... | ... | @@ -890,6 +890,769 @@ by Amal Abid, Mouna Torjmen Khemakhem, Soumaya Marzouk, Maher Ben Jemaa, Thierry |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Papers in bibtex (to be merged in this page)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Mathematical Definition, Mapping, and Detection of (Anti) Fragility" by Taleb 2013
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-antifragile-taleb-2013,
|
|
|
title = {Mathematical Definition, Mapping, and Detection of (Anti) Fragility},
|
|
|
author = {Taleb, Nassim Nicholas and Douady, Raphael},
|
|
|
journal = {Quantitative Finance },
|
|
|
volume = {13},
|
|
|
number = {11},
|
|
|
pages = {1677--1689},
|
|
|
year = {2013},
|
|
|
month = {11},
|
|
|
DOI = {10.1080/14697688.2013.800219},
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2013.800219},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230609579_Mathematical_Definition_Mapping_and_Detection_of_AntiFragility}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://arxiv.org/abs/1208.1189}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01151340}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
We provide a mathematical definition of fragility and antifragility as negative or positive sensitivity to a semi-measure of dispersion and volatility (a variant of negative or positive ÒvegaÓ) and examine the link to nonlinear effects. We integrate model error (and biases) into the fragile or antifragile context. Unlike risk, which is linked to psychological notions such as subjective preferences (hence cannot apply to a coffee cup) we offer a measure that is universal and concerns any object that has a probability distribution (whether such distribution is known or, critically, unknown).
|
|
|
|
|
|
We propose a detection of fragility, robustness, and antifragility using a single "fast-and-frugal", model-free, probability free heuristic that also picks up exposure to model error. The heuristic lends itself to immediate implementation, and uncovers hidden risks related to company size, forecasting problems, and bank tail exposures (it explains the forecasting biases). While simple to implement, it outperforms stress testing and other such methods such as Value-at-Risk.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning" by Mintzberg 1994
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-mintzberg-1994,
|
|
|
title = {The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning},
|
|
|
author = {Mintzberg, Henry},
|
|
|
journal = {Harvard Business Review},
|
|
|
number={94107},
|
|
|
volume={JANUARY–FEBRUARY 1994},
|
|
|
pages = {107--114},
|
|
|
year = {1994},
|
|
|
month = {02},
|
|
|
Note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://hbr.org/1994/01/the-fall-and-rise-of-strategic-planning}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/89d3/153825e9606a67934df5a7a03125faddd825.pdf}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Randomness: Rethinking the foundation of probability" by Liu 2002
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
|
|
|
@inproceedings{liu2002randomness,
|
|
|
title={Randomness: Rethinking the foundation of probability},
|
|
|
author={Liu, Yan and Thompson, Patrick},
|
|
|
booktitle={Proceedings of the twenty fourth annual meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Athens, GA},
|
|
|
volume={3},
|
|
|
pages={1331--1334},
|
|
|
year={2002}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Randomness in quantum mechanics: philosophy, physics and technology" by Bera 2017
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-bera-2017,
|
|
|
title = {Randomness in quantum mechanics: philosophy, physics and technology},
|
|
|
author = {Bera, Manabendra Nath and Ac{\'\i}n, Antonio and Ku{\'s}, Marek and Mitchell, Morgan W and Lewenstein, Maciej},
|
|
|
journal = {Reports on Progress in Physics},
|
|
|
volume = {80},
|
|
|
number = {12},
|
|
|
pages = {124001},
|
|
|
year = {2017},
|
|
|
month = {11},
|
|
|
publisher = {IOP Publishing},
|
|
|
doi = {10.1088/1361-6633/aa8731},
|
|
|
url = {https://doi.org/10.1088%2F1361-6633%2Faa8731},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6633/aa8731/meta}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.02176.pdf}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
This progress report covers recent developments in the area of quantum randomness, which is an extraordinarily interdisciplinary area that belongs not only to physics, but also to philosophy, mathematics, computer science, and technology. For this reason the article contains three parts that will be essentially devoted to different aspects of quantum randomness, and even directed, although not restricted, to various audiences: a philosophical part, a physical part, and a technological part. For these reasons the article is written on an elementary level, combining simple and non-technical descriptions with a concise review of more advanced results. In this way readers of various provenances will be able to gain while reading the article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks" by Buldyrev 2010
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-buldyrev-2010,
|
|
|
title={Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks},
|
|
|
author={
|
|
|
Buldyrev, Sergey V and
|
|
|
Parshani, Roni and
|
|
|
Paul, Gerald and
|
|
|
Stanley, H Eugene and
|
|
|
Havlin, Shlomo},
|
|
|
journal={Nature},
|
|
|
volume={464},
|
|
|
number={7291},
|
|
|
pages={1025},
|
|
|
year={2010},
|
|
|
month={04},
|
|
|
publisher={Nature Publishing Group},
|
|
|
DOI = {10.1038/nature08932},
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08932},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.nature.com/articles/nature08932#supplementary-information}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43148428_Catastrophic_Cascade_of_Failures_in_Interdependent_Networks}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20393559}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://arxiv.org/abs/0907.1182}
|
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
Complex networks have been studied intensively for a decade, but research still focuses on the limited case of a single, non-interacting network1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14. Modern systems are coupled together15,16,17,18,19 and therefore should be modelled as interdependent networks. A fundamental property of interdependent networks is that failure of nodes in one network may lead to failure of dependent nodes in other networks. This may happen recursively and can lead to a cascade of failures. In fact, a failure of a very small fraction of nodes in one network may lead to the complete fragmentation of a system of several interdependent networks. A dramatic real-world example of a cascade of failures (‘concurrent malfunction’) is the electrical blackout that affected much of Italy on 28 September 2003: the shutdown of power stations directly led to the failure of nodes in the Internet communication network, which in turn caused further breakdown of power stations20. Here we develop a framework for understanding the robustness of interacting networks subject to such cascading failures. We present exact analytical solutions for the critical fraction of nodes that, on removal, will lead to a failure cascade and to a complete fragmentation of two interdependent networks. Surprisingly, a broader degree distribution increases the vulnerability of interdependent networks to random failure, which is opposite to how a single network behaves. Our findings highlight the need to consider interdependent network properties in designing robust networks.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience" by Aven 2011
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-risk-aven-2011,
|
|
|
title={On some recent definitions and analysis frameworks for risk, vulnerability, and resilience},
|
|
|
author={Aven, Terje},
|
|
|
journal={Risk Analysis: An International Journal},
|
|
|
volume={31},
|
|
|
number={4},
|
|
|
pages={515--522},
|
|
|
year={2011},
|
|
|
publisher={Wiley Online Library},
|
|
|
DOI = {10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01528.x},
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01528.x},
|
|
|
eprint = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01528.x},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01528.x}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
Recently, considerable attention has been paid to a systems-based approach to risk, vulnerability, and resilience analysis. It is argued that risk, vulnerability, and resilience are inherently and fundamentally functions of the states of the system and its environment. Vulnerability is defined as the manifestation of the inherent states of the system that can be subjected to a natural hazard or be exploited to adversely affect that system, whereas resilience is defined as the ability of the system to withstand a major disruption within acceptable degradation parameters and to recover within an acceptable time, and composite costs, and risks. Risk, on the other hand, is probability based, defined by the probability and severity of adverse effects (i.e., the consequences). In this article, we look more closely into this approach. It is observed that the key concepts are inconsistent in the sense that the uncertainty (probability) dimension is included for the risk definition but not for vulnerability and resilience. In the article, we question the rationale for this inconsistency. The suggested approach is compared with an alternative framework that provides a logically defined structure for risk, vulnerability, and resilience, where all three concepts are incorporating the uncertainty (probability) dimension.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "The risk concept—historical and recent development trends" by Aven 2012
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-risk-aven-2012,
|
|
|
title={The risk concept—historical and recent development trends},
|
|
|
author={Aven, Terje},
|
|
|
journal={Reliability Engineering \& System Safety},
|
|
|
volume={99},
|
|
|
pages={33--44},
|
|
|
year={2012},
|
|
|
publisher={Elsevier},
|
|
|
issn = "0951-8320",
|
|
|
doi = "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2011.11.006",
|
|
|
url = "http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832011002584",
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832011002584}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{http://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.ress.2011.11.006}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
This paper reviews the definition and meaning of the concept of risk. The review has a historical and development trend perspective, also covering recent years. It is questioned if, and to what extent, it is possible to identify some underlying patterns in the way risk has been, and is being understood today. The analysis is based on a new categorisation of risk definitions and an assessment of these categories in relation to a set of critical issues, including how these risk definitions match typical daily-life phrases about risk. The paper presents a set of constructed development paths for the risk concept and concludes that over the last 15–20 years we have seen a shift from rather narrow perspectives based on probabilities to ways of thinking which highlight events, consequences and uncertainties. However, some of the more narrow perspectives (like expected values and probability-based perspectives) are still strongly influencing the risk field, although arguments can be provided against their use. The implications of this situation for risk assessment and risk management are also discussed.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "The Concept of Antifragility and its Implications for the Practice of Risk Analysis" by Aven 2015
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-risk-aven-2015,
|
|
|
title = {The Concept of Antifragility and its Implications for the Practice of Risk Analysis},
|
|
|
author = {Aven, Terje},
|
|
|
journal = {Risk Analysis},
|
|
|
volume = {35},
|
|
|
number = {3},
|
|
|
pages = {476--483},
|
|
|
year = {2015},
|
|
|
month = {03},
|
|
|
DOI = {10.1111/RISA.12279},
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12279},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266149936_The_Concept_of_Antifragility_and_its_Implications_for_the_Practice_of_Risk_Analysis}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/risa.12279}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
Nassim Taleb's antifragile concept has been shown considerable interest in the media and on the Internet recently. For Taleb, the antifragile concept is a blueprint for living in a black swan world (where surprising extreme events may occur), the key being to love variation and uncertainty to some degree, and thus also errors. The antonym of “fragile” is not robustness or resilience, but “please mishandle” or “please handle carelessly,” using an example from Taleb when referring to sending a package full of glasses by post. In this article, we perform a detailed analysis of this concept, having a special focus on how the antifragile concept relates to common ideas and principles of risk management. The article argues that Taleb's antifragile concept adds an important contribution to the current practice of risk analysis by its focus on the dynamic aspects of risk and performance, and the necessity of some variation, uncertainties, and risk to achieve improvements and high performance at later stages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Risk, vulnerability, robustness, and resilience from a decision-theoretic perspective" by Scholz 2012
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-scholz-2012,
|
|
|
title={Risk, vulnerability, robustness, and resilience from a decision-theoretic perspective},
|
|
|
author={Scholz, Roland W and Blumer, Yann B and Brand, Fridolin S},
|
|
|
journal={Journal of Risk Research},
|
|
|
volume={15},
|
|
|
number={3},
|
|
|
pages={313--330},
|
|
|
year={2012},
|
|
|
publisher={Routledge and Taylor \& Francis},
|
|
|
doi = {10.1080/13669877.2011.634522},
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2011.634522},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13669877.2011.634522}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
Risk, vulnerability, robustness, and resilience are terms that are being used increasingly frequently in a large range of sciences. This paper shows how these terms can be consistently defined based on a decision-theoretic, verbal, and formal definition. Risk is conceived as an evaluation of an uncertain loss potential. The paper starts from a formal decision-theoretic definition of risk, which distinguishes between the risk situation (i.e. the risk analyst’s model of the situation in which someone perceives or assesses risk) and the risk function (i.e. the risk analyst’s model about how someone is perceiving and assessing risk). The approach allows scholars to link together different historical approaches to risk, such as the toxicological risk concept and the action-based approach to risk. The paper then elaborates how risk, vulnerability, and resilience are all linked to one another. In general, the vulnerability concept, such as the definition of vulnerability by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), goes beyond risk, as it includes an adaptive capacity. Thus vulnerability is mostly seen as a dynamic concept that refers to a certain period of time. If the vulnerability of a system is viewed only at a certain point of time, vulnerability equals risk. In contrast, if we consider dynamic risk in the sense that we include actions that may follow adverse events, risk resembles vulnerability. In this case we speak about adaptive risk management. Similar to vulnerability, resilience incorporates the capability of a system to cope with the adverse effects that a system has been exposed to. Here we distinguish between specified and general resilience. Specified resilience equals (dynamic) vulnerability as the adverse events linked to threats/hazards to which a system is exposed to are known. Robustness can be seen as an antonym to (static) vulnerability. General resilience includes coping with the unknown. In particular, the approach presented here allows us to precisely relate different types of risk, vulnerability, robustness and resilience, and considers all concepts together as part of adaptive risk management.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Recommendations for Design against Disproportionate Collapse of Structures" by Starossek 2010
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@inproceedings{ article-starossek-2010,
|
|
|
title = {Report of the Terminology and Procedures Sub-Committee (SC1): Recommendations for Design against Disproportionate Collapse of Structures},
|
|
|
booktitle = {Structures Congress 2011},
|
|
|
author = {Starossek, Uwe and Smilowitz, Robert and Waggoner, M and Rubenacker, Karl and Haberland, Marco and P Moore, Walter},
|
|
|
year = {2011},
|
|
|
month = {04},
|
|
|
pages = {2090-2103},
|
|
|
doi = {10.1061/41171(401)182},
|
|
|
URL = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/41171(401)182},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://trid.trb.org/view/1109827}
|
|
|
and ResearchGate
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {The ASCE SEI Committee on Disproportionate Collapse Standards and Guidance is developing a guidance document for design against disproportionate collapse of structures. A Terminology and Procedures Sub-Committee was created to focus on definitions of terms and to develop a conceptual framework. The Sub-Committee prepared a draft that was discussed and accepted in principle by the Committee at its meeting on 13 May 2010. The draft is published here in its latest but shortened version for rapid dissemination and discussion. The complete draft is available on request. The draft starts with a comprehensive and consistent set of definitions of relevant terms such as collapse resistance, robustness, vulnerability, exposure, direct design, indirect design, threat-specific design, non-threat-specific design, and many more, which up to now have not been consistently defined and used. These definitions are strongly cross-referenced and a hierarchical system of interrelated definitions thus emerges. On this basis, a conceptual framework of design criteria comprising design requirements, design objectives, design methods, and verification procedures is developed. This framework will serve as the outline for the Committee's design guidance document. Specific content for a number of sections and an appendix still need to be developed by dedicated Sub-Committees (SC). These tasks are clearly defined by the framework. The draft consists of recommendations and commentary. In the following, recommendations are set in normal font and commentary in italics. The section numbering of the draft is substantial to cross-referencing and thus retained. Specific content still to be developed by dedicated Sub-Committees is indicated in brackets. Numbers given in tables are intended to illustrate the possible final content of these tables and to stimulate discussion. They should be understood as placeholders for the final content to be specified by the respective Sub-Committee.}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "The Bellagio Initiative, background paper, Resilience: A Literature Review" by Martin-Breen and Anderies 2011
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@inproceedings{ article-martin-breen-2011,
|
|
|
booktitle = {Resilience: A Literature Review},
|
|
|
title = {The Bellagio Initiative, background paper, Resilience: A Literature Review},
|
|
|
author = {Martin-Breen, Patrick and Anderies, J. Marty},
|
|
|
organization = {IDS, The Resource Alliance, The Rockerfeller Foundation},
|
|
|
address = {Brighton:IDS},
|
|
|
year = {2011},
|
|
|
month = {11},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{http://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/123456789/3692}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
Resilience has, in the past four decades, been a term increasingly employed throughout a number of sciences: psychology and ecology, most prominently. Increasingly one finds it in political science, business administration, sociology, history, disaster planning, urban planning, and international development. The shared use of the term does not, however, imply unified concepts of resilience nor the theories in which it is embedded. Different uses generate different methods, sometimes different methodologies. Evidential or other empirical support can differ between domains of application, even when concepts are broadly shared. The review centres on three resilience frameworks, of increasing complexity: Engineering Resilience (or ‘Common Sense’ resilience); Systems Resilience, called Robustness in economics; and Resilience in Complex Adaptive Systems. Although each framework has historical roots in particular disciplines, the frameworks themselves can be applied to any domain: Engineering Resilience is utilised in some child development studies; Systems Resilience is often used in governance and management; and the Complex Adaptive Systems approach has been applied to economics, innovation in technology, history, and urban planning. Thus different frameworks along the spectrum offer a choice of perspective; the acceptability of trade-offs between them, and not subject matter, will ultimately determine which perspective is chosen.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience" by Holling 1996
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-holling-1996,
|
|
|
title={Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience},
|
|
|
author={Holling, Crawford Stanley},
|
|
|
journal={Engineering within Ecological Constraints},
|
|
|
publisher = {National Academy Press},
|
|
|
address = {Washington DC},
|
|
|
volume={31},
|
|
|
number={1996},
|
|
|
pages={31--43},
|
|
|
year={1996},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266149936_The_Concept_of_Antifragility_and_its_Implications_for_the_Practice_of_Risk_Analysis}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.scirp.org/(S(czeh2tfqyw2orz553k1w0r45))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1804343}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.nap.edu/read/4919/chapter/4}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {abstract not yet found}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social--ecological systems" by Walker 2004
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-walker-2004,
|
|
|
title={Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social--ecological systems},
|
|
|
author={Walker, Brian H. and Holling, Crawford S. and Carpenter, Stephen R. and Kinzig, Ann},
|
|
|
journal={Ecology and society},
|
|
|
volume={9},
|
|
|
number={2},
|
|
|
year={2004},
|
|
|
month={12},
|
|
|
publisher={The Resilience Alliance},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss2/art5}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/ES-2010-3610.pdf}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297778685_Resilience_Adaptability_and_Transformability_in_Social-Ecological_Systems}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8f28/9160976f0f830c0c74b1e4e245a90637688f.pdf}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://asu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/resilience-adaptability-and-transformability-in-social-ecological}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
The concept of resilience has evolved considerably since Holling's (1973) seminal paper. Different interpretations of what is meant by resilience, however, cause confusion. Resilience of a system needs to be considered in terms of the attributes that govern the system's dynamics. Three related attributes of social-ecological systems (SESs) determine their future trajectories: resilience, adaptability, and transformability. Resilience (the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks) has four components - latitude, resistance, precariousness, and panarchy - most readily portrayed using the metaphor of a stability landscape. Adaptability is the capacity of actors in the system to influence resilience (in a SES, essentially to manage it). There are four general ways in which this can be done, corresponding to the four aspects of resilience. Transformability is the capacity to create a fundamentally new system when ecological, economic, or social structures make the existing system untenable. The implications of this interpretation of SES dynamics for sustainability science include changing the focus from seeking optimal states and the determinants of maximum sustainable yield (the MSY paradigm), to resilience analysis, adaptive resource management, and adaptive governance.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "To Master Disaster: How SME managers can thrive and benefit from economic crises" by Henriksson 2016
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@misc{paper-henriksson-2016,
|
|
|
title={To Master Disaster: How SME managers can thrive and benefit from economic crises},
|
|
|
author={Henriksson, Victor and Spiss, Martin and van Houten, Chris},
|
|
|
year={2016},
|
|
|
month={06},
|
|
|
publisher={Linnaeus University, School of Business and Economics, Department of Marketing.},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A934567&dswid=-7618} ;
|
|
|
{URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-53185} ;
|
|
|
{OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-53185} ;
|
|
|
{DiVA, id: diva2:934567} ;
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
Economic crises become progressively more global and the frequency as well as the length by which crises occur, is increasing. Crises affect all businesses differently and operating in times of crises is arduous which makes outcomes unpredictable. But there is one certainty: the manager’s approach to handling crises will affect the company’s output. The concept of antifragility will be introduced which means to go beyond resilience; with the purpose not only to survive crises but also to gain from the disorder that is caused by it. The antifragile uses change to its advantage and grows from it. In SMEs the manager has a significant responsibility and the future value of the company mainly a consequence of their actions. The natural response to crisis is to assume a defensive or passive posture and cut down expenses to survive. Essentially leaving the company vulnerable for a longer period of economic downturn, thus making it considerably more difficult when the market rebounds. This study aims to explore the field of antifragility and examine a manager’s possibilities to move towards the creation of an antifragile SME. Analysing the areas that move the company towards antifragility and how managers can utilize these assets to profit from economic crises is a key inquiry. To fulfil this purpose, the study is accompanied by qualitative case studies of seven Swedish SMEs which operated during the economic crisis in 2008 and 2009. The empirical data was collected through semi-interviews at each of the case companies. The theoretical framework includes the theoretical key success areas, strategy, opportunities and motivation, and different theories regarding managers and antifragility. The theoretical framework concludes with the theoretical synthesis developed from the theories presented earlier in the chapter. The findings from the interviews are presented in the empirical chapter. The analysis connects the theoretical framework to the empirical data, and forms the basis for the paper conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "International Conference on Business Information Systems" by Muller 2013
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@inproceedings{paper-muller-2013,
|
|
|
booktitle={International Conference on Business Information Systems},
|
|
|
title={Resilience-a new research field in business information systems?},
|
|
|
author={M{\"u}ller, G{\"u}nter and Koslowski, Thomas G and Accorsi, Rafael},
|
|
|
pages={3--14},
|
|
|
year={2013},
|
|
|
DOI={10.1007/978-3-642-41687-3_2},
|
|
|
URL={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41687-3_2},
|
|
|
organization={Springer},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-41687-3_2}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9139e5450049db8eab6e2a1fa837af2618e3563c}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
Being responsive in cases of unplanned disruptions has been difficult for management in the past, but for IT it is even more challenging: IT Systems are developed to fulfill predefined properties, and offer a hard-wired set of exception handling functionalities. Resilience encompasses reaction on disturbances beyond the scope of known properties. An organization is resilient if its capabilities can be adapted to new requirements which have not been explictly incorporated into the existing IT design. This paper introduces the concept of resilience and its implications in the fields of business information systems.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability" by Folke 2010
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-folke-2010,
|
|
|
title={Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability},
|
|
|
author={Folke, Carl and Carpenter, Stephen R. and Walker, Brian and Scheffer, Marten and Chapin, Terry and Rockstr{\"o}m, Johan},
|
|
|
journal={Ecology and society},
|
|
|
volume={15},
|
|
|
number={4},
|
|
|
year={2010},
|
|
|
month={01},
|
|
|
publisher={The Resilience Alliance},
|
|
|
DOI={10.5751/ES-03610-150420},
|
|
|
URL={https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03610-150420},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/journals/pnw_2010_folke.pdf}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://scinapse.io/papers/2127569725}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
Resilience thinking addresses the dynamics and development of complex social-ecological systems (SES). Three aspects are central: resilience, adaptability and transformability. These aspects interrelate across multiple scales. Resilience in this context is the capacity of a SES to continually change and adapt yet remain within critical thresholds. Adaptability is part of resilience. It represents the capacity to adjust responses to changing external drivers and internal processes and thereby allow for development along the current trajectory (stability domain). Transformability is the capacity to cross thresholds into new development trajectories. Transformational change at smaller scales enables resilience at larger scales. The capacity to transform at smaller scales draws on resilience from multiple scales, making use of crises as windows of opportunity for novelty and innovation, and recombining sources of experience and knowledge to navigate social-ecological transitions. Society must seriously consider ways to foster resilience of smaller more manageable SESs that contribute to Earth System resilience and to explore options for deliberate transformation of SESs that threaten Earth System resilience.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Review of Resilience Research" by Santos 2012
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@inproceedings{ article-santos-2012,
|
|
|
booktitle = {Review of Resilience Research},
|
|
|
title={\"Why Resilience?\" A Review of Literature of Resilience and Implications for Further Educational Research.},
|
|
|
author={Santos, Ryan S. },
|
|
|
year={2012},
|
|
|
publisher={Claremont Graduate University \& San Diego State University},
|
|
|
address = {Claremont, CA},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.scirp.org/(S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkposzje))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1957059}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Resilience-1-Running-Head\%3A-Review-of-Resilience-A-Santos-Dreyer/8225bf92c023959dd344784f37d52d998885b33e}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://go.sdsu.edu/education/doc/files/01370-ResiliencyLiteratureReview\%28SDSU\%29.pdf}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://go.sdsu.edu/education/doc/files/01383-Qual_Defense_PPT-Santos.pdf}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {abstract not yet found}
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "From Resilience to the Design of Antifragility" by Passos, Coelho and Sarti 2018
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@inproceedings{ article-Passos-2018,
|
|
|
title = {From Resilience to the Design of Antifragility},
|
|
|
Booktitle = {pesaro 2018},
|
|
|
author = {Passos, Danielle Sandler dos and Coelho, Helder and Sarti, Flávia Mori},
|
|
|
year = {2018},
|
|
|
month = {04},
|
|
|
organization = {The Eighth International Conference on Performance, Safety and Robustness in Complex Systems and Applications},
|
|
|
volume={1},
|
|
|
pages = {7--11},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{http://toc.proceedings.com/39327webtoc.pdf},
|
|
|
\url{https://www.thinkmind.org/download.php?articleid=pesaro_2018_2_10_60003}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.gbes.com/blog/from-resilience-to-antifragile/}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {Resilience has been highlighted for the last few years as one of the most important mechanisms of survival and evolution of systems. However, with the complexity and exponential advance of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), volatility, uncertainty and disorder have become constant in our daily lives, creating the need for adjustments and improvements in resilience, in order to maintain its efficiency. As a consequence, various skills, such as adaptation, learning, self-organization and others, have been added to it, increasing it to antifragility. Focusing on this process of evolution, this work confronts the dissociation between resilience and antifragility, proving in the end, that antifragility is the resilience in its most advanced form.}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Analysis of the Definitions of Resilience" by Wang 2017
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-Wang2017,
|
|
|
title = {Analysis of the Definitions of Resilience},
|
|
|
author = {Wang, Zhonglin and Nistor, Marian Sorin and Pickl, Stefan Wolfgang },
|
|
|
doi = {10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.1756},
|
|
|
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.1756},
|
|
|
year = {2017},
|
|
|
month = {07},
|
|
|
publisher = {Elsevier {BV}},
|
|
|
volume = {50},
|
|
|
number = {1},
|
|
|
pages = {10649--10657},
|
|
|
journal = {{IFAC}-{PapersOnLine}},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405896317323753}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320493227_Analysis_of_the_Definitions_of_Resilience}
|
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
Several studies have proposed different definitions of resilience during the past two decades. While reviews of part of the literature were published, a comparative analysis of the extant definitions is still lacking. This article critically analyzes the current definitions of resilience and show their limits and applicability domains especially in control theoretic situations. Further contributions of this article are the conversion of several qualitative definitions into quantitative ones and the determination of the level of compliancy of the discussed definitions with desirable properties, such as monotony in the variables.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "An alternative view to assessing antifragility in an organisation: A case study in a manufacutring SME." by Kennon, Schutte and Lutters 2015
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
|
|
|
@article{ article-org-Kennon-2015,
|
|
|
title = {An alternative view to assessing antifragility in an organisation: A case study in a manufacutring SME.},
|
|
|
author = {{Kennon}, D. and {Schutte}, C.S.L. and {Lutters}, dr.ir. D. },
|
|
|
journal = {CIRP annals : manufacturing technology},
|
|
|
volume = {64},
|
|
|
pages = {177--180},
|
|
|
year = {2015},
|
|
|
month = {04},
|
|
|
DOI = {10.1016/j.cirp.2015.04.024},
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2015.04.024},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
ISSN 0007-8506
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://epdoc.utsp.utwente.nl/100574/}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276164208_An_alternative_view_to_assessing_antifragility_in_an_organisation_A_case_study_in_a_manufacturing_SME}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007850615000323?via%3Dihub}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://research.utwente.nl/en/publications/an-alternative-view-to-assessing-antifragility-in-an-organisation}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {In complex adaptive systems, antifragility designates the positive sensitivity to volatility, caused by (exceptional or ?black swan?) external stressors that intervene with the intended functionality of these systems. System Engineers can purposefully employ the concept antifragility to engender better systems. Prerequisite for this is the ability to adequately assess system changes and especially system improvements as the consequence of stressors. Albeit antifragility measurements do exist, their practicality is limited. This publication proposes a novel approach for antifragility measurement. A case study on a manufacturing SME depicts the antifragile spectrum rating of an SME to test the effects of system changes.}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science." by Turner 2003
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-turner-2003,
|
|
|
title={A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science.},
|
|
|
author={
|
|
|
Turner, Billie L. and
|
|
|
Kasperson, Roger E. and
|
|
|
Matson, Pamela A. and
|
|
|
McCarthy, James J. and
|
|
|
Corell, Robert W. and
|
|
|
Christensen, Lindsey and
|
|
|
Eckley, Noelle and
|
|
|
Kasperson, Jeanne X. and
|
|
|
Luers, Amy and
|
|
|
Martello, Marybeth L. and
|
|
|
Polsky, Colin and
|
|
|
Pulsipher, Alexander and
|
|
|
Schiller, Andrew},
|
|
|
journal={Proceedings of the national academy of sciences},
|
|
|
volume={100},
|
|
|
number={14},
|
|
|
pages={8074--8079},
|
|
|
year={2003},
|
|
|
month={07},
|
|
|
publisher={National Acad Sciences},
|
|
|
issn = {0027-8424},
|
|
|
DOI={10.1073/pnas.1231335100},
|
|
|
url={https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1231335100},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.pnas.org/content/100/14/8074.short}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.pnas.org/content/100/14/8074.full.pdf}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/10720959_A_framework_for_vulnerability_analysis_in_sustainability_science}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://asu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/a-framework-for-vulnerability-analysis-in-sustainability-science}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/84b9/4343cb53cc1421fe6e416465d0d276c33f12.pdf}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
Global environmental change and sustainability science increasingly recognize the need to address the consequences of changes taking place in the structure and function of the biosphere. These changes raise questions such as: Who and what are vulnerable to the multiple environmental changes underway, and where? Research demonstrates that vulnerability is registered not by exposure to hazards (perturbations and stresses) alone but also resides in the sensitivity and resilience of the system experiencing such hazards. This recognition requires revisions and enlargements in the basic design of vulnerability assessments, including the capacity to treat coupled human - environment systems and those linkages within and without the systems that affect their vulnerability. A vulnerability framework for the assessment of coupled human-environment systems is presented.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Stress and disorders of the stress system." by Chrousos, George P 2009
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-chrousos-2009,
|
|
|
title={Stress and disorders of the stress system.},
|
|
|
author={Chrousos, George P},
|
|
|
journal={Nature reviews endocrinology},
|
|
|
volume={5},
|
|
|
number={7},
|
|
|
pages={374--381},
|
|
|
year={2009},
|
|
|
month={06},
|
|
|
publisher={Nature Publishing Group},
|
|
|
DOI={10.1038/nrendo.2009.106},
|
|
|
URL={https://doi.org/10.1038/nrendo.2009.106},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.nature.com/articles/nrendo.2009.106}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.pnas.org/content/100/14/8074.full.pdf}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19488073}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/704866_2}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26258826_Stress_and_disorders_of_the_stress_system}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/profile/George_Chrousos/publication/26258826_Stress_and_disorders_of_the_stress_system/links/09e4150f0899bf1a02000000.pdf}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
All organisms must maintain a complex dynamic equilibrium, or homeostasis, which is constantly challenged by internal or external adverse forces termed stressors. Stress occurs when homeostasis is threatened or perceived to be so; homeostasis is re-established by various physiological and behavioral adaptive responses. Neuroendocrine hormones have major roles in the regulation of both basal homeostasis and responses to threats, and are involved in the pathogenesis of diseases characterized by dyshomeostasis or cacostasis. The stress response is mediated by the stress system, partly located in the central nervous system and partly in peripheral organs. The central, greatly interconnected effectors of this system include the hypothalamic hormones arginine vasopressin, corticotropin-releasing hormone and pro-opiomelanocortin-derived peptides, and the locus ceruleus and autonomic norepinephrine centers in the brainstem. Targets of these effectors include the executive and/or cognitive, reward and fear systems, the wake-sleep centers of the brain, the growth, reproductive and thyroid hormone axes, and the gastrointestinal, cardiorespiratory, metabolic, and immune systems. Optimal basal activity and responsiveness of the stress system is essential for a sense of well-being, successful performance of tasks, and appropriate social interactions. By contrast, excessive or inadequate basal activity and responsiveness of this system might impair development, growth and body composition, and lead to a host of behavioral and somatic pathological conditions.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Coupled and complex: Human--environment interaction in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, USA" by Bennett, David and McGinnis, David 2008
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-bennett-2008,
|
|
|
title={Coupled and complex: Human--environment interaction in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, USA},
|
|
|
author={Bennett, David and McGinnis, David},
|
|
|
journal={Geoforum},
|
|
|
volume={39},
|
|
|
number={2},
|
|
|
pages={833--845},
|
|
|
year={2008},
|
|
|
month={03},
|
|
|
publisher={Elsevier},
|
|
|
DOI={10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.05.009},
|
|
|
URL={https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.05.009},
|
|
|
ISSN = {0016-7185},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016718507000917}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.infona.pl/resource/bwmeta1.element.elsevier-16991518-7e69-3c3c-804d-c2becc9cbf54}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248434064_Coupled_and_complex_Human-environment_interaction_in_the_Greater_Yellowstone_Ecosystem_USA}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
Complexity theory has received considerable attention over the past decade from a wide variety of disciplines. Some who write on this topic suggest that complexity theory will lead to a unifying understanding of complex phenomena; others dismiss it as a passing and disruptive fad. We suggest that for the analysis of coupled natural/human systems, the truth emerges from the middle ground. As an approach focused as much on the connections among system elements as the elements themselves, we argue that complexity theory provides a useful conceptual framework for the study of coupled natural/human systems. It is, if nothing else, a framework that leads us to ask interesting questions about, for example, sustainability, resilience, threshold events, and predictability.In this paper we attempt to demystify the ongoing discussions on complexity theory by linking its evocative and overloaded terminology to real-world processes. We illustrate how a shift in focus from system elements to connections among elements can lead to meaningful insight into human–environment interactions that might otherwise be overlooked. We ground our discussion in ongoing interdisciplinary research surrounding Yellowstone National Park’s northern elk winter range; a tightly coupled natural/human system that has been the center of debate, conflict, and compromise for more than 135 years.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Antifragility analysis and measurement framework for systems of systems" by Johnson, John and Gheorghe, Adrian V 2013
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-johnson-2013,
|
|
|
title={Antifragility analysis and measurement framework for systems of systems},
|
|
|
author={Johnson, John and Gheorghe, Adrian V},
|
|
|
journal={International Journal of Disaster Risk Science},
|
|
|
volume={4},
|
|
|
number={4},
|
|
|
pages={159--168},
|
|
|
year={2013},
|
|
|
month={12},
|
|
|
publisher={Springer},
|
|
|
issn={2192-6395},
|
|
|
doi={10.1007/s13753-013-0017-7},
|
|
|
url={https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-013-0017-7},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs13753-013-0017-7.pdf}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cba954bae35ee7594e17a75cc978b9dafb714502}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
The twenty-first century is defined by the social and technical hazards we face. A hazardous situation is a condition, or event, that threatens the well-being of people, organizations, societies, environments, and property. The most extreme of the hazards are considered X-Events and are an exogenous source of extreme stress to a system. X-Events can also be the unintended outputs of a system with both positive (serendipitous) and negative (catastrophic) consequences. Systems can vary in their ability to withstand these stress events. This ability exists on a continuum of fragility that ranges from fragile (degrading with stress), to robust (unchanged by stress), to antifragile (improving with stress). The state of the art does not include a method for analyzing or measuring fragility. Given that “what we measure we will improve,” the absence of a measurement approach limits the effectiveness of governance in making our systems less fragile and more robust if not antifragile. The authors present an antifragile system simulation model, and propose a framework for analyzing and measuring antifragility based on system of systems concepts. The framework reduces a multidimensional concept of fragility into a two-dimensional continuous interval scale.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Preparing for the future: Development of an ‘antifragile’ methodology that complements scenario planning by omitting causation." by Derbyshire, James and Wright, George 2014
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-risk-wright-2014,
|
|
|
title = {Preparing for the future: Development of an ‘antifragile’ methodology that complements scenario planning by omitting causation.},
|
|
|
author = {Derbyshire, James and Wright, George },
|
|
|
journal = {Technological Forecasting and Social Change},
|
|
|
volume = {82},
|
|
|
pages = {215--225},
|
|
|
year = {2014},
|
|
|
month = {02},
|
|
|
DOI = {10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2013.07.001 },
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.07.001},
|
|
|
ISSN = {0040-1625},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/52933/}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260029387_Preparing_for_the_future_Development_of_an_'antifragile'_methodology_that_complements_scenario_planning_by_omitting_causation}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162513001534}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
This paper demonstrates that the Intuitive Logics method of scenario planning emphasises the causal unfolding of future events and that this emphasis limits its ability to aid preparation for the future, for example by giving a misleading impression as to the usefulness of ‘weak signals’ or ‘early warnings’. We argue for the benefits of an alternative method that views uncertainty as originating from indeterminism. We develop and illustrate an ‘antifragile’ approach to preparing for the future and present it as a step-by-step, non-deterministic methodology that can be used as a replacement for, or as a complement to, the causally-focused approach of scenario planning.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Evaluating organizational antifragility via fuzzy logic. The case of an iranian company producing banknotes and security paper." by Ghasemi, Ahmadreza and Alizadeh, Mitra 2017
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-org-ghasemi-2017,
|
|
|
title = {Evaluating organizational antifragility via fuzzy logic. The case of an iranian company producing banknotes and security paper.},
|
|
|
author = {Ghasemi, Ahmadreza and Alizadeh, Mitra },
|
|
|
journal = {Operations Research and Decisions},
|
|
|
volume = {1},
|
|
|
pages = {21--43},
|
|
|
year = {2017},
|
|
|
month = {02},
|
|
|
DOI = {10.5277/ord170202} ,
|
|
|
URL = {https://doi.org/10.5277/ord170202},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325385576_EVALUATING_ORGANIZATIONAL_ANTIFRAGILITY_VIA_FUZZY_LOGIC_THE_CASE_OF_AN_IRANIAN_COMPANY_PRODUCING_BANKNOTES_AND_SECURITY_PAPER}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://econpapers.repec.org/article/wutjournl/v_3a2_3ay_3a2017_3ap_3a21-43_3aid_3a1311.htm}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://ideas.repec.org/a/wut/journl/v2y2017p21-43id1311.html}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{http://orduser.pwr.wroc.pl/DownloadFile.aspx?aid=1311}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/EVALUATING_ORGANIZATIONAL_ANTIFRAGILITY_VIA_FUZZY_Ghasemi_Alizadeh/706abe9a615c552e81118774b915b15d9126b307}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
the antifragility concept has received high attention from researchers in recent years. Contrary to fragile systems that fail when exposed to stressors, antifragile systems prosper and gets better in response to unpredictability, volatility, randomness, chaos and disturbance. The antifragility implication is beyond resilience or robustness. The resilient system resists stresses and remains the same; while the antifragile system improves and gets better. Taleb discusses that antifragility is required for dealing with events that he called them as black swans or X-Events which are scarce, unpredictable, and extreme events. These events come as surprise and have major consequences. Antifragile was developed by Taleb in the socioeconomic context, not in industrial production. But authors think that this concept may have its largest practical utilization and be very useful if it is applied to industrial environments. Thus, we had focused on this concept in our work. In this paper, we are aiming to investigate the antifragility level in an organization. In order to perform this, authors used a case study on Iranian Security Paper Manufacturing Complex (TAKAB). Firstly a questionnaire was designed according to 7 antifragility analytical criteria using five-point Likert scale and devoted a triangular fuzzy number to each Linguistic term. In the next phase, the weight of each criterion was obtained using entropy technique. In the final stage, the Euclidean distance between the aggregation Fuzzy Antifragility Index (FAI) and each linguistic term used during this case study was calculated. Eventually based on results, the antifragility level of the organization assessed as “satisfactorily antifragile", due to the minimum Euclidean distance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "The Fractography and Crack Patterns of Broken Glass" by Bradt, Richard C. 2011
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@Article{ article-bradt-2011,
|
|
|
author="Bradt, Richard C.",
|
|
|
title="The Fractography and Crack Patterns of Broken Glass",
|
|
|
journal="Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention",
|
|
|
year="2011",
|
|
|
month="04",
|
|
|
day="01",
|
|
|
volume="11",
|
|
|
number="2",
|
|
|
pages="79--96",
|
|
|
issn="1864-1245",
|
|
|
doi="10.1007/s11668-011-9432-5",
|
|
|
url="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-011-9432-5",
|
|
|
abstract="The topographical features which appear on the fracture surfaces of broken glass objects and the resulting crack patterns which develop are Nature's documentation of the fracture event. They are considered after a brief discussion of glass strength. Strength is central to the fracture surface features for it determines the strain energy release rate and the dynamics of crack extension. The surface features known as the mirror, the mist, and the hackle are illustrated and addressed through the principles of fracture mechanics and associated energy criteria. Quantitative aspects of the fracture process such as the stress level at fracture for a glass object are directly related to the size of the fracture mirror. The concept of a fracture mirror constant is related to the strength. Formation of the mist and hackle surface regions are also fundamentally addressed, as is crack branching. Distinctive crack patterns that evolve during fracture, that is the traces of the cracks intersecting the glass free surfaces, are described. Dicing fragmentation of high-strength tempered glass and the long sword-like shards of low-strength annealed glass fracture are contrasted through their strain energies. Characteristic cracking patterns are reviewed for several common glass fractures including those for pressure breaks, both bottle explosions and flat glass window failures from wind pressure whose basic similarities are described. The patterns of crack branching or forking, the branching angles and the crack length prior to forking, are also discussed. Other glass crack patterns such as those from impact and thermal stress are also considered."
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "Antifragile Information Systems" by Gorgeon, Arnaud 2015
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@inproceedings{ article-se-gorgeon-2015,
|
|
|
booktitle = {Antifragile Information Systems},
|
|
|
title = {Anti-Fragile Information Systems (Completed Research Paper)},
|
|
|
author = {Gorgeon, Arnaud },
|
|
|
organization = {International Conference on Information Systems},
|
|
|
address = {Fort Worth},
|
|
|
year = {2015},
|
|
|
month = {12},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285288834_Antifragile_Information_Systems}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2015/proceedings/BreakoutIdeas/6/}
|
|
|
,
|
|
|
\url{https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Anti-Fragile-Information-Systems-Gorgeon/62159e3b5591ad850fc2aa402920352d2137d99a}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://bsahely.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/21ba7f06ee170aca94123d9d7f83a8e80466.pdf}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract={
|
|
|
As complex socio-technical systems composed of many interconnected parts, interactingin non-linear, dynamic, emergent and often unexpected ways Information Systems arefragile. In this paper we introduce the concept of antifragility as an alternative mean ofapprehending the fragility of Information Systems and a novel way of dealing with risk, uncertainty and the unknown. Antifragility is the opposite of fragility. Antifragility allows to go beyond robustness or resilience by moving away from a predictive mode of thinking and decision making to a mode that embraces the unknown and randomness and focuses on the characteristics that render systems fragile rather than trying to assess and predict the chain of events that may harm them. We propose a set of guidelines for moving from the fragile toward the antifragile, and explore, for the processes of the IS function, their applications and the questions they raise for practice and research.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### "The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world" by Kurtz, Cynthia F and Snowden, David J 2003
|
|
|
```javascript
|
|
|
@article{ article-kurtz-2003,
|
|
|
title={The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world},
|
|
|
author={Kurtz, Cynthia F and Snowden, David J},
|
|
|
journal={IBM systems journal},
|
|
|
volume={42},
|
|
|
number={3},
|
|
|
pages={462--483},
|
|
|
year={2003},
|
|
|
publisher={IBM},
|
|
|
note = {
|
|
|
Retrieved from
|
|
|
\url{https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/5386804}
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
\url{https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c9b427a98caeacb7f5ce1441df89bb1f923c34d7}
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
abstract = {
|
|
|
In this paper, we challenge the universality of three basic assumptions prevalent in organizational decision support and strategy: assumptions of order, of rational choice, and of intent. We describe the Cynefin framework, a sense-making device we have developed to help people make sense of the complexities made visible by the relaxation of these assumptions. The Cynefin framework is derived from several years of action research into the use of narrative and complexity theory in organizational knowledge exchange, decision-making, strategy, and policy-making. The framework is explained, its conceptual underpinnings are outlined, and its use in group sense-making and discourse is described. Finally, the consequences of relaxing the three basic assumptions, using the Cynefin framework as a mechanism, are considered.
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Collection of papers
|
|
|
1. Title : __Nassim Nicholas Taleb's articles on arXiv__
|
|
|
__Author__ :
|
... | ... | |