REPLY Getting a Good Problem Statement (SD6577)

[SDMAIL Jean-Jacques Laublé]

Posted by  Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jacques.lauble at wanadoo.fr>

Hi Jim

Thank you for your point of view.

I have often noticed that when people in this forum and elsewhere
express different opinions, it is often because they just do not talk about
the same thing.

It is to my opinion the case with Bob Eberlein and Richard Stevenson in one
of the present thread. They are to my opinion both right from their different point of
views.

One typical case is the controversy some six years ago between Coyle and
Homer, Oliva about quantitative and qualitative modelling where I think that
both parties were right because they were not considering the same problem.

It seems to me that it is the same case here .
When I say that I prefer plain text, I should have mentioned what was the
utility of that text and generally speaking, what is a problem definition
for me.

For me a problem definition is independent from any method, paradigm,
methodology etc.
It explains just what the problem is about, and does not suppose that there
is dynamic involved, that the problem to be solved needs simulation or
optimization or anything else.

It explains the context of the problem too, the intellectual, financial,
time capacity, the past experiences and everything that everybody needs to
consider and in particular the different solutions (because there can be
many of them) that the problem owner would be satisfied with.

To my opinion, the problem definition as you expose it, supposes that one
has already made the choice of the method and that there are sufficient
inertial and feedback problems that justify the application of SD, and that
the client has the necessary intellectual, financial and time resources and
that the stake of the problem matches the effort needed to solve it with SD
and that there is no other method more appropriate to the context exposed.

For instance lots of business problems are solved by experiment, just
because there is not a lot of inertia and the results of the policies can be
seen relatively quickly and permit to avoid simulations more useful when it
takes years to see the effect of decisions.

Deciding between the two methods is not easy as sometimes, there is not
a so long time inertia and both methods can be considered.

One of the reasons for the slow acceptance of SD by the business word is
that the total conditions of the problem are not well considered.

The business word is more results and time oriented than the public sector
for example who can afford the risk of starting a study even if the outcome
are not evident for the simple reason that whatever the outcome it will be
still present after 10 years, unlike the business that can
disappear in the meantime.
I hope that I have made myself better understood.
Regards.
Jean-Jacques Laublé Eurli Allocar

Strasbourg France.
Posted by  Jean-Jacques Laublé <jean-jacques.lauble at wanadoo.fr>
posting date  Wed, 5 Sep 2007 13:14:06 +0200