Current teaching and learning of system dynamics is based on materials derived from the expertise of masters. However, there is little explicit reference to the stages which beginners go through to become proficient nor what is learned at each of these stages. We argue that this hinders cumulative research and development in teaching and learning strategies. We engaged 15 acknowledged masters in the field to take part in a three-round Delphi study to develop an operational representation of the competence development stages and what is learned at each stage. The resulting system dynamics competence framework consists of a qualified, expert-evaluated, empirically based set of seven skills and 265 learning outcomes. The skills provide a common orientation, in the language of current educational research, to facilitate research, course design and certification efforts to ensure quality standards. To conclude this paper provides avenues for future work.

Mental models are the basis on which managers make decisions even though external decision support systems may provide help. Research has demonstrated that more comprehensive and dynamic mental models seem to be at the foundation for improved policies and decisions. Eliciting and comparing such models can systematically explicate key variables and their main underlying structures. In addition, superior dynamic mental models can be identified. This paper reviews existing studies which measure and compare mental models. It shows that the methods used to compare such models lack to account for relevant aspects of dynamic systems, such as, time delays in causal links, feedback structures, and the polarities of feedback loops. Mental models without those properties are mostly static models. To overcome these limitations of the methods to compare mental models, we enhance the widely used distance ratio approach (Markóczy and Goldberg, 1995) so as to comprehend these dynamic characteristics and detect differences among mental models at three levels: the level of elements, the level of individual feedback loops, and the level of the complete model. Our contribution lies in a new method to compare explicated mental models, not to elicit such models. An application of the method shows that this previously non-existent information is essential for understanding differences between managers' mental models of dynamic systems. Thereby, a further path is created to critically analyze and elaborate the models managers use in real world decision making. We discuss the benefits and limitations of our approach for research about mental models and decision making and conclude by identifying directions for further research for operational researchers.

The present paper focuses on the modeling of cognitive processes in organizations. This issue is approached from the perspective of Organizational Cybernetics, the science of control and communication applied to the management of organizations. First, the Team Syntegrity Model is described, which provides a structural architecture for processes of planning, knowledge generation and innovation in turbulent environments. The model is holographic and based on the mathematical structure of polyhedra. Then, by means of a case study it is expounded how processes of self-organization and self-reference can be designed in new, more effective ways. Finally, it is shown that the outstanding performance of this model hinges on invariant features linked to the optimal fractal dimensionality of its structure.

One of the sections of the the 47th Conference of the International Society for the System Sciences (ISSS) in Crete was dedicated to the methodology and applications of Team Syntegrity (TS). TS is a methodology to make the discourse of large groups effective, which is particularly useful in the context of conversations about the future. This contribution is centred on a Team Syntegrity event in which members of the conference initiated a dialogue on the future of ISSS. The paper provides a report and a reflection about that event, and an outlook on how to embark on an ongoing discourse about that vital concern of the Society.

This study examines the interorganizational strategy process as documented by two case ecologies within the emerging domain of electric mobility. We argue that interorganizational strategy-making oscillates between meta- and firm-level and unfolds within constructed strategic arenas through an ongoing negotiation between dispersed actors. We report findings about strategic activity that seems to compensate for the absence of hierarchical structures and authorities as present in collaborative arrangements. Our study also points towards the salient roles of individuals in building common strategies by linking actors that are spread across ecologies, as well as giving "voice and face" to interorganizational endeavors.

This paper contributes to multiple agency theory by examining how the compensation schemes awarded to outside directors and the CEO jointly affect firm-level risk taking. Using data of the S&P 1500 firms from 1997 to 2006, we find support for earlier arguments that providing the CEO, the outside directors, or both with stock options increases risk taking. More importantly, we find that compensating outside directors with stock options has significantly stronger effects than CEO stock options. Finally, contrary to what one would expect, we find that these effects are mutually substituting; that is, if both the outside directors and the CEO are provided with stock option compensation, outside directors' incentives weaken the effect of the CEO's incentives on firms' risk taking. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Prior investigations treated subsidiary autonomy more or less as a static concept, but the headquarters-subsidiary relationship is likely to evolve and result in changing power positions over time. This article examines the static and dynamic impacts of external/internal embeddedness on the autonomy of overseas R&D subsidiaries. Based on data from 73 overseas R&D subsidiaries of German firms, we show that a dynamic perspective indeed produces counterintuitive results, namely that high internal embeddedness in the past may help laboratories gain higher levels of autonomy in the future, whereas high external embeddedness may lead to lower levels of autonomy in the future. Our results indicate that building trust and linking up with headquarters are important strategies for subsidiaries wishing to be granted autonomy in the future.

Although the nature of this topic largely excludes providing guidelines for all possible structures of all possible knowledge networks to fulfill all business needs, this problem is solved by providing a general process de-scription as derived from the research on knowledge networks for growth. Every step of an action is explained with examples from the three fields that we examined: customer integration networks, innovation networks, and merger & acquisition networks. The steps need to be followed in the order described, since one section builds logically on the previous section. Small cases, additional examples and the design of the guidelines will help you to understand and build knowledge networks for growth.