Management of Complex Systems: Toward Agent-Based Gaming for Policy

  • Wander JagerEmail author
  • Gerben van der Vegt
Part of the Public Administration and Information Technology book series (PAIT, volume 10)


In this chapter, we discuss the implications of complexities in societal systems for management. After discussing some essential features of complex systems, we discuss the current focus of managers and management theory on prediction and the problems arising from this perspective. A short overview is given of the leadership and management literature, identifying what information is lacking concerning the management of complex systems. Next agent-based gaming, which allows for modeling a virtual and autonomous population in a computer-game setting, is introduced as a tool to explore the possibilities to manage complex systems. The chapter concludes with a research agenda for management and leadership in complex systems.


Opinion Leader Leadership Style Leadership Behavior Social Complex Leadership Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This chapter has been written in the context of the eGovPoliNet project. More information can be found on


  1. Arai K, Deguchi H, Matsui H, (2006) Agent-based modeling meets gaming simulation. Springer, JapanGoogle Scholar
  2. Barreteau O, Bousquet F, Attonaty JM (2001) Role-playing games for opening the black box of multi-agent systems: method and lessons of its application to Senegal River Valley irrigated systems. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 4(2):12 ( Scholar
  3. Bass BM (1990) Bass & Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: theory, research, and managerial applications, 3rd ed. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bravo G, Vallino E, Cerutti AK, Pairotti MB (2013) Alternative scenarios of green consumption in Italy: an empirically grounded model. Environ Model Softw 47:225–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Collinson D (2005) Dialectics of leadership. Hum Relat 58:1419–1442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Endsley (1995) Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factor 37(1):65–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edwards, BD, Day, EA, Arthur, W Jr, Bell, ST (2006) Relationships among team ability composition, team mental models, and team performance. J Appl Psychol 91(3):727–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gilbert N, Troitzsch KG (2005) Simulation for the social scientist. Open University Press, Buckingham.Google Scholar
  9. Guyot P, Honiden S (2006) Agent-based participatory simulations: merging multi-agent systems and role-playing games. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 9(4):8. Google Scholar
  10. Jager W (2000) Modelling consumer behavior. Doctoral thesis. Groningen, University of Groningen, Centre for Environmental and Traffic psychologyGoogle Scholar
  11. Jager W, Janssen MA, De Vries HJM, De Greef J, Vlek CAJ (2000) Behaviour in commons dilemmas: homo economicus and homo psychologicus in an ecological-economic model. Ecol Econ 35:357–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jager W, Janssen M, Bockarjova M (2014). Diffusion dynamics of electric cars and adaptive policy: towards an empirical based simulation. Adv Soc Simul 229:259–270Google Scholar
  13. Janssen MA, W Jager (2001) Fashions, habits and changing preferences: simulation of psychological factors affecting market dynamics. J Econ Psychol 22:745–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kane M (2014) Sales of plug in vehicles in the Netherlands drop off big time. retrieved on 08–07–2014
  15. Kozlowski SWJ, Watola DJ, Nowakowski JM, Kim BH, Botero IC (2008) Developing adaptive teams: a theory of dynamic team leadership. In E Salas, GF Goodwin, CS Burke (eds) Team effectiveness in complex organizations: cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches. Psychology Press, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Lisk TC, Kaplancali UT, Riggio RE (2012) Leadership in multiplayer online gaming environments. Simul Gaming 43(1):133–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mialhe F, Becuc N, Gunnelld Y, (2012) An agent-based model for analyzing land use dynamics in response to farmer behaviour and environmental change in the Pampanga delta (Philippines). Agric Ecosyst Environ 161(2012):55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schoenmacker GH (2014) Agent-based consumer modelling of the Dutch lighting market. Master Thesis Department of Artificial Intelligence Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  19. Speelman EN (2014) Gaming and simulation to explore resilience of contested agricultural landscapes. Doctoral Thesis, Wageningen University, Farming Systems EcologyGoogle Scholar
  20. Squazzoni F, Jager W, Edmonds B (2013) Social simulation in the social sciences: a brief overview. Soc Sci Comput Rev. First published on December 6, 2013. doi:10.1177/0894439313512975Google Scholar
  21. Uhl-Bien M, Marion, R (2009) Complexity leadership in bureaucratic forms of organizing: a meso model. Leadersh Q 20:631–650Google Scholar
  22. Uhl-Bien M, Marion R, McKelvey B (2007) Complexity leadership theory: shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadersh Q 18:298–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Van Eck PS, Jager W, Leeflang PSH (2011) Opinion leaders’ role in innovation diffusion: a simulation study. J Prod Innov Manag 28:187–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wijermans W, Jorna R, Jager W, Van Vliet T, Adang O (2013) CROSS: modelling crowd behaviour with social-cognitive agents. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 16(4):1Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Groningen Center of Social Complexity StudiesUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Faculty of Economics and BusinessUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations