Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

System Dynamics Applied to Project Management: A Survey, Assessment, and Directions for Future Research

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science

  • 504 Accesses

Context

Projects abound in industry, public service, and many other endeavors. As a series of activities or tasks that (1) have a specific objective (scope) to be completed within certain specifications (requirements), (2) have defined start and end dates, (3) have funding limits, and (4) consume and/or utilize resources (Project Management Institute 2000), projects have proven challenging to plan and manage. This is largely because project conditions and performance evolve over time as a result of feedback responses, many involving nonlinear relationships, and to accumulations of project progress and resources. This has made the application of system dynamics to project management a fertile and productive field of study. This entry surveys the large body of system dynamics work on projects, evaluates its progress, and suggests directions for future development.

Many different types of models have been developed to improve project management. These models include some of the system...

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Abdel-Hamid TK (1984) The dynamics of software development project management: an integrative system dynamics perspective. PhD thesis, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Hamid TK (1993a) A multiproject perspective of single-project dynamics. J Syst Softw 22(3):151–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Hamid TK (1993b) Adapting, correcting, and perfecting software estimates: a maintenance metaphor. Computer 26:20–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Hamid TK (1996) The slippery path to productivity improvement. IEEE Softw 13:43–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Hamid TK (2011) Single-loop project controls: reigning paradigms or straitjackets? Proj Manag J 42(1):17–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abdel-Hamid TK, Madnick SE (1991) Software project dynamics: an integrated approach. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackermann F, Eden C, Williams T (1997) Modelling for litigation: mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches. Interfaces 27(2):48–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkermans H, van Oorschot KE (2016) Pilot error? Managerial decision biases as explanation for disruptions in aircraft development. Proj Manag J 47(2):79–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alessandri T, Ford D, Lander D, Leggio K, Taylor M (2004) Managing risk and uncertainty in complex capital projects. Q Rev Econ Financ 44(5):751–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlas Y, Bayraktutar I (1992) An interactive simulation game for software project management (Softsim). In: Proceedings of the 1992 international system dynamics conference, Utrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayer S, Gann D (2006) Balancing work: bidding strategies and workload dynamics in a project-based professional service organization. Syst Dyn Rev 22(3):185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao Q, Ford D, Leggio K (2006) The application of real options to the R&D outsourcing decision. In: Schniederjans M, Schniederjans A, Schniederjans D (eds) Outsourcing management information systems. Idea Group Publishing, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper KG (1980) Naval ship production: a claim settled and a framework built. Interfaces 10(6):20–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper KG (1993) The rework cycle (a series of 3 articles): Why projects are mismanaged; how it really works … and reworks …; benchmarks for the project manager. PMNETwork Magazine, February 1993 for first two articles; Project Management Journal March 1993 for third article

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper KG (1994) The $2,000 hour: how managers influence project performance through the rework cycle. Proj Manag J 25(1):11

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper K, Lee G (2008) Managing the dynamics of projects and changes at fluor. [reference SD Society Website Link]

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper KG, Reichelt KS (2004) Project changes: sources, impacts, mitigation, pricing, litigation, and excellence. In: PWG M, Pinto JK (eds) The Wiley guide to managing projects. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 743–772

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper KG, Lyneis JM, Byrant BJ (2002) Learning to learn, from past to future. Int J Proj Manag 20:213–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damnjanovic I, Johnson S, Ford DN (2016) Financial stress testing of toll road projects: the effect of feedback loop dynamics. J Struct Financ 21(4):51–64. https://doi.org/10.3905/jsf.2016.2016.1.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden CE, Williams TM, Ackermann FA (1998) Dismantling the learning curve: the role of disruptions on the planning of development projects. Int J Proj Manag 16(3):131–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden CE, Williams TM, Ackermann FA, Howick S (2000) On the nature of disruption and delay (D&D) in major projects. J Oper Res Soc 51(3):291–300

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN (1995) The dynamics of project management: an investigation of the impacts of project process and coordination on performance. PhD thesis, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN (2002) Achieving multiple project objectives through contingency management. ASCE J Constr Eng Manag 128(1):30–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Bhargav S (2006) Project management quality and the value of flexible strategies. Eng Constr Archit Manag 13(3):275–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Ceylan K (2002) Using options to manage dynamic uncertainty in acquisition projects. Acquis Rev Q 9(4):243–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Sobek D (2005) Modeling real options to switch among alternatives in product development. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 52(2):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Sterman JD (1998a) Dynamic modeling of product development processes. Syst Dyn Rev 14(1):31–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Sterman JD (1998b) Expert knowledge elicitation for improving mental and formal models. Syst Dyn Rev 14(4):309–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Sterman JD (2003a) Overcoming the 90% syndrome: iteration management in concurrent development projects. Concurr Eng Res Appl 111(3):177–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Sterman JD (2003b) The liar’s club: impacts of concealment in concurrent development projects. Concurr Eng Res Appl 111(3):211–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Anderson S, Damron A, de Las Casas R, Gokmen N, Kuennen S (2004) Managing constructability reviews to reduce highway project durations. ASCE J Constr Eng Manag 130(1):33–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Lyneis JM, Taylor T (2007) Project controls to minimize cost and schedule overruns: a model, research agenda, and initial results. In: Proceedings of the 2007 international system dynamics conference, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford DN, Damnjanovic I, Johnson S (2015) Public-private partnerships: a study of risk allocation design envelops. In: Johnston EW (ed) Governance in the information era: theory and practice of policy infomatics. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester JW (1961) Industrial dynamics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester JW (1969) Urban dynamics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Godlewski E, Lee G, Cooper K (2012) System dynamics transforms fluor project and change management. Interfaces 42(1):17–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham AK (2000) Beyond PM101: lessons for managing large development programs. Proj Manag J 31(4):7–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham AK, Choi CY, Mullen TW (2002a) Using fit-constrained Monte Carlo trials to quantify confidence in simulation model outcomes. In: Proceedings of the 35th annual Hawaii conference on systems sciences. IEEE, Los Alamitos

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham AK, Moore J, Choi CY (2002b) How robust are conclusions from a complex calibrated model, really? A project management model benchmark using fit constrained Monte Carlo analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2002 international system dynamics conference, Palermo

    Google Scholar 

  • Homer JB, Sterman JD, Greenwood B, Perkola M (1993) Delivery time reduction in pulp and paper mill construction projects: a dynamic analysis of alternatives. In: Proceedings of the 1993 international system dynamics conference, Cancun

    Google Scholar 

  • Howick S (2005) Using system dynamics models with litigation audiences, European Journal of Operational Research 162:239–250

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Howick S, Eden C (2001) The impact of disruption and delay when compressing large projects: going for incentives? J Oper Res Soc 52:26–34

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jalili Y (2017) Tipping point indicators in dynamic systems. PhD thesis, Texas A&M University

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalili Y, Ford DN (2016) Quantifying the impacts of rework, schedule pressure, and ripple effect loops on project schedule performance. Syst Dyn Rev 32(1):82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joglekar N, Ford DN (2005) Product development resource allocation with foresight. Eur J Oper Res 160(1):72–87

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson S, Taylor T, Ford DN (2006) Using system dynamics to extend real options use: insights from the oil & gas industry. In: Proceedings of the 2006 international system dynamics conference, Nijmegan, July 23–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson DC, Drakeley GM, Plante TN, Dalton WJ, Trost CS (2009) Managing change on complex programs: VIRGINIA class cost reduction. Naval Eng J 121(4):79–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee SH, Peña-Mora F (2007) Understanding and managing iterative error and change cycles in construction. Syst Dyn Rev 23(1):35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee Z, Ford DN, Joglekar N (2007) Resource allocation policy design for reduced project duration: a systems modeling approach. Syst Res Behav Sci 24:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt RE, Thomsen J, Christiansen TR, Kunz JC, Jin Y, Nass C (1999) Simulating project work processes and organizations: toward a micro-contingency theory of organizational design. Manag Sci 45(11):1479–1495

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lin J, Chai KH, Wong TS, Brombacher AC (2008) A dynamic model for managing overlapped iterative product development. Eur J Oper Res 185:378–392

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lyneis JM (2003) Course notes for MIT course ESD.36J: system and project management, fall 2003. http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Engineering-Systems-Division/ESD-36JFall-2003/CourseHome/index.htm

  • Lyneis JM, Cooper KG, Els SA (2001) Strategic management of complex projects: a case study using system dynamics. Syst Dyn Rev 17:237–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacInnis DV (2004) Development of a system dynamics based management flight simulator for new product development. MSc thesis, System Design and Management Program, MIT

    Google Scholar 

  • Madachy RJ (2002) Software process concurrence. In: Proceedings of the 2002 international system dynamics conference, Palermo

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenna N (2005) Executing major projects through contractors. In: Proceedings of the 2005 international system dynamics conference, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Paez-Perez D, Sanchez-Silva M (2016) A dynamic principal-agent framework for modeling the performance of infrastructure. Eur J Oper Res 254:576–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park M (2001) Dynamic planning and control methodology for concurrent construction projects. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Park M, Pena-Mora F (2003) Dynamic change management for construction: introducing the change cycle into model-based project management. Syst Dyn Rev 19(3):213–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park M, Pena-Mora F (2004) Reliability buffering for construction projects. ASCE J Constr Eng Manag 130(5):626–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfahl D, Lebsanft K (1999) Integration of system dynamics modelling with descriptive process modelling and goal-oriented measurement. J Syst Softw 46(2/3):135–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Praven K, Rahmandad H, Haghani A (2015) Inter-phase feedbacks in construction projects. J Oper Manag 39–40:48–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Project Management Institute (2000) A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK ® Guide). Project Management Institute, Newtown Square

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahmandad H, Hu K (2010) Modeling the rework cycle: capturing multiple defects per task. Syst Dyn Rev 26(4):291–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahmandad H, Weiss DM (2009) Dynamics of concurrent software development. Syst Dyn Rev 25(3):224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichelt KS (1990) Halter marine: a case study of the dangers of litigation. Unpublished Masters thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichelt KS, Lyneis JM (1999) The dynamics of project performance: benchmarking the drivers of cost and schedule overrun. Eur Manag J 17(2):135–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repenning NP (2000) A dynamic model of resource allocation in multi-project research and development systems. Syst Dyn Rev 16(3):173–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repenning NP (2001) Understanding fire fighting in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management 18:285–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repenning NP, Sterman JD (2001) Nobody ever gets credit for fixing problems that never happened: creating and sustaining process improvement. Calif Manag Rev 43(4):64–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repenning NP, Sterman JD (2002) Capability traps and self-confirming attribution errors in the dynamics of process improvement. Adm Sci Q 47:265–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson GP, Pugh AL III (1981) Introduction to system dynamics modeling with dynamo. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts EB (1964) The dynamics of research and development. Harper and Row, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts EB (1974) A simple model of R&D project dynamics. R&D Manag 5(1):1. Reprinted in Roberts EB (ed) (1978) Managerial applications of system dynamics. Productivity Press, Cambridge, MA

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues A (2000) The application of system dynamics to project management: an integrated methodology (SYDPIM). PhD dissertation thesis. Department of Management Science, University of Strathclyde

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues AG (2001) Managing and modelling project risk dynamics: a system dynamics-based framework. Presented at the Fourth European project management conference, PMI Europe 2001, London, 6–7 June

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues AG, Bowers J (1996) System dynamics in project management: a comparative analysis with traditional methods. Syst Dyn Rev 12(2):121–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues AG, Williams TM (1998) System dynamics in project management: assessing the impacts of client behavior on project performance. J Oper Res Soc 49(1):2–15

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta K, Abdel-Hamid TK (1993) Alternative conceptions of feedback in dynamic decision environments: an experimental investigation. Manag Sci 39(4):411–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta K, Abdel-Hamid TK (1996) The impact of unreliable information on the management of software projects: a dynamic decision perspective. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 26(2):177–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith BJ, Nguyen N, Vidale RF (1993) Death of a software manager: how to avoid career suicide through dynamic software process modeling. Am Program 6(5):10–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens CA, Graham AK, Lyneis JM (2005) System dynamics modeling in the legal arena: meeting the challenges of expert witness admissibility. Syst Dyn Rev 21(2):95–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman JD (2000) Business dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Irwin/McGraw Hill, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor T, Ford DN (2006) Tipping point dynamics in development projects. Syst Dyn Rev 22(1):51–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor TRB, Ford DN (2008) Managing tipping point dynamics in complex construction projects. J Constr Eng Manag 134(6):421–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Oorschot K, Sengupta K, Akkermans H, van Wassenhove L (2010) Get fat fast: surviving stage-gate® in NPD. J Prod Innov Manag 27(6):828–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Oorschot KE, Akkermans KS, Wassenhove LNV (2013) Anatomy of a decision trap in complex new product development projects. Acad Manag J 56(1):285–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Oorschot K, Eling K, Langerak F (2017) Measuring the knowns to manage the unknown: how to choose the gate timing strategy in NPD projects. J Prod Innov Manag 35(2):164–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weil HB, Etherton RL (1990) System dynamics in dispute resolution. In: Proceedings of the 1990 international system dynamics conference, Utrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • White JC, Sholtes RM (2016) The Dynamic Progress Method: Using Advanced Simulation to Improve Project planning and Management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams TM (1999) Seeking optimum project duration extensions. J Oper Res Soc 50:460–467

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Williams T (2002) Modelling complex projects. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaghootkar K, Gil N (2012) The effects of schedule-driven project management in multi-project environments. Int J Proj Manag 30(12):127–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Zachry Department of Civil Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

    David N. Ford

  2. System Design and Management Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Weston, MA, USA

    James M. Lyneis

Authors
  1. David N. Ford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James M. Lyneis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to David N. Ford or James M. Lyneis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ramtech Ltd., Larkspur, CA, USA

    Robert A. Meyers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Science+Business Media LLC

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Ford, D.N., Lyneis, J.M. (2019). System Dynamics Applied to Project Management: A Survey, Assessment, and Directions for Future Research. In: Meyers, R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27737-5_658-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27737-5_658-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-27737-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-27737-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Physics and AstronomyReference Module Physical and Materials ScienceReference Module Chemistry, Materials and Physics

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation