REPLY Separate Professional Conference (SD6301)

[System Dynamics Mailing List]

Posted by  Richard Stevenson <rstevenson at valculus.com>

I absolutely recognise the dynamics that Kim Warren describes. 
Francisco Perez also makes some very interesting suggestions that  
reflect my own thoughts.

Perhaps this opens up a more practical discussion - the potential to  
develop an international network of competent SD business consultants  
that will collaborate rather than compete.  The potential market is  
so huge - and the supply of competent practitioners so small - that 
 we surely need to take a new approach to SD business development.

It is of course very difficult to get consultants and clients to turn  
up at conferences and talk openly about their work. Apart from  
confidentiality issues, the time required to write papers to  
"academic" standards is a considerable barrier - there's little or no  
financial return, except perhaps in respect of long-term academic  
reputation building.  That's important to academics - less so to  
consultants and even less to clients.

There is a natural tendency among consultants to "play things close",  
as Kim describes.  I am sure I know exactly the consulting group that  
Kim refers to.  They have a reputation for inviting other front line  
consultants to talk about their work at their own "internal"  
conferences - so as to learn from them - but do not participate in  
the SDS.  By keeping things close, they use their (considerable)  
reputation to leverage client fees on claims of unique competence.

At the other extreme I also know a large modelling group in another  
of the big consulting firms that desperately wants to sell SD - but  
lacks the courage to build the internal capacity and competence to  
deliver good client work.  As far as I know, they don't participate  
in the ISDS either.

In between, and worldwide, there is a plethora of individual  
consultants and small consulting firms that do good SD work that  
largely goes unreported.  Working alone, in different industries, in  
different continents, to different standards, and (apparently) having 
every disincentive to collaborate.

I suggest that, rather than playing things close, there is now every  
reason for competent professional consultants ( I include competent  
practitioners in businesses)  to share their expertise and  
experiences more widely.  To grow the market, we need more focus and  
more publicity - we need organisation and "war stories".

>From a personal perspective, my company has a "war chest" - two  
decades of practical SD consulting work - that I would love to be  
able to disseminate in a form that is both "client-sanitised" and  
"non-academic".  How can we make such experience useful - and dare I  
say it, profitable?

But perhaps above all, we need to address seriously the question of  
competence.  Almost anybody can buy a copy of iThink, Powersim or  
Vensim and become an instant "consultant".  To establish SD as a  
serious professional discipline, we need a more rigourous stance.   
Again, my company has a formal competence framework that we developed  
a decade ago - that we would be happy to contribute, given the  
appropriate forum.

Some form of international SD business network, maybe?  But I'm not  
sure that the ISDS is the place to host this.  All comments welcome.

Richard Stevenson
Valculus Ltd
UK 
Posted by  Richard Stevenson <rstevenson at valculus.com>
posting date  Sat, 24 Feb 2007 14:09:53 +0000