Towards an agent-based model using a hybrid conceptual modelling approach: A case study of relationship conflict within large enterprise system implementations

References

• Alam, S. J., & Geller, A. (2012). Agent-Based models of geographical systems. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Axtell, R. L., & Epstein, J. L. (1994). Agent-based modelling: Understanding our creations. Bulletin of the Santa Fe Institute 9(2), 28–32. https://sfi-edu.s3.amazonaws.com/sfi-edu/production/uploads/publication/2016/10/31/Winter1994Bulletin.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Balci, O. (1994). Validation, verification and testing techniques throughout the life cycle of a simulation study. Annals of Operations Research, 53(1), 121–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02136828
   Google Scholar
• Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323(5916), 892–895. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165821
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boudon, R. (1998). Social mechanisms: an analytical approach to social theory. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boulding, K. (1963). Conflict and defense. Harper & Row.
   Google Scholar
• Chaudron, M. R. V., Heijstek, W., & Nugroho, A. (2012). How effective is UML modelling? An empirical perspective on costs and benefits. Software and Systems Modelling, 12(4), 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-012-0278-4
   Google Scholar
• Checkland, P. (1981). Soft systems methodology in action (1st ed.). John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Checkland, P. (1999). Systems thinking, systems practice (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Checkland, P., & Poulter, J. (2010). Systems approaches to managing change: A practical guide (pp. 191–242). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Coakley, S., Smallwood, R., & Holcombe, M. (2006). From molecules to insect communities - how formal agent-based computational modelling is uncovering new biological facts. Scientiae Mathematicae Japonicae Online, e-2006, 6(2), 765–778. https://www.jams.jp/scm/contents/e-2006-7/2006-69.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Cox, S. A., & Kirkham, S. (2019). Understanding the contribution and challenges of using soft systems methodology to facilitate cultural change: A case study in the public sector. In Cabitza, F., Batini, C., Magni, M.(Eds), Organizing for the Digital World. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation. Cham:Springer. Vol.28. pp. 215–234. ISBN:978-3-319-90502-0. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-90503-7_17.
   Google Scholar
• Eilenberg, S. (1974). Automata languages and machines (Vol. A). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, J. (1999). Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity, 4(5), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0526(199905/06)4:5<41::AID-CPLX9>3.0.CO;2-F
   Google Scholar
• Kehris, E., Eleftherakis, G., & Kefalas, P. (2000). Using X-machines to model and test discrete event simulation programs 4th World MultiConference on Circuits, Systems, Communications & Computers, 9-16 July 2000, Athens, Greece. pp. 163–168.
   Google Scholar
• Kotiadis, K. (2007). Using soft systems methodology to determine the simulation study objectives. Journal of Simulation, 1(3), 215–222. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jos.4250025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotiadis, K., & Robinson, S. (2008). Conceptual modelling: Knowledge acquisition and model abstraction. In: S. J. Mason, R. R. Hill, L. Monch, O. Rose, T. Jefferson, & J. W. Fowler (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2008 winter simulation conference, pp.951–958, Miami, FL: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Macal, C. M. (2016). Everything you need to know about agent-based modelling and simulation. Journal of Simulation, 10(2), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1057/jos.2016.7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macal, C. M., & North, M. J. (2010). Tutorial on agent-based modelling and simulation. Journal of Simulation, 4(3), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1057/jos.2010.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mustafee, N., Harper, A., & Onggo, B. S. (2020). Hybrid modelling and simulation (M&S): Driving innovation in the theory and practice of M&S. In K. H. Bae, B. Feng, S. Kim, S. Lazarova-Molnar, Z. Zheng, T. Roeder, & R. Thiesing (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2020 winter simulation conference (pp. 3140–3151). Virtual Conference: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Mustafee, N., & Powell, J. H. (2018). From hybrid simulation to hybrid systems modelling. In. M. Rabe, A. A. Juan, N. Mustafee, A. Skoogh, S. Jain, & B. Johansson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2018 winter simulation conference, pp.1430–1439, Gothenberg, Sweden: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, J. H., & Mustafee, N. (2017). Widening requirements capture with soft methods: An investigation of hybrid M&S studies in health care. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 68(10), 1211–1222. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41274-016-0147-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, S. (2008a). Conceptual modelling for simulation part i: Definition and requirements. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(3), 278–290. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602368
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, S. (2008b). Conceptual modelling for simulation part ii: A framework for conceptual modelling. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(3), 291–304. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602369
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. (2013). Social network analysis (3rd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Stamatopoulou, I., Kefalas, P., & Gheorghe, M. (2007). Modelling the dynamics of biological state-based systems. BioSystems, 87(2–3), 142–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2006.09.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stepney, S., & Polack, F. A. C. (2018). Engineering simulations as scientific instruments: A pattern language. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Tako, A. A., Tsioptsias, N., & Robinson, S. (2020). Can we learn from simplified simulation models? An experimental study on user learning. Journal of Simulation, 14(2), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/17477778.2019.1704636
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, S. J. E. (2014). Introducing agent-based modeling and simulation. In Taylor, S.J.E (Eds.), Agent-Based modeling and simulation. OR essentialE. Hampshire, UK:Palgrave Macmillan, 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• The Object Management Group. (2017). OMG unified modeling language version 2.5.1. https://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.5.1/PDF
   Google Scholar
• Tolk, A., Harper, A., & Mustafee, N. (2021). Hybrid models as transdisciplinary research enablers. European Journal of Operational Research, 291(3), 1075–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasilakis, C., Lecznarowicz, D., & Lee, C. (2009). Developing model requirements for patient flow simulation studies using the unified modelling language (UML). Journal of Simulation, 3(3), 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1057/jos.2009.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, R. A. (2018). Lessons learned on development and application of agent-based models of complex dynamical systems. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 83, 201–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2017.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, R. A. (2019). Conflict propagation within large technology and software engineering programmes: A multi-partner enterprise system implementattion as case study. IEEE Access, 7(1) , 167696–167713. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2953952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, R. A. (2020). Cybernetics of conflict within multi-partner technology and software engineering programmes. IEEE Access, 8, 94994–95018. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2995263
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, R. A. (2021). User experiences using FLAME: A case study modelling conflict in large enterprise system implementations. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 106, 102196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2020.102196
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zornova, A., Ripoll, P., & Peiro, J. M. (2002). Conflict management in groups that work in two different communication contexts. Small Group Research, 33(5), 481–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/104649602237167
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar