REPLY Future Development Directions (SD6248)

[System Dynamics Mailing List]

Posted by  Bob Eberlein <bob at vensim.com>

Hi Everyone,

Jay Forrester, as only he can, sometimes talks about what it would 
be like if people from ancient Greece were transported to today. 
He points out that while they might find our technology baffling, if 
we were to take them to the US Senate to observe a debate, they would 
feel perfectly at home. The same could be said of any corporate 
boardroom.

We have made amazing bounds in engineering and science, and yet our 
social institutions have changed very little in thousands of years. 
Jay's vision, as I interpret it, is to get the same progress evident 
all around us into the human species ability to manage itself.

I do not believe that the direction Mr. Stevenson suggests really moves 
us toward Jay's vision. Fundamentally, good system dynamics is simply 
good science and there is very little about business practice that 
embraces good science. I can think of only two examples of solid 
science in business practice. One is accounting, which I think all 
would agree on. The second is process/quality control (Time Management,
TQM, Six Sigma..) and there are probably differing opinions on that.

The future development of the field needs to focus on breathtaking 
applications that either solve huge visible problems or make 
comparative corporate performance look like the difference between 
companies with, and without, accounting. This is a bold statement, 
but it is in boldness and not meekly fitting ourselves in with 
other tools and techniques that we can make a difference.

Of course, muddling along through life as we are, we do need to keep 
our jobs, get tenure, find clients and basically fit in. And many of 
Mr. Stevenson's suggestions make sense from this perspective. Just 
keep the bigger picture in mind.

Bob Eberlein 
Posted by  Bob Eberlein <bob at vensim.com>
posting date  Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:46:26 -0500