Skip to main content
Log in

O-Cubed Modeling and Simulator for Computational Organization Design

  • Published:
Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses the development of O-cubed (operational organization oriented) modeling and a simulator for computational organization design. O-cubed modeling is used to describe an organization model in terms of models of coordination structures, tasks, and agents. The model of a coordination structure can represent not only task decomposition and allocation, but also choices between hierarchical management and autonomous management. The model of a task can represent the workflow within an organization. Using the O-cubed simulator, we can easily describe the models for coordination structure, tasks and agents, so that agents can make decisions concerning task processing and choose coordination structures effectively. In order to show applicability of the modeling and simulator, we describe an O-Cubed model of cooperation in a kitchen of a restaurant. The cooperation is good example to explain organization design, because it contains balanced elements of coordination structures, tasks, and agents. The example show that the organization models described by O-cubed modeling and the simulator are promising models for designing organizations.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbas, S. and G. O'Hare (1997), “Incorporating Organizational Design Principles and Experiences into the Design and Implementation of Multi Agent Systems, ” in S. Krin and G. O'Hare (Eds.) Cooperative Knowledge Processing: The Key Technology for Intelligent Organizations. Springer-Verlag, London, pp. 173–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cammarata, S., D. McAuthur and R. Steeb (1983), “Strategies of Cooperation in Distributed Problem Solving, ” in Proceedings of the Eight International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Karlsruhe, West Germany, pp. 767–770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K.M., J. Kjaer-Hansen, A. Newell and A. Prietula (1992), “Plural-SOAR: A Prolegomenon to Artificial Agents and Organizational Behavior, ” in M. Masuch and G. Massimo (Eds.) Distributed Intelligence: Application in Human Organizations. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 87–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley, K.M. and M.J. Prietula (1994), “ACTS Theory: Extending the Model of Bounded Rationality, ” in K.M. Carley and M.J. Prietula (Eds.) Computational Organization Theory. L. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 55–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowston, K. (1994), “Evolving Novel Organizational Forms, ” in K.M. Carley and M.J. Prietula (Eds.) Computational Organization Theory. L. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 19–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T.H. (1993), Process Innovation, Reengineering Work Through Information Technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R. and R.G. Smith (1983), “Negotiation as a Metaphor for Distributed Problem Solving, ” Artificial Intelligence, 20, 63–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J.R. (1977), Organization Design. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishida, K. (1996), “A Modeling Language for Simulating Collective Behavior Among Intelligent Performers, ” IPSJ SIG Notes (in Japanese), pp. 1–8.

  • Jacobson, I., M. Ericsson and A. Jacobson (1994), The Object Advantage: Business Process Reengineering with Object Technology. ACM Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, M., L.B. Waisel and W.A. Wallance (1998), “Team Soar: A Model for Team Decision Making, ” in M.J. Prietura, K.M. Carley and L. Gasser (Eds.) Simulating Organizations: Computational Models of Institutions and Groups. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 23–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laird, J.E., A. Newell and P.S. Rosenbloom (1987), “SOAR: An Architecture for General Intelligence, ” Artificial Intelligence, 33, 1–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Z. (1994), “The Choice Between Accuracy and Errors: A Contingency Analysis of External Conditions and Organizational Decision Making Performance, ” in K.M. Carley and M.J. Prietula (Eds.) Computational Organization Theory. L. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 67–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, T.W. (1987), “Modeling Coordination in Organizations and Markets, ” Management Science, 33(10), 1317–1332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoham, Y. (1990), “Agent Oriented Programming, ” Technical Report STAN-CS-90-1334, Stanford University.

  • Shoham, Y. (1993), “Agent Oriented Programming: Methodology and Application, ” Artificial Intelligence, 60, 51–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (1937), The Wealth of Nations. Random House, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ishida, K., Ohta, T. O-Cubed Modeling and Simulator for Computational Organization Design. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory 7, 155–176 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011357005795

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011357005795

Navigation