using game theory for producing quality plans: a pac-man simulation experiment
DESCRIPTION
Using game theory for producing quality plans: A Pac-Man simulation experiment. Petter Øgland, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo UKSS Conference, Sep 1.-2. 2009. Structure of presentation. Introduction Brief review of game theory as part of systems theory The Pac-Man model - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Using game theory for producing quality plans: A Pac-Man
simulation experimentPetter Øgland, Department of Informatics, University of Oslo
UKSS Conference, Sep 1.-2. 2009
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Doing OR without understanding organizational politics
• To succeed with OR it is necessary with sociological understanding and political skills (Checkland, 1981; Jackson, 2000; Mingers, 2006)
• Management scientists (change agents) and managers are ”natural enemies” (Beer, 1968)
ScientistsEngineers
Managers
Observations leading to a question
• The theory of “serious games” (Abt, 1969) is based on the idea that games can be used as general models for understanding conflict and competition
• Axelrod (2002) has written about the non-serious game of Monopoly as a model for understanding business strategy
• Some researchers believe that the video game generation see the world differently than previous generations (Beck & Wade, 2006)
• Could the non-serious Pac-Man video game be used as a model for understanding the politics of OR and TQM?
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Game theory & Systems theory
• In the early years of systems theory and cybernetics, game theory is explicitly seen as a part of systems theory (Wiener, 1950; Ashby, 1954; Churchman et al, 1957; von Bertalanffy, 1968; Weinberg, 1975; Rapoport, 1986)
• Metaphors about TQM as a game is common in business literature (e.g. Crosby, 1979; Berry, 1991; Cole, 1999), but strangely not so common in systems-based business literature (e.g. Flood, 1992; Jackson, 2000)
• Metaphors about science as a game is common (Latour, 1979; Sinderman, 2001), but strangely not so common when writing about action research (e.g. Reason & Bradbury, 2004)
Systems theory categorized by the Burrell&Morgan matrix (examples)
Subjective Objective
Radical change
(”conflict”)
Drama theory
(Howard, 1971)
Game theory (von Neumann, 1944)
Regulation
(”harmony”)
SSM OR
Game theory & GST
strategy payoffGame model(model of conflictual
system)
ChessBridgeMonopolyPac-Man…SportsDrama
GamesBusinessEconomicsPoliticsBiologyPsychology…
homomorphism
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Pac-Man (Iwatani, 1979)
Title screen Start of game
Ghost psychology & management grid (Blake & Mouton, 1964)
Score boardPac-Man
foodLevel Points TQM activity
Dot All 10 Document verification
Dot All 10 Quality audit
Dot All 10 Quality report not part of a management decision process
Power pellet All 50 Quality report as part of management decision process
1st Ghost All 200 Impact on manager
2nd Ghost All 400 Also impact on a second manager
3rd Ghost All 800 Also impact on a third manager
4th Ghost All 1600 Impact on four or more managers
Cherry 1 100 Positive feedback
Strawberry 2 300 Positive feedback
Lemon 3+4 500 Positive feedback
Apple 5 700 Positive feedback
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Insert coin: 1999
Pac-Man strategy
Game over: 2005
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Pac-Man score
6 years
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Applying Pac-Man philosophy in the real world
Pac-Man TQM politics
Principle 1
Keep eating, and reflect in action (or between games). For each board level, there are behavioural survival patterns (Zavisca & Beltowski, 1982).
Keep auditing, measuring, analyzing and making improvements. Data collection, analysis, action and progress must never stop.
Principle 2
Understand ghost psychology, both on individual level and how they act as a swarm (Kelly, 1994; Holland, 1995).
Expect conflict, study management psychology and avoid irritating people unnecessarily.
Principle 3
Get energized and attack when the ghosts are clustered, before they manage to scatter in all directions.
Design “management review” (Hoyle, 2006) to fit with institutionalized quality control practice (annual budget process, annual production cycles etc.), get as much management commitment as possible.
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Conclusion
• Seeing TQM as Pac-Man produces strategies of fight and flight that can help change agents interact with management
• Game theory was seen as a promising part of systems theory in the past – the study indicates the relevance of future exporation on the ”soft” aspects of GT