Using system dynamics models with litigation audiences

European Journal of Operational Research

Volumn 162, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 239-250

  Howick, Susan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Complex projects; Implementation; Litigation; Model validity; System dynamics

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST EFFECTIVENESS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; OPTIMIZATION; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS;

COMPLEX PROJECTS; IMPLEMENTATION; LITIGATION; MODEL VALIDITY; SYSTEM DYNAMICS;

OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

EID: 8344283589     PISSN: 03772217     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2003.08.041     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (43)

1. Abdel-Hamid T.K., Madnick S.E. Software Project Dynamics: An Integrated Approach. 1991;Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
2. Ackermann F., Eden C., Williams T.M. Modeling for litigation: Mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches. Interfaces. 27(2):1997;48-65.
3. Ackoff R.L., Sasieni M.W. Fundamentals of Operations Research. 1968;Wiley, New York.
4. Barlas Y. Multiple tests for validation of system dynamics type of simulation models. European Journal of Operational Research. 42(1):1989;59-87.
5. Barlas Y., Carpenter S. Philosophical roots of model validation: Two paradigms. System Dynamics Review. 6(2):1990;148-166.
6. Barlas Y. Formal Aspects of model validity and validation in system dynamics. System Dynamics Review. 12(3):1996;183-210.
7. Cooper K.G. Naval ship production: A claim settled and a framework built. Interfaces. 10(6):1980;20-36.
8. Cooper K.G. The $2000 hour: How managers influence project performance through the rework cycle. Project Management Journal. 25(1):1994;11-24.
9. Coyle G., Exelby D. The validation of commercial system dynamics models. System Dynamics Review. 16(1):2000;27-41.
10. Cushman R.F., Jacobsen C.M., Trimble P.J. Proving and Pricing Construction Claims: Second Edition, The Construction Law Library. 1996;Aspen Law & Business, Frederick, MD.
11. Diehl E., Sterman J.D. Effects of feedback complexity on dynamic decision making. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes. 62(2):1995;198-215.
12. Eberlein R.L. Simplification and understanding of models. System Dynamics Review. 5(1):1989;51-68.
13. Eden C. Cognitive mapping: A review. European Journal of Operational Research. 36(1):1988;1-13.
14. Eden C. Operational research as negotiation. Jackson M.C., Keys P., Cropper S.A. Operational Research and the Social Sciences, Proceedings of IFORS Specialized Conference on Operational Research and the Social Sciences. 1989;Plenum Press, New York.
15. Eden C., Ackermann F., Cropper S. The analysis of cause maps. Journal of Management Studies. 29(3):1992;309-324.
16. Eden C. Cognitive mapping and problem structuring for system dynamics model building. System Dynamics Review. 10(2-3):1994;257-276.
17. Eden C., Williams T., Ackermann F., Howick S. On the nature of disruption and delay (D&D) in major projects. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 51(3):2000;291-300.
18. Fleming J.W. A guide to the use of computers to estimate damages in complex litigation. Computer/Law Journal. 2:1980;863-875.
19. Forrester J.W. Industrial Dynamics. 1961;Productivity Press, Portland, OR.
20. Forrester J.W. Understanding the counterintuitive behaviour of social systems. Beishon J., Peters G. Systems Behaviour. 1972;The Open University, London.
21. Forrester, J.W., Senge, P.M., 1980. Tests for building confidence in system dynamics models. In: Legasto Jr., A.A., Forrester, J.W., Lyneis, J.M. (Eds.), TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences 14.
22. Howick, S., 2001. An Exploration of the Role of System Dynamics in the Analysis of Disruption and Delay for Litigation, PhD Thesis, University of Strathclyde, UK.
23. Howick S. Using system dynamics to analyse disruption and delay in complex projects for litigation: Can the modelling purposes be met? Journal of the Operational Research Society. 54(3):2002;222-229.
24. King R.A., Brooks P.L. Types of claims. Cushman R.F., Jacobsen C.M., Trimble P.J. Proving and Pricing Construction Claims. Second Ed. 1996;Wiley, New York.
25. Lyneis J.M., Cooper K.G., Els S.A. Strategic management of complex projects: A case study using system dynamics. System Dynamics Review. 17(3):2001;237-260.
26. Mitchell G. The Practice of Operational Research. 1993;Wiley, Chichester.
27. Morris P.W., Hough G.H. The Anatomy of Major Projects. 1987;Wiley, Chichester.
28. Nahmias S. The use of management science to support a multimillion dollar precedent-setting government contract litigation. Interfaces. 10(1):1980;1-11.
29. Paich M., Sterman J. Boom, bust, and failures to learn in experimental markets. Management Science. 39(12):1993;1439-1458.
30. Pidd M. Tools for Thinking: Modelling in Management Science. 1996;Wiley, Chichester.
31. Project Management Institute, 1996. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Project Management Institute, North Carolina.
32. Rivett P. Principles of Model Building. 1972;Wiley, London.
33. Rodrigues, A.G., 2000. The Application of System Dynamics to Project Management: An Integrated Methodology (SYDPIM). PhD Thesis, University of Strathclyde, UK.
34. Scott S. Dealing with delay claims: A survey. International Journal of Project Management. 11(3):1993;143-153.
35. Sterman J.D. Appropriate summary statistics for evaluating the historical fit of system dynamics models. Dynamica. 10(2):1984;51-66.
36. Sterman J.D. Modeling managerial behavior: Misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment. Management Science. 35(3):1989;321-339.
37. Sterman J.D. Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Process. 43(3):1989;301-335.
38. Sterman J.D. Learning in and about complex systems. System Dynamics Review. 10(2-3):1994;291-330.
39. Sterman J.D. Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. 2000;Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Chicago.
40. Weil H.B., Etherton R.L. System dynamics in dispute resolution. Andersen D., Richardson G., Sterman J. Proceedings of the 1990 International System Dynamics Conference. 1990;System Dynamics Society, Chestnut Hill, MA.
41. Wickwire J.M., Smith R.F. The use of critical path method techniques in contract claims. Public Contract Law Journal. 7(1):1974;1-45.
42. Williams T. The need for new paradigms for complex projects. Williams T. Managing and Modelling Complex Projects. 1997;Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
43. Williams T., Ackermann F., Eden C. Structuring a delay and disruption claim: An application of cause-mapping and system dynamics. European Journal of Operational Research. 148(1):2003;192-204.