REPLY Future Development Directions (SD6253)

[System Dynamics Mailing List]

Posted by  Richard Stevenson <rstevenson at valculus.com>

Bob Eberlein says that  "good system dynamics is simply good science  
and there is very little about business practice that embraces good  
science."   Also, " it is in boldness and not meekly fitting  
ourselves in with other tools and techniques that we can make a  
difference."

I seem to recall that Jay Forrester's original book was titled  
"Industrial Dynamics".

1961  "Management is on the verge of a major breakthrough in  
understanding how industrial company success depends on the  
interaction between the flows of information, materials, money,  
manpower and capital equipment" (Jay Forrester Industrial Dynamics)

1992  "It seems clear we are asking for a paradigm transition" (and)  
such a transition tends to be strongly resisted both because it  
contradicts past assumptions and because it is difficult to  
understand from within the prior perspective" (Jay Forrester
>From  the Ranch to System Dynamics; An Autobiography)

2003  "I remain mystified why these essentially simple mechanisms 
have remained largely ignored for four decades" (Kim Warren -  
Competitive Strategy Dynamics)

It is this paradox that we must address.

Mr Eberlein's description and vision of business and science is  
narrow and, with respect - simply wrong.

Firstly, "accounting" is certainly not a science.  Sure, the old  
fashioned view of accounting is numbers and bean counting.  But  
today, corporate finance is about much more than sums.  It's about  
looking forward, not counting back.  And Enron, Worldcom, etc. prove  
what happens when accountants are left to run corporations. System  
dynamics has a great deal to contribute to open up corporate finance  
and to make it more "scientific".

Second, "process/quality control" is a vastly narrow view of  
management science. I can't even begin to describe how narrow.

Third, modern business boardrooms are mostly populated with highly  
educated and intelligent managers - many of them scientists.

Mr Eberlein apparently feels that business strategy is completely  
outside of the scientific method - and that business managers are  
anchored in ancient Greece ( I just can't speak for the US Senate,  
but I could concede that Mr Eberlein might have a point there - the  
UK parliament also!).   But business isn't about politics,  
ultimately, and we should not confuse the two.  Having been in a  
boardroom or three, I know that good managers fundamentally want  
better strategic decision-making tools.

Jay Forrester's original vision remains valid and unfulfilled.  
SD  practitioners should ask why - and not shelter in vague academic  
generalisations and outdated criticisms of business people.  SD needs  
to get more engaged with business people - and SD practitioners need  
the courage to put their heads above the parapet, rather than  
criticising from a distance.  I know very few (but there are a few)  
SD practitioners who have the courage, experience, skills and  
gravitas to practise SD in a corporate boardroom.

Oh, and just one more thing before I retire to my bunker to await the  
shelling!

Bob Eberlein's email exhibits another great fault in the SD  
community - I call it "Jay-itiss".

Nobody who knows anything about SD could possibly under-rate Jay  
Forrester's contribution.  He is one of the intellectual giants of  
the 20th century.

BUT....
Jay wrote (mostly) half a century ago.  Since his writings there have  
been many great contributions to SD - mostly academic, some  populist,  
but all overshadowed by and deferential to Jay's work.  It  
seems to me that SD is almost afraid to venture outside Jay's  
protective shell.

Applaud, of course.  Gratitude, certainly.  Deference, I don't think  
so.  We are mostly guilty of thinking we must defer to the MIT  
"summit" of SD.  Whereas, as far as I can see, much original work is  
now coming from anywhere else but East coast USA.

Richard Stevenson
Valculus Ltd
UK 
Posted by  Richard Stevenson <rstevenson at valculus.com>
posting date  Sat, 10 Feb 2007 18:03:00 +0000