Beyond Garbage Cans: An Al Model of Organizational Choice

Masuch, Michael; LaPotin, Perry J.

doi:10.2307/2392985

Cited by 120 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In representing processes computationally, our work is also similar to other computational organizational models (e.g., Cohen et al 1972, Carley et al 1992, Levitt et al 1994, Gasser and Majchrzak 1994, Baligh et al 1990, Masuch and LaPotin 1989. One major difference from most of this work, however, is that we focus on organizing knowledge, not on simulating performance.…”

Section: Malone Crowston Lee Pentland Dellarocas Wyner Quimbymentioning

confidence: 82%

Tools for Inventing Organizations: Toward a Handbook of Organizational Processes

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T his paper describes a novel theoretical and empirical approach to tasks such as business process redesign and knowledge management. The project involves collecting examples of how different organizations perform similar processes, and organizing these examples in an on-line "process handbook." The handbook is intended to help people: (1) redesign existing organizational processes, (2) invent new organizational processes (especially ones that take advantage of information technology), and (3) share ideas about organizational practices.A key element of the work is an approach to analyzing processes at various levels of abstraction, thus capturing both the details of specific processes as well as the "deep structure" of their similarities. This approach uses ideas from computer science about inheritance and from coordination theory about managing dependencies. A primary advantage of the approach is that it allows people to explicitly represent the similarities (and differences) among related processes and to easily find or generate sensible alternatives for how a given process could be performed. In addition to describing this new approach, the work reported here demonstrates the basic technical feasibility of these ideas and gives one example of their use in a field study.

show abstract

Section: Malone Crowston Lee Pentland Dellarocas Wyner Quimbymentioning

confidence: 82%

Tools for Inventing Organizations: Toward a Handbook of Organizational Processes

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although some simulation studies were published in major management journals in the 1980s (e.g., Burton & Obel, 1980;Malone, 1986;Masuch & LaPotin, 1989;Padgett, 1980), as well as in books (e.g., Nelson & Winter, 1982), simulation-based work did not begin to appear in management and social science journals with any regularity until the 1990s. To assess the impact of simulation, we examined its use in management journal articles and compared that with its use in journals of other social sciences.…”

Section: The Impact Of Simulation Research In Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation modeling in organizational and management research

Harrison

Lin

Carroll

et al. 2007

AMR

517

434

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simulation modeling provides a powerful methodology for advancing theory and research on complex behaviors and systems, yet it has been embraced more slowly in management than in some associated social science disciplines. We suspect that part of the reason is that simulation methods are not well understood. We therefore aim to promote understanding of simulation methodology and to develop an appreciation of its potential contributions to management theory by describing the nature of simulations, its attractions, and its special problems, as well as some uses of computational modeling in management research.Managerial behaviors and organizational outcomes increasingly are recognized to be the result of the interaction of multiple interdependent processes. Progress in understanding these phenomena depends, in part, on the ability to incorporate more complexity into management theory and to conduct research on the consequences of the resulting theory.Traditional approaches to theory development are limited in their ability to analyze multiple interdependent processes operating simultaneously. Even when the individual processes are well understood, analyzing their interdependent behavior poses difficulties, because the processes involved may interact in complicated and unforeseen ways. And because the interactions typically produce nonlinear system behavior with feedback, empirical analysis using the general linear model has limited value, especially when (as is typical) samples are sparse in the regions of greatest interest.In studying the complexities of managerial and organizational behavior, a more systematic methodology for theory development and analysis may prove useful. Specifically, we believe that simulation or computational modeling has unique advantages in this respect (Axelrod, 1997;Taber & Timpone, 1996). Well suited for the study of complex behavioral systems, simulations show greatest utility for gaining theoretical insight through developing theories and exploring their consequences (Cohen & Cyert, 1965).Yet researchers in the academic field of management have been slow to take advantage of simulation methods. Scholars in some related social science disciplines, most notably psychology, seem to be far ahead, and the application of simulations by management practitioners to set policy and study organizational problems is quite extensive (Carley, 2003). So management theorists have the opportunity to benefit by taking fuller advantage of simulation methods.Our aim in this article is to provide an explanation and overview of simulation methodology. By doing so, we seek to encourage management scholars to become users of simulation methods and to become better informed consumers of simulation-based research. An understanding of what simulations are and how they work is a prerequisite for appreciating the potential contributions of simulation analysis to management theory, as well as for identifying problems and shortcomings in simulation work.We thank Xia Zhao for research assistance and the anonymous ...

show abstract

“…Anderson & Fischer, 1986;Levitt & Nass, 1989;Lipson, 2007;Masuch & Lapotin, 1989;Padgett, 1980;Waguespack, 2006;Weiner, 1976). Levitt and Nass applied it to the domain of textbook publishing and found that although GCM processes dominate editors' decision-making, institutional mechanisms affect decisions.…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…P. A. Anderson & Fischer, 1986;Masuch & Lapotin, 1989) have been faithful to or extended the computer-simulation model in the original paper by Cohen et al (1972). Others have applied qualitative case or field studies (e.g.…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

IS Strategic Decision-Making: A Garbage Can View

Fardal¹,

Sørnes²

2008

Proceedings of the 2008 InSITE Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing information systems (IS) strategies and choosing the right IS portfolio for an organization require, among other things, identifying the most appropriate IS projects, determining how best to organize the IS staff, and arranging for IS procurement. All of these actions involve decision-making. This paper analyzes IS strategic decision-making in organizations, with the Garbage Can Model (GCM) of decision-making providing the theoretical framework. Our findings show that IS strategic decision-making often happens through GCM processes, and while these processes are hard to control and predict, the decision quality tends to be high at the organizational level. At the individual level, however, Garbage Can processes tend to return low-quality IS strategic decisions.

show abstract

Beyond Garbage Cans: An Al Model of Organizational Choice

Cited by 120 publications

References 24 publications

Tools for Inventing Organizations: Toward a Handbook of Organizational Processes

Tools for Inventing Organizations: Toward a Handbook of Organizational Processes

Simulation modeling in organizational and management research

IS Strategic Decision-Making: A Garbage Can View

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About