تبیین کارکردهای روش مدل‌سازی جمعی و گروهی در پویایی شناسی سیستم‌ها

نویسندگان

1 دکتری مدیریت فناوری اطلاعات، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

2 دانشیار، گروه مدیرت فناوری اطلاعات، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

3 استاد، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران

چکیده

رویکرد پویایی‌شناسی سیستم‌ها بر مشارکت افراد در مدل‌سازی و همچنین ارزیابی مدل و مدل‌سازی تاکید دارد. در سال‌های اخیر روش‌های مدل‌سازی مشارکتی چه بصورت فردی و چه گروهی و همچنین روش مدل‌سازی جمعی که مبتنی بر مشارکت انبوه مردم از طریق وب 2 و شبکه‌های اجتماعی است توسعه داده شده است. با این حال تاکنون مطالعه سیستماتیک زیادی برای ارزیابی اثربخشی و مقایسه این روش‌های مدل‌سازی صورت نگرفته است. از طرف دیگر در توسعه روش‌های مدل‌سازی بخصوص روش جدید مدل‌سازی جمعی، ویژگی‌ها و خصوصیات خاصی را برای هر یک برشمرده‌اند که نیاز است تا با بررسی دقیق آن‌ها مورد واکاوی قرار گیرد. لذا این مقاله بدنبال ارزیابی و مقایسه سیستماتیک روش مدل‌سازی  جمعی و گروهی است. برای این منظور از طریق پرسشنامه آنلاین به بررسی این دو روش مدل‌سازی پرداخته شده است. نتایج بیانگر این بود که مشارکت‌کنندگان به تاثیر مثبت جلسات مدل‌سازی گروهی و جمعی در تامین اهداف و همچنین اهمیت و مفید بودن این جلسات اذعان کردند. با این حال نتایج نشان داد مدل‌سازی جمعی در شناخت ابعاد مختلف تامین مالی جمعی با نگاهی واگرا، انتشار مباحث و فرهنگ سازی در جامعه مفیدتر است در حالی که مدل‌سازی گروهی در عمق بخشیدن شناخت افراد نسبت به ابعاد تامین مالی جمعی با نگاهی همگرا، افزایش تعهد (احساس مسئولیت) افراد نسبت به توسعه تامین مالی جمعی مفیدتر بوده است. همچنین نتایج نشان داد تنوع افراد و ساختار غیررسمی جلسات در موفقیت مدل‌سازی جمعی و گروهی تاثیر معنی‌داری دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Explaining the Applications of Crowd Model Building and Group Model Building in System Dynamics

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ali Haji Gholam Saryazdi 1
  • Ali Rajabzadeh Ghatari 2
  • Ali Naghi Mashayekhi 3
  • Alireza Hassanzadeh 2
چکیده [English]

The systems dynamics emphasize the participation of individuals in modeling as well as modeling evaluation. In recent years, participative model building methods have been developed, both individually and in groups, as well as crowd model building, which are based on the mass participation of people through the Web 2 and social networks. However, so far no systematic study has been done to evaluate the effectiveness and compare these modeling methods. On the other hand, in the development of modeling methods, especially crowd model building; special features and characteristics have been enumerated for each of them, which needs to be carefully examined by evaluating them. Therefore, this article seeks to systematically evaluate and compare the crowd and group model building. For this purpose, these two modeling methods have been studied through an online questionnaire. The results showed that the participants acknowledged the positive effect of crowd and group model building sessions in achieving the goals as well as the importance and usefulness of these sessions. However, the results showed that crowd model building is more useful in recognizing different dimensions of crowdfunding with a divergent view, dissemination of topics, and culture building in society, while group model building has been more useful in deepening peoplechr('39')s knowledge of the dimensions of crowdfunding with a convergent view, increasing the commitment of individuals. The results also showed that the diversity of individuals and the informal structure of the sessions have a significant effect on the success of crowd and group model building.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Systematic Evaluation
  • System Dynamics Approach
  • Group Model Building (GMB)
  • Crowd Model Building (CMB)
  • Web 2.0

مراجع

  1. 1. Akkermans, Henk A., Jac A. M. Vennix, 1997, Clients’ opinions on group model-building: an exploratory study, System Dynamics Review Vol. 13, No. 1, (Spring 1997): 3–31. 2. Haji Gholam Saryzadi, Ali, 1397, System Dynamics and its Various Software Tutorials (Introducing and Training 14 Software), With a Foreword by Dr. Alinaghi Mashayekhi, Danesh Mandargar Asr Publications, First Edition, Tehran, Winter 1397, (In Persian). 3. Haji Gholam Saryzadi, Ali, Manteghi, Manuochehr, 1397, Systematic Evaluation of Group Modeling in Analyzing Qualitative System Dynamics, The Modares Journal of Management Research in Iran, Volume 22, Number 4, Page 203 – 224, (In Persian). 4. Forrester, 1980, Information Sources for Modeling the National Economy, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75 (371): 555-574. 5. Forrester, J. W., 1961, Industrial Dynamics. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. 6. Haji Gholam Saryzadi, Ali, 2016, Designing a System Dynamics Model of Crowd Funding for Supporting Knowledge-Based Start-Up Businesses, PhD dissertation on Information Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares University, (In Persian). 7. Rouwette, Eti¨enne A. J. A., Jac A. M. Vennix, Theo van Mullekom, 2002, Group model building effectiveness: review of assessment studies, System Dynamics Review Vol. 18, No. 1, (Spring 2002): 5–45. 8. Vennix, J.A.M., 1990, Mental models and computer models: design and evaluation of a computer based learning environment. Ph.D. dissertation, Catholic University of Nijmegen, 1990. 9. Vennix, Jac A.M., Wim Scheper, Rob Willems, 1993, Group model-building: what does the client think of it?, Proceedings of the 1993 international system dynamics conference, Cancum, Mexico. 10. Verburgh, L., 1993, Evaluation of a participative model-building project, Ph.D. dissertation., Catholic University of Nijmegen, 1993. 11. Forrester, J. W., 1973, World Dynamics, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA. 12. Elias, Arun A., 2008, Group Model Building: Energy Efficiency in New Zealand's Residential Sector. Proceedings of the 6th Annual Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management Operations Management Symposium (Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia). 13. Vennix J., 1996, Group Model Building: Facilitating Team Learning Using System Dynamics. London: John Wiley & Sons, 1 edition, 1996. 14. Vennix, J., 1999, Group model-building: tackling messy problems, System Dynamics Review, Vol. 15, No. 4, Winter, 379-401. 15. Agarwal, N. and X. Xu (2011). Social computational systems, Journal of Computational Science 2(3): 189-192. 16. Akkermans, H., Vennix, H., Rouwette E. 1993, Participative Modeling To Facilitate Organizational Change: A Case Study, The 11th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, 1993, Mexico. 17. Vennix, Jac A. M., Henk A. Akkermans, and Etienne A. J. A. Rouwette, 1996, Group model-building to facilitate organizational change: an exploratory study, System Dynamics Review, Vol. 12, no. 1, (Spring 1996): 39-58. 18. Akkermans, Henk, Bosker, Jacqueline, 1994, Design Guidelines for Participative Business Modelling projects: lessons from an unsuccessful case study, The 12th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, 1994 Stirling, Scotland. 19. Yahril, Shanty, Tasrif, Muhammad, Mukhith, A. Taufik, Napitupulu, Lucentezza, 2006, Group Model Building Intervention in Developing Country: Lesson Learned from Developing Strategies for Clean Air, The 24th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 23-27, 2006 Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 20. McCardle-Keurentjes, Marleen H.F., Etiënne A.J.A. Rouwette, Jac A.M. Vennix, 2008, Effectiveness of Group Model Building in discovering hidden profiles in strategic decision-making, The 2008 International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 20 – 24, Greece. 21. McCardle-Keurentjes, Marleen H.F., Etiënne A.J.A. Rouwette, Jac A.M. Vennix, Eric Jacobs, 2009, Is Group Model Building worthwile? Considering the effectiveness of GMB, The 27th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 26 – 30, 2009, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. 22. Dwyer, Michael, Krystyna Stave, 2008, Group Model Building Wins: The results of a comparative analysis, The 2008 International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 20 – 24, Greece. 23. Fokkinga, Brigit, Inge Bleijenbergh, Jac Vennix, 2009, Group model building evaluation in single cases: a method to assess changes in mental models, The 27th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 26 – 30, 2009, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. 24. Rouwette, Etiënne A. J. A., Hubert Korzilius, Jac A. M. Vennix, Eric Jacobs, 2011, Modeling as persuasion: the impact of group model building on attitudes and behavior, System Dynamics Review vol 27, No 1 (January–March 2011): 1–21. 25. Scott, R. J., et al., 2012, Evaluation of group model building in a strategy implementation context: a New Zealand government case study, The 30th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 22 – 26, 2012, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 26. Herrera, Hugo, 2014, Combining group decision support systems and participatory system dynamics to create strategic dynamic statements, 32nd International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Delft, Netherlands, July 20-24, 2014. 27. Scott, R. J., Cavana, R. Y., Cameron, D. 2013a, Evaluating long-term impact of qualitative system dynamics workshops on participant mental models, The 31st International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 21 – July 25, 2013, Massachusetts USA. 28. Scott, Rodney J., Robert Y. Cavana, Donald Cameron, 2013b, Evaluating immediate and long-term impacts of qualitative group model building workshops on participants’ mental models, System Dynamics Review 29(4), 216–236. 29. Alexiev, Victor, 2012, Measuring Group Model Building Intervention Impact Through Preference Elicitation, The 30th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, July 22 – 26, 2012, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 30. Rouwette, Etiënne, Inge Bleijenbergh, Jac Vennix, 2014, Group Model-Building to Support Public Policy: Addressing a Conflicted Situation in a Problem Neighbourhood, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, (2014). 31. Scholz, Geeske, Martina Austermann, Kai Kaldrack, Claudia Pahl-Wostl, 2015, Evaluating group model building exercises: a method for comparing externalized mental models and group models, System Dynamics Review vol 31, No 1-2 (January-June 2015): 28–45. 32. Scott, Rodney J, Robert Y Cavana, Donald Cameron, 2016, Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building, European Journal of Operational Research, 249 (2016) 908–918. 33. Scott, Rodney J., Robert Y. Cavana, Donald Cameron, 2014, Client perceptions of reported outcomes of group model building in the New Zealand public sector, 32nd International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Delft, Netherlands -- July 20-24, 2014. 34. Agrawal, Ajay, Catalini, Chrisyian, Goldfarb, Avi, 2015, Crowdfunding: Geography, Social Networks, and the Timing of Investment Decisions, Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Volume 24, Number 2, Summer 2015, 253–274. 35. Haji Gholam Saryzadi, Ali, Rajabzadeh Ghatari, Ali, Mashayekhi, Alinaghi, Hassanzadeh, Alireza (2017), The Dilemma of the Dynamic Problems: Provide a Framework for the Process of Problem Definition, The Modares Journal of Management Research in Iran, Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017, 1-26 (In Persian). 36. Ayatollahi, A., kazazi, A., Hanafizadeh, P., Khatami Firouzabadi, M. (2019). Structuring Of complex problem with coercive stakeholders using Post Modern Operational Research. Modern Research in Decision Making, 4(3), 75-95 (In Persian). 37. Haji Gholam Saryzadi, Ali, Rajabzadeh Ghatari, Ali, Mashayekhi, Alinaghi, Hassanzadeh, Alireza (2020), Designing System Dynamics Model of Crowdfunding Diffusion in Iran, Modern Research in Decision Making, 5(2), 49-80 (In Persian).
پژوهش های مدیریت در ایران
دوره 24، شماره 4
دی 1399
صفحه 127-154

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار