Multi-Agent-Based Simulation: Why Bother?
This year’s MABS workshop was the sixth in a series which is intended to look at “using multi-agent models and technology in social simulation,” according to the the workshop series homepage . We feel that this is an appropriate time to ask the participants and the wider community what it is that they hope to gain from this application of the technology, and more importantly, are the tools and techniques being used appropriate for achieving these aims? We are concerned that in many cases they are not, and consequently, false or misleading conclusions are being drawn from simulation results. In this paper, we focus on one particular example of this failing: the consequences of the inappropriate use of numbers. The translation of qualitative data into quantitative measures may enable the application of precise analysis, but unless the translation is done with extreme care, the analysis may simply be more precisely wrong. We conclude that as a community we need to pay careful attention to the tools and techniques that we are using, particularly when borrowing from other disciplines, to make sure that we avoid similar pitfalls in the future.
KeywordsManagement Research Strategic Management Journal Social Simulation Workshop Series Establishment View
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Sichman, J.S.: Multi-agent-based simulation (MABS) – the international workshop series (2005), website http://www.pcs.usp.br/~mabs/
- 2.Gilbert, N., Conte, R., Sichman, J.S.: ICMAS 1998 workshop on multi-agent systems and agent-based simulation (MABS) (1998), website http://cress.soc.surrey.ac.uk/mabs98.html
- 7.Pfeffer, J., Fong, C.T.: The end of business schools? less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education 1 (2002)Google Scholar
- 9.Bennis, W.G., O’Toole, J.: How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review (2005)Google Scholar
- 14.Edmonds, B.: Against the inappropriate use of numerical representation in social simulation. Technical Report 04-131, Centre for Policy Modelling (2004), available at http://cfpm.org/cpmrep129.html
- 15.Edmonds, B.: Assessing the safety of (numerical) representation in social simulation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European Social Simulation Association conference (ESSA 2005), Koblenz, Germany (2005)Google Scholar
- 16.Academy of Management Review: Information for contributors. Academy of Management Review 30, 230 (2005)Google Scholar
- 17.Academy of Management Journal: Information for contributors. Academy of Management Journal 48, 179 (2005)Google Scholar
- 18.Strategic Management Journal website (2005), http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jabout/2144/ProductInformation.html
- 19.Administrative Science Quarterly website (2005), http://www.johnson.cornell.edu/publications/asq/contributors.html
- 20.Management Science website (2005), http://mansci.pubs.informs.org/amission.html
- 22.Wageman, R.: How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on coaching. Organization Science 12, 559–577 (2001)Google Scholar
- 27.Edwards, J.R.: Alternative to difference scores: Polynomial regression analysis and response surface methodology. In: Drasgow, F., Schmitt, N. (eds.) Measuring and Analysing Behavior in Organizations: Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis, pp. 350–400. Jossey-Bass ( (2002)Google Scholar
- 28.Cohen, P.R.: Heuristic Reasoning about Uncertainty: An Artificial Intelligence Approach. Pitman, London (1985)Google Scholar