https://psbedu.academia.edu/DavideSecchi
Professional homepagehttps://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xdXGOncAAAAJ&hl=en
ORCID more infohttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6677-8689
GitHub more infoNo associated GitHub account.
I am Professor of Management at Paris School of Business and have held positions at the University of Southern Denmark, Bournemouth University (UK), University of Wisconsin (US), and at the University of Insubria (Italy). My current research efforts are on socially-based decision making, agent-based modeling, cognitive processes in organizations and socially responsible behavior in organizations. With a coauthor network of 50 colleagues located in over 10 different countries, I have published 126 (as of 2025) among articles, book chapters, and books. The monograph Computational organizational cognition (2021, Emerald), and the edited Agent-Based Simulation of Organizational Behavior with M. Neumann (2016, Springer Nature) specifically target computational simulation research in the social sciences. The book How do I Develop an Agent-Based Model? (2022, Elgar) is the first specifically written for business and management scholars.
My simulation research focuses on the applications of ABM to organizational behavior studies. I study socially-distributed decision making—i.e., the process of exploiting external resources in a social environment—and I work to develop its theoretical underpinnings in order to to test it. A second stream of research is on how group dynamics affect individual perceptions of social responsibility and on the definition and measurement of individual social responsibility (I-SR).
This model was designed to study resilience in organizations. Inspired by ethnographic work, it follows the simple goal to understand whether team structure affects the way in which tasks are performed. In so doing, it compares the ‘hybrid’ data-inspired structure with three more traditional structures (i.e. hierarchy, flexible/relaxed hierarchy, and anarchy/disorganization).
This version 2.1.0
of the uFunk
model is about setting a business strategy (the S
in the name) for an organization. A team of managers (or executives) meet and discuss various options on the strategy for the firm. There are three aspects that they have to agree on to set the strategic positioning of the organization.
The discussion is on market, stakeholders, and resources. The team (it could be a business strategy task force) considers various aspects of these three elements. The resources they use to develop the discussion can come from a traditional approach to strategy or from non-traditional means (e.g., so-called serious play, creativity and imagination techniques).
The S-uFunk 2.1.0 Model
wants to understand to which extent cognitive means triggered by traditional and non-traditional resources affect the making of the strategy process.
The aim of the model is to define when researcher’s assumptions of dependence or independence of cases in multiple case study research affect the results — hence, the understanding of these cases.
The agent-based simulation is set to work on information that is either (a) functional, (b) pseudo-functional, (c) dysfunctional, or (d) irrelevant. The idea is that a judgment on whether information falls into one of the four categories is based on the agent and its network. In other words, it is the agents who interprets a particular information as being (a), (b), (c), or (d). It is a decision based on an exchange with co-workers. This makes the judgment a socially-grounded cognitive exercise. The uFUNK 1.0.2 Model is set on an organization where agent-employee work on agent-tasks.
This model builds on inquisitiveness as a key individual disposition to expand the bounds of their rationality. It represents a system where teams are formed around problems and inquisitive agents integrate competencies to find ‘emergent’ solutions.
IOP 2.1.2 is an agent-based simulation model designed to explore the relations between (1) employees, (2) tasks and (3) resources in an organizational setting. By comparing alternative cognitive strategies in the use of resources, employees face increasingly demanding waves of tasks that derive by challenges the organization face to adapt to a turbulent environment. The assumption tested by this model is that a successful organizational adaptation, called plastic, is necessarily tied to how employees handle pressure coming from existing and new tasks. By comparing alternative cognitive strategies, connected to ‘docility’ (Simon, 1993; Secchi, 2011) and ‘extended’ cognition (Clark, 2003, Secchi & Cowley, 2018), IOP 2.1.2 is an attempt to indicate which strategy is most suitable and under which scenario.
This model takes into consideration Peer Reviewing under the influence of Impact Factor (PRIF) and it has the purpose to explore whether the infamous metric affects assessment of papers under review. The idea is to consider to types of reviewers, those who are agnostic towards IF (IU1) and those that believe that it is a measure of journal (and article) quality (IU2). This perception is somehow reflected in the evaluation, because the perceived scientific value of a paper becomes a function of the journal in which an article has been submitted. Various mechanisms to update reviewer preferences are also implemented.
This model explores different aspects of the formation of urban neighbourhoods where residents believe in values distant from those dominant in society. Or, at least, this is what the Danish government beliefs when they discuss their politics about parallel societies. This simulation is set to understand (a) whether these alternative values areas form and what determines their formation, (b) if they are linked to low or no income residents, and (c) what happens if they disappear from the map. All these three points are part of the Danish government policy. This agent-based model is set to understand the boundaries and effects of this policy.
The model explores the impact of journal metrics (e.g., the notorious impact factor) on the perception that academics have of an article’s scientific value.
The model simulates the process of widespread diffusion of something due to popularity (i.e., bandwagon) within an organization.
Under development.