Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Gaming and Simulation for Railway Innovation: A Case Study of the Dutch Railway System
KTH, School of Technology and Health (STH), Health Systems Engineering, Health Care Logistics. Delft University of Technology, Netherlands.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1126-3781
2015 (English)In: Journal Simulation & Gaming, ISSN 1046-8781, E-ISSN 1552-826X, Vol. 46, no 5, 489-511 p.Article in journal (Refereed) PublishedText
Abstract [en]

Background. Gaming simulation allows decision-makers to experiment with sociotechnical systems, similar to computer simulation. However, the value of these tools in comparison with each other remains uncertain, especially when focusing on their real-life application in systemic innovation processes. Aim. This article builds a framework based on the literature related to innovation of complex systems in a multi-actor environment and intends to use this framework to differentiate between the value of computer simulation and gaming simulation in innovation processes. Method. Using a case study of the introduction of gaming simulation to ProRail, the Dutch railway infrastructure manager, this article explores the advantages and disadvantages of using the two tools in situations where radical innovations need to be invented, explored, tested, and implemented in an incumbent system. Results. Computer simulations, as closed exercises, allow for more radical innovations to be studied. The openness of gaming sessions as well as the need for gamers to interact with a recognizable system inhibit the use of gaming simulation in envisioning radical innovations. However, they are more suitable for the joint commissioning of research and the stepwise testing of small-scale improvements. Gaming simulation is therefore a more appropriate tool for planning a concerted transition in a multi-actor setting. Conclusion. Computer simulation better allows for the building of experimental niches, and gaming simulation better helps in the concerted planning of the implementation of innovations. The article ends with concrete directions for further research as well as ideas about combining the two tools.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2015. Vol. 46, no 5, 489-511 p.
Keyword [en]
Complex systems, computer simulation, debriefing, decision support, experimental niches, gaming for research, gaming simulation
National Category
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and Ergonomics
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-181993DOI: 10.1177/1046878114549001ScopusID: 2-s2.0-84951864343OAI: diva2:902522

QC 20160211

Available from: 2016-02-11 Created: 2016-02-11 Last updated: 2016-02-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Meijer, Sebastiaan
By organisation
Health Care Logistics
In the same journal
Journal Simulation & Gaming
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and Ergonomics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 41 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link