagrams

In the system dynamics methodology, a problem or a system (e.g., ecosystem, political system or mechanical system) may be represented as a causal loop diagram.[6] A causal loop diagram is a simple map of a system with all its constituent components and their interactions. By capturing interactions and consequently the feedback loops (see figure below), a causal loop diagram reveals the structure of a system. By understanding the structure of a system, it becomes possible to ascertain a system's behavior over a certain time period.[7]

The causal loop diagram of the new product introduction may look as follows:

Causal loop diagram of New product adoption model

There are two feedback loops in this diagram. The positive reinforcement (labeled R) loop on the right indicates that the more people have already adopted the new product, the stronger the word-of-mouth impact. There will be more references to the product, more demonstrations, and more reviews. This positive feedback should generate sales that continue to grow.

The second feedback loop on the left is negative reinforcement (or "balancing" and hence labeled B). Clearly, growth cannot continue forever, because as more and more people adopt, there remain fewer and fewer potential adopters.

Both feedback loops act simultaneously, but at different times they may have different strengths. Thus one might expect growing sales in the initial years, and then declining sales in the later years. However, in general a causal loop diagram does not specify the structure of a system sufficiently to permit determination of its behavior from the visual representation alone.[8]

Stock and flow diagrams

Causal loop diagrams aid in visualizing a system's structure and behavior, and analyzing the system qualitatively. To perform a more detailed quantitative analysis, a causal loop diagram is transformed to a stock and flow diagram. A stock and flow model helps in studying and analyzing the system in a quantitative way; such models are usually built and simulated using computer software.

A stock is the term for any entity that accumulates or depletes over time. A flow is the rate of change in a stock.

A flow is the rate of accumulation of the stock

In this example, there are two stocks: Potential adopters and Adopters. There is one flow: New adopters. For every new adopter, the stock of potential adopters declines by one, and the stock of adopters increases by one.

Stock and flow diagram of New product adoption model

Equations

The real power of system dynamics is utilised through simulation. Although it is possible to perform the modeling in a spreadsheet, there are a variety of software packages that have been optimised for this.

The steps involved in a simulation are:

  • Define the problem boundary
  • Identify the most important stocks and flows that change these stock levels
  • Identify sources of information that impact the flows
  • Identify the main feedback loops
  • Draw a causal loop diagram that links the stocks, flows and sources of information
  • Write the equations that determine the flows
  • Estimate the parameters and initial conditions. These can be estimated using statistical methods, expert opinion, market research data or other relevant sources of information.[9]
  • Simulate the model and analyse results.

In this example, the equations that change the two stocks via the flow are:



Equations in discrete time

List of all the equations in discrete time, in their order of execution in each year, for years 1 to 15 :









Dynamic simulation results

The dynamic simulation results show that the behaviour of the system would be to have growth in adopters that follows a classic s-curve shape.
The increase in adopters is very slow initially, then exponential growth for a period, followed ultimately by saturation.

Dynamic stock and flow diagram of New product adoption model
Stocks and flows values for years = 0 to 15

Equations in continuous time

To get intermediate values and better accuracy, the model can run in continuous time: we multiply the number of units of time and we proportionally divide values that change stock levels. In this example we multiply the 15 years by 4 to obtain 60 quarters, and we divide the value of the flow by 4.
Dividing the value is the simplest with the Euler method, but other methods could be employed instead, such as Runge–Kutta methods.

List of the equations in continuous time for trimesters = 1 to 60 :

  • They are the same equations as in the section Equation in discrete time above, except equations 4.1 and 4.2 replaced by following :




  • In the below stock and flow diagram, the intermediate flow 'Valve New adopters' calculates the equation :

Dynamic stock and flow diagram of New product adoption model in continuous time

Application

System dynamics has found application in a wide range of areas, for example population, agriculture,[10] ecological and economic systems, which usually interact strongly with each other.

System dynamics have various "back of the envelope" management applications. They are a potent tool to:

  • Teach system thinking reflexes to persons being coached
  • Analyze and compare assumptions and mental models about the way things work
  • Gain qualitative insight into the workings of a system or the consequences of a decision
  • Recognize archetypes of dysfunctional systems in everyday practice

Computer software is used to simulate a system dynamics model of the situation being studied. Running "what if" simulations to test certain policies on such a model can greatly aid in understanding how the system changes over time. System dynamics is very similar to systems thinking and constructs the same causal loop diagrams of systems with feedback. However, system dynamics typically goes further and utilises simulation to study the behaviour of systems and the impact of alternative policies.[11]

System dynamics has been used to investigate resource dependencies, and resulting problems, in product development.[12][13]

A system dynamics approach to macroeconomics, known as Minsky, has been developed by the economist Steve Keen.[14] This has been used to successfully model world economic behaviour from the apparent stability of the Great Moderation to the sudden unexpected Financial crisis of 2007–08.

Example: Growth and decline of companies

Causal loop diagram of a model examining the growth or decline of a life insurance company.[15]

The figure above is a causal loop diagram of a system dynamics model created to examine forces that may be responsible for the growth or decline of life insurance companies in the United Kingdom. A number of this figure's features are worth mentioning. The first is that the model's negative feedback loops are identified by C's, which stand for Counteracting loops. The second is that double slashes are used to indicate places where there is a significant delay between causes (i.e., variables at the tails of arrows) and effects (i.e., variables at the heads of arrows). This is a common causal loop diagramming convention in system dynamics. Third, is that thicker lines are used to identify the feedback loops and links that author wishes the audience to focus on. This is also a common system dynamics diagramming convention. Last, it is clear that a decision maker would find it impossible to think through the dynamic behavior inherent in the model, from inspection of the figure alone.[15]

Example: Piston motion

  1. Objective: study of a crank-connecting rod system.
    We want to model a crank-connecting rod system through a system dynamic model. Two different full descriptions of the physical system with related systems of equations can be found here (in English) and here (in French); they give the same results. In this example, the crank, with variable radius and angular frequency, will drive a piston with a variable connecting rod length.
  2. System dynamic modeling: the system is now modeled, according to a stock and flow system dynamic logic.
    The figure below shows the stock and flow diagram
    Stock and flow diagram for crank-connecting rod system
  3. Simulation: the behavior of the crank-connecting rod dynamic system can then be simulated.
    The next figure is a 3D simulation created using procedural animation. Variables of the model animate all parts of this animation: crank, radius, angular frequency, rod length, and piston position.
3D procedural animation of the crank-connecting rod system modeled in 2

See also

References

  1. ^ "MIT System Dynamics in Education Project (SDEP)".
  2. ^ a b c d e Michael J. Radzicki and Robert A. Taylor (2008). "Origin of System Dynamics: Jay W. Forrester and the History of System Dynamics". In: U.S. Department of Energy's Introduction to System Dynamics. Retrieved 23 October 2008.
  3. ^ Forrester, Jay (1971). Counterintuitive behavior of social systems. Technology Review 73(3): 52–68
  4. ^ Goodwin, R.M. (1982). A Growth Cycle. In: Essays in Economic Dynamics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. [1]
  5. ^ Di Matteo, M., & Sordi, S. (2015). Goodwin in Siena: economist, social philosopher and artist. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 39(6), 1507–1527. [2]
  6. ^ Sterman, John D. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. Boston: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-231135-5.
  7. ^ Meadows, Donella. (2008). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. Earthscan
  8. ^ Richardson, G. P. (1986). "Problems with causal-loop diagrams". Syst. Dyn. Rev. 2 (2): 158–170. doi:10.1002/sdr.4260020207.
  9. ^ Sterman, John D. (2001). "System dynamics modeling: Tools for learning in a complex world". California Management Review. 43 (4): 8–25. doi:10.2307/41166098. JSTOR 41166098. S2CID 4637381.
  10. ^ F. H. A. Rahim, N. N. Hawari and N. Z. Abidin, "Supply and demand of rice in Malaysia: A system dynamics approach", International Journal of Supply Chain and Management, Vol.6, No.4, pp. 234-240, 2017.
  11. ^ System Dynamics Society
  12. ^ Repenning, Nelson P. (2001). "Understanding fire fighting in new product development" (PDF). The Journal of Product Innovation Management. 18 (5): 285–300. doi:10.1016/S0737-6782(01)00099-6. hdl:1721.1/3961.
  13. ^ Nelson P. Repenning (1999). Resource dependence in product development improvement efforts, MIT Sloan School of Management Department of Operations Management/System Dynamics Group, Dec 1999.
  14. ^  [3] Minsky - Project of the month January 2014. Interview with Minsky development team. Accessed January 2014
  15. ^ a b Michael J. Radzicki and Robert A. Taylor (2008). "Feedback". In: U.S. Department of Energy's Introduction to System Dynamics. Retrieved 23 October 2008.

Further reading

External links

This page was last edited on 1 February 2024, at 07:15
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.