All issues

The article describes a mathematical model that simulates performance of a hierarchical organization during an early stage of a crisis. A distinguished feature of this stage of crisis is presence of so called early warning signals containing information on the approaching event. Employees are capable of catching the early warnings and of preparing the organization for the crisis based on the signals’ meaning. The efficiency of the preparation depends on both parameters of the organization and parameters of the crisis. The proposed simulation agentbased model is implemented on Java programming language and is used for conducting experiments via Monte- Carlo method. The goal of the experiments is to compare how centralized and decentralized organizational structures perform during sudden and smoldering crises. By centralized organizations we assume structures with high number of hierarchy levels and low number of direct reports of every manager, while decentralized organizations mean structures with low number of hierarchy levels and high number of direct reports of every manager. Sudden crises are distinguished by short early stage and low number of warning signals, while smoldering crises are defined as crises with long lasting early stage and high number of warning signals not necessary containing important information. Efficiency of the organizational performance during early stage of a crisis is measured by two parameters: percentage of early warnings which have been acted upon in order to prepare organization for the crisis, and time spent by top-manager on working with early warnings. As a result, we show that during early stage of smoldering crises centralized organizations process signals more efficiently than decentralized organizations, while decentralized organizations handle early warning signals more efficiently during early stage of sudden crises. However, occupation of top-managers during sudden crises is higher in decentralized organizations and it is higher in centralized organizations during smoldering crises. Thus, neither of the two classes of organizational structures is more efficient by the two parameters simultaneously. Finally, we conduct sensitivity analysis to verify the obtained results.

At the middle of the 2000-th, scientists studying the functioning of insect communities identified four basic patterns of the organizational structure of such communities. (i) Cooperation is more developed in groups with strong kinship. (ii) Cooperation in species with large colony sizes is often more developed than in species with small colony sizes. And small-sized colonies often exhibit greater internal reproductive conflict and less morphological and behavioral specialization. (iii) Within a single species, brood size (i. e., in a sense, efficiency) per capita usually decreases as colony size increases. (iv) Advanced cooperation tends to occur when resources are limited and intergroup competition is fierce. Thinking of the functioning of a group of organisms as a two-level competitive market in which individuals face the problem of allocating their energy between investment in intergroup competition and investment in intragroup competition, i. e., an internal struggle for the share of resources obtained through intergroup competition, we can compare such a biological situation with the economic phenomenon of “coopetition” — the cooperation of competing agents with the goal of later competitively dividing the resources won in consequence In the framework of economic researches the effects similar to (ii) — in the framework of large and small group competition the optimal strategy of large group would be complete squeezing out of the second group and monopolization of the market (i. e. large groups tend to act cooperatively) and (iii) — there are conditions, in which the size of the group has a negative impact on productivity of each of its individuals (this effect is called the paradox of group size or Ringelman effect). The general idea of modeling such effects is the idea of proportionality — each individual (an individual/rational agent) decides what share of his forces to invest in intergroup competition and what share to invest in intragroup competition. The group’s gain must be proportional to its total investment in competition, while the individual’s gain is proportional to its contribution to intra-group competition. Despite the prevalence of empirical observations, no gametheoretic model has yet been introduced in which the empirically observed effects can be confirmed. This paper proposes a model that eliminates the problems of previously existing ones and the simulation of Nash equilibrium states within the proposed model allows the above effects to be observed in numerical experiments.

Often decisions in social groups are made by consensus. This applies, for example, to the examination in the technical committee for standardization (TC) before the approval of the national standard by Rosstandart. The standard is approved if and only if the secured consensus in the TC. The same approach to standards development was adopted in almost all countries and at the regional and international level. Previously published works of authors dedicated to the construction of a mathematical model of time to reach consensus in technical committees for standardization in terms of variation in the number of TC members and their level of authoritarianism. The present study is a continuation of these works for the case of the formation of coalitions that are often formed during the consideration of the draft standard to the TC. In the article the mathematical model is constructed to ensure consensus on the work of technical standardization committees in terms of coalitions. In the framework of the model it is shown that in the presence of coalitions consensus is not achievable. However, the coalition, as a rule, are overcome during the negotiation process, otherwise the number of the adopted standards would be extremely small. This paper analyzes the factors that influence the bridging coalitions: the value of the assignment and an index of the effect of the coalition. On the basis of statistical modelling of regular Markov chains is investigated their effects on the time to ensure consensus in the technical Committee. It is proved that the time to reach consensus significantly depends on the value of unilateral concessions coalition and weakly depends on the size of coalitions. Built regression model of dependence of the average number of approvals from the value of the assignment. It was revealed that even a small concession leads to the onset of consensus, increasing the size of the assignment results (with other factors being equal) to a sharp decline in time before the consensus. It is shown that the assignment of a larger coalition against small coalitions takes on average more time before consensus. The result has practical value for all organizational structures, where the emergence of coalitions entails the inability of decision-making in the framework of consensus and requires the consideration of various methods for reaching a consensus decision.