Page 102 -

98 P.-O. Siebers and F. Klügl

While the framework represents a structured modelling approach, there will
always be iterations required by the users to improve definitions from previous
tasks. When stepping through the framework, the users may realise that they did
not consider important elements/details in a previous step or that they considered
too many or that they considered them wrongly. In particular discussions in focus
groups unearth these kinds of issues and are therefore extremely valuable for the
model development process. The framework is a suitable tool for well-organised
discussions and to capture the knowledge and ideas coming out of these discussions
in a formal way. While there is a given sequence of steps that users should follow,
they need to be prepared to go back to a previous task if required and apply changes.
Consequently this means that the users do not have to worry too much if in the
initial rounds they get things wrong or things feel incomplete. They should simply
move on to the next task if they feel that they have some form of contribution.
Our experience is that it is necessary to revisit each task four to five times before
there is a satisfying result that is acceptable to all stakeholders. In that sense, the
approach somewhat resembles “agile” approaches of software engineering with
frequent interactions with stakeholders and frequent iterations and not investing a
lot of time into specifications that are obsolete after the next discussion.
While this framework will not work perfectly for all possible cases, it provides
at least some form of systematic approach. The user should be prepared to adapt
it to fit individual needs. In the following we will explain each step (including the
necessary tools) and exemplify its application.
In order to demonstrate the use of our structured approach, we use an illustrative
example, which is based on work by Zhang et al. (2011), Susanty (2015) and Bed-
well et al. (2014). In this example we focus on the simulation model development
to support studying the impact of normative comparison amongst colleagues with
regards to energy consumption in an office environment. Normative comparison in
this context means giving people clear regular personalised insight into their own
energy consumption (e.g. “you used x% more energy than usual for this month”)
and allowing them to compare it to that of their neighbours (e.g. “you used x%
more than your efficient neighbours”). A simulation study could compare the impact
of “individual apportionment” vs. “group apportionment” of energy consumption
information on the actual energy consumption within the office environment.

Gathering Knowledge

The task of knowledge gathering is one that happens throughout the structured
modelling approach and in many different ways. The main ones we use in our
framework are literature review, focus group discussions, observations and surveys.
The knowledge gathering is either a prerequisite for tasks (e.g. a literature review)
or embedded within the tasks (e.g. focus group discussions). For our study, all
focus groups were led by a computer scientist (the initiator of the study), and the
participants consisted of a mixture of academics and researchers from the fields of
computer science, business management and psychology. In this example study, we