Using game theory for producing
quality plans: A Pac-Man
simulation experiment
Petter Øgland, Department of
Informatics, University of Oslo
UKSS Conference, Sep 1.-2. 2009
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of
systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Doing OR without understanding
organizational politics
• To succeed with OR it is necessary with
sociological understanding and political
skills (Checkland, 1981; Jackson, 2000;
Mingers, 2006)
• Management scientists (change agents)
and managers are ”natural enemies”
(Beer, 1968)
Managers
Engineers
Scientists
Observations leading to a question
• The theory of “serious games” (Abt, 1969) is based on
the idea that games can be used as general models for
understanding conflict and competition
• Axelrod (2002) has written about the non-serious game
of Monopoly as a model for understanding business
strategy
• Some researchers believe that the video game
generation see the world differently than previous
generations (Beck & Wade, 2006)
• Could the non-serious Pac-Man video game be used as
a model for understanding the politics of OR and TQM?
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of
systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Game theory & Systems theory
• In the early years of systems theory and cybernetics,
game theory is explicitly seen as a part of systems
theory (Wiener, 1950; Ashby, 1954; Churchman et al,
1957; von Bertalanffy, 1968; Weinberg, 1975; Rapoport,
1986)
• Metaphors about TQM as a game is common in
business literature (e.g. Crosby, 1979; Berry, 1991; Cole,
1999), but strangely not so common in systems-based
business literature (e.g. Flood, 1992; Jackson, 2000)
• Metaphors about science as a game is common (Latour,
1979; Sinderman, 2001), but strangely not so common
when writing about action research (e.g. Reason &
Bradbury, 2004)
Systems theory categorized by the
Burrell&Morgan matrix (examples)
Subjective
Objective
Radical
change
(”conflict”)
Drama theory
Game theory
(Howard, 1971) (von Neumann,
1944)
Regulation
(”harmony”)
SSM
OR
Game theory & GST
strategy
Chess
Bridge
Monopoly
Pac-Man
…
Sports
Drama
Game model
payoff
(model of conflictual
system)
homomorphism
Games
Business
Economics
Politics
Biology
Psychology
…
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of
systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Pac-Man (Iwatani, 1979)
Title screen
Start of game
Ghost psychology & management
grid (Blake & Mouton, 1964)
Score board
Pac-Man food
Level
Points
Dot
All
10
Document verification
Dot
All
10
Quality audit
Dot
All
10
Quality report not part of a management decision process
Power pellet
All
50
Quality report as part of management decision process
1st Ghost
All
200
Impact on manager
2nd Ghost
All
400
Also impact on a second manager
3rd Ghost
All
800
Also impact on a third manager
4th Ghost
All
1600
Cherry
1
100
Positive feedback
Strawberry
2
300
Positive feedback
3+4
500
Positive feedback
5
700
Positive feedback
Lemon
Apple
TQM activity
Impact on four or more managers
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of
systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Insert coin: 1999
Pac-Man strategy
Game over: 2005
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
Pac-Man score
6 years
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
0
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of
systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Applying Pac-Man philosophy in
the real world
Pac-Man
TQM politics
Principle
1
Keep eating, and reflect in Keep auditing, measuring, analyzing and
action (or between games).
making improvements. Data collection,
For each board level, there
analysis, action and progress must never
are behavioural survival
stop.
patterns
(Zavisca
&
Beltowski, 1982).
Principle
2
Understand ghost psychology, Expect
conflict,
study
management
both on individual level and
psychology and avoid irritating people
how they act as a swarm
unnecessarily.
(Kelly, 1994; Holland,
1995).
Principle
3
Get energized and attack when Design “management review” (Hoyle, 2006)
the ghosts are clustered,
to fit with institutionalized quality
before they manage to
control practice (annual budget process,
scatter in all directions.
annual production cycles etc.), get as
much management commitment as
possible.
Structure of presentation
1. Introduction
2. Brief review of game theory as part of
systems theory
3. The Pac-Man model
4. Example of the model in practical use
5. Discussion
6. Conclusion
Conclusion
• Seeing TQM as Pac-Man produces
strategies of fight and flight that can help
change agents interact with management
• Game theory was seen as a promising
part of systems theory in the past – the
study indicates the relevance of future
exporation on the ”soft” aspects of GT