Skip to main content

Exploring the New Frontier: Computational Studies of Organizational Behavior

  • Chapter

Abstract

This chapter introduces the book Agent-Based Simulation of Organizational Behavior presenting the idea of agent-based modeling as a “new frontier” for organizational research. After providing some indications of the challenge of bringing together cross-disciplinary and specialization tensions, the chapter suggests that autonomy, sociality, and cross-validation make this technique particularly suited to analyze organizational behavior research. An overview of the book follows with a short summary of the four parts of the book and each and every chapter. This introduction concludes with a map of what this new research frontier is about, covering both methodological and theoretical grounds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Not all samples in organizational behavior have these characteristics; in fact, especially in organizational team research, observations are not independent and this violation led to the adoption of particular techniques called “multilevel regression analysis.”

References

  • Axelrod, R. (1997). The dissemination of culture: A model with local convergence and global polarization. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41(2), 203–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A. V. (1992). A simple model of herd behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 3, 797–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardone, E. (2015). Intervening via chance seeking. In D. Secchi & M. Neumann (Eds.), Agent-based simulation of organizational behavior: New frontiers of social science research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coen, C. (2009). Simple but not simpler. Introduction CMOT special issue—simple or realistic. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 15, 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, H. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conte, R., Andrighetto, G., & Campenni, M. (2014). Minding norms. Mechanisms and dynamics of social order in agent societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowling, D. (1999). Experimenting on theories. Science in Context, 12(2), 261–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, B. (2015). Introduction to JASSS special issue—Using qualitative evidence to inform the specification of agent-based models. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 18(1), 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, J., & Axtell, R. (1996). Growing artificial societies. Social Science from the bottom-up. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, C. M., & O’Connor, E. J. (2003). Waking up! Mindfulness in the face of bandwagon. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 54–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fioretti, G. (2013). Agent-based simulation models in organization science. Organizational Research Methods, 16(2), 227–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fioretti, G. (2015). Emergent organizations. In D. Secchi & M. Neumann (Eds.), Agent-based simulation of organizational behavior: New frontiers of social science research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J. (2003). Bounded rationality in the economics of organizations: ‘Much cited and little used’. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 245–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure – The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C., & Sitkin, S. B. (2001). Big-B versus Big-O: What is organizational about organizational behavior? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(1), 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckbert, S. (2013). MayaSim: An agent-based model of the ancient Maya social-ecological system. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 16(4), 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2002). Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: Models, analysis and simulation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 5(3), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. (2006). Empirically based, agent-based models. Ecology and Society, 11(2), 37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knudsen, T., & Srikanth, K. (2014). Coordinated exploration: Organizing joint search by multiple specialists to overcome mutual confusion and joint myopia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59, 409–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorscheid, I. (2012). Opening the ‘black box’ of simulations: Increased transparency and effective communication through the systematic design of experiments. Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 18(1), 22–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, R. E., Höllerer, A. M., Jancsary, D., & van Leeuwen, T. (2013). The visual dimension in organizing, organization, and organization research: Core ideas, current developments, and promising avenues. Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 489–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. D. (2015). Agent-based modeling and organization studies: A critical realist perspective. Organization Studies, 36(2), 175–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. D., & Lin, S.-J. (2010). Different truths in different worlds. Organization Science, 21(1), 97–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, S., & Edmonds, B. (2005). Sociology and simulation: Statistical and qualitative cross-validation.American Journal of Sociology, 110(4), 1095–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change (1st ed.). Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, M. (2015). Grounded simulation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 18(1), 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, M., & Cowley, S. (2015). Modelling social agency using diachronic cognition: Learning from the Mafia. In D. Secchi & M. Neumann (Eds.), Agent-based simulation of organizational behavior: New frontiers of social science research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pentland, B. T., & Rueter, H. H. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 484–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.). (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T. C. (1971). Dynamic models of segregation. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1, 143–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secchi, D. (2015). A case for agent-based model in organizational behavior and team research. Team Performance Management, 21(1/2), 37–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secchi, D., Gullekson, N. (2012). The social and cognitive forces behind bandwagon processes: Models of organizational bandwagon. In European Academy of Management Annual Conference. Rotterdam, Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1993). Altruism and economics. American Economic Review, 83(2), 156–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squazzoni, F., Jager, W., & Edmonds, B. (2014). Social simulation in the social sciences: A brief overview. Social Science Computer Review, 32(3), 279–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomsen, S. E. (2015). How docility impacts team efficiency. An agent-based modeling approach. In D. Secchi & M. Neumann (Eds.), Agent-based simulation of organizational behavior: New frontiers of social science research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down memory lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolridge, M. (2009). An introduction to multi-agent systems (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Davide Secchi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Neumann, M., Secchi, D. (2016). Exploring the New Frontier: Computational Studies of Organizational Behavior. In: Secchi, D., Neumann, M. (eds) Agent-Based Simulation of Organizational Behavior. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18153-0_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics