Measuring Complexity

Discussion of ways to measure complexity using Nominal Group Technique and Interpretive Structural Management (ISM) to gather data that will then be calculated. The Miller Index can then measure the extent of the problem perceived and the Spreadthink Index can measure differences in opinion within a group. Additionally, the De Morgan Index can provide a measurement of the degree of paired relationships among the problems and the Aristotle index can measure the density of logic in a problematique produced during a group’s work with Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM).

Sent to GMU 27 September 2007. This paper was completed in mid-April 2001.The filename includes the acronym "SR&BS" which Warfield said stands for the journal Systems Res & Behav Sci, which he said he was thinking of sending the paper to, but hadn't yet decided to do so. Also if he teaches in Hull, England this summer, he thinks he will use this paper for the class. First paragraph of abstract: Metrics (i.e., numerical values) that measure complexity in problematic situations have numerous benefits in understanding complexity and comparing situations. But such measures have been elusive because of misperceptions of what constitutes complexity. The key to measuring complexity is to understand its nature. Once its nature is understood, it becomes clear that various linguistic adjustments are required to support definitions of metrics, and to understand their significance.




Additional Info

  • Category: Applications, Complexity, Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM)
  • Size: 19 p
  • Description: Spiral bound manuscript with cover.
  • Publication Year: 2002
Read 126 times Last modified on Sunday, 19 July 2015 14:40

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.