|
What's New? Why Use MM? About Us Services Clients Communities Businesses Schools Researchers Contact Us Models Publications In Progress Site Map Home Links |
More about mediated modeling The added value of mediated computer modeling versus a mediated discussion without modeling or versus modeling without stakeholder participation is illustrated in Figure 1. A distinction is made between "consensus among stakeholders" and "understanding of the system dynamics". Some effective form of interaction and discussion among stakeholders may presumably achieve consensus among stakeholders. But consensus among stakeholders does not necessarily mean that the shared understanding of how the system works has improved. The consensus may be based on wishful thinking. For example, groups may achieve consensus on goals and visions for the system or on the relative risks of various activities, but they may not fully appreciate the dynamic links between the variables. While envisioning exercises such as "Future Search" (Weisbord, 1992;Weisbord & Janoff, 1995) can be very empowering, they are not geared toward improvement of the shared level of understanding of the system dynamics involved. With the use of computers the system dynamics component can be enhanced and strengthened. Even though the resulting model may be less elaborate than if it were merely constructed by modeling experts, its important advantage is that it generates stakeholder consensus about how the system works and how stakeholders would like to see it work. This greatly improves the prospects for implementation of the model's results.  The modeling effort does not have to stagnate at scoping level. Costanza and Ruth (1998) promote a strong stakeholder involvement at the front end of a 3-step process where model-building progresses from simple, but elegant scoping models, toward research and management models. However, the development of a model at scoping level geared toward a team learning experience among stakeholders and scientists, is all too often skipped. Mediated modeling is an improvement over discussion alone because it forces a confrontation with facts. Based on the way humans construct a social reality, one can argue that there is no such thing as an objective "fact". What is perceived as real by individuals is partially influenced by what others in our environment think (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). Science has developed specific methods and peer review processes in order to maintain as objective a view as possible. But in other environments, this conscious effort is often lacking. Sharing different viewpoints, separating beliefs from facts, and connecting the potential outcomes of current actions with future outcomes all can be explored by means of mediated modeling. System dynamics software can be tremendously helpful in this process. The positions of groups may be based on a selfish perception of their own interests. This is a potential pitfall for a mediated modeling process, which relies entirely on the input from the participants. Potential participants may be uninterested in a learning experience by sharing information or in looking at the system under study in a more objective way. Commitment to personal interests may prevail and some stakeholders may be present only to obstruct a positive attempt to get at the problem. The mediated modeling process is based on a voluntary commitment of participants to collaborate, usually without monetary compensation. It should be agreed by the group at the outset that the question "what is equally good for all?" (Habermas, 1992) prevails throughout the process. A self-selection of participants with a relatively positive attitude towards cooperation for the mediated modeling process may thus be expected. Are the most skeptical participants likely to take the time to participate in order to sabotage the process rather than ignore it? Since mediated modeling aims at a relatively low resolution scoping model it may be expected that the real obstructionists will wait to dig in their heels until specific measures evolve from the process. If the process picks up momentum and produces concrete measures, hopefully the collaborative process has included or reached a broad enough public to become appealing to any uncooperative interest groups. Mediated modeling thus helps accomplish three things that people of diverse background need to jointly produce measurable results: Mediated modeling helps to structure a group's thinking. A group is systematically asked to at times to focus on a future vision and at other times, on observed past behavior of problem related aspects. Step by step, past observations and information, and aspirations for the future are integrated in a simulation model designed by the participants. Multiple elements may influence each other to the extent that it may be difficult to keep track of. Counter intuitive behavior or the dynamics of interlinked systems require a systematic, structured and logical examination. Based on the understanding of the dynamics of the underlying system, short-term recommendations and an action plan can be developed. Using a computer model to record the discussion helps to structure the thinking. Mediated modeling helps to structure a group's discussion. When a group designs a frame, represented by the "model sectors" discussed in more detail in chapter 4, for their complex challenges and fills that frame of model sectors with knowledge, experience and information, the most important parts find their rightful places. Addressing a higher conceptual level, by means of a frame of model sectors, before turning to specific challenges allows for openings toward innovative solutions. Starting with a conceptual frame helps in maintaining a more balanced course during the discussion. For example, when a participant presents a specific point of view, the facilitator and the other participants help to interpret how this point of view can be reflected in the evolving model. Tailoring a discussion around a modeled problem helps to keep a discussion structured and connected. Mediated modeling stimulates joint learning among a group of individuals with varying backgrounds. Stakeholders can become relatively myopic in assessing a (potential) conflict, especially when they do not meet regularly. Workshops geared toward addressing a common challenge may help to widen the scope of individual participants. They learn specific information from each other, build a better understanding of each other's viewpoints and learn how they may be interconnected in the larger picture in a variety of ways. Mediated modeling has proven effective in resolving existing or anticipated conflicts among community members in a wide range of settings. It can function as an integrative tool for extensive research programs. In a two-way exchange, mediated modeling has also been used to invite stakeholder input into an extensive research program and alternatively provide research results to a variety of stakeholders. |