222 Chapter 8 Discussion Introduction This chapter reflects on the ...

Conclusion
The original aspect of the work presented here was to combine qualitative with
quantitative insights in the development of an ABSS model. The qualitative approach
is encapsulated by the data collected through interviews, and the quantitative by sales
and other data. The key problem is to relate the quantitative to the qualitative, and
vice versa, i.e. to translate the qualitative data into a form suitable to apply the formal
methods of computer modelling, and likewise to interpret numerical outputs of
simulation experiments in terms of qualitative descriptions of modelled phenomena.
<strong>This</strong> is an important point, because stakeholder participation requires developing
explanations of model behaviour to which the stakeholders can understand and
discuss. As discussed in <strong>chapter</strong> six, the participatory approach was central to the
research although it produced problems in obtaining data that stakeholders had
initially agreed to provide, in completing the model evaluation process, and in an
eventual abrupt ending to the project. All of these problems were linked with the
literature on ethnographic research settings, namely the issues of ‘sponsorship’,
‘ongoing access relations’, and ‘models of the researcher’.
The lack of information was particularly problematic for model development because
the assumptions were less well validated than they might have been. Similarly to
SSM and BPM approaches to participatory inquiry, ABSS modelling is a process
which forces disambiguation amongst stakeholders in specifying a ‘conceptual
model’ of the system under investigation, and the (often hidden) assumptions that
constitute it.
In addition to simulating the consequences of managers’ decision-making and other
scenarios involving dynamic processes, a main strength of the approach would be this
disambiguation of the specification of a problem area. In the course of doing this,
necessarily the researcher will elicit stakeholders’ subjective positions. It must be
recognised then, that the model is not an objective one but, on the contrary, contains a
number of subjective interpretations. Nevertheless, the view of the author is that it is
possible to claim objectivity on the grounds that there are common ‘threads’ running
243