 The task is simple, the tools are clear, or are they? Selecting the best tool for the job is not always easy. This also applies to actor models. There are many models to choose from. So, how do you decide? A conceptual framework can help. In this clip, I'll explain how. Your task is to get a better understanding of your actor environment. So, what is there to know about actors? Many things. Better yet, what is essential or fundamental to explain strategic actor interactions? Well, let's start with two fundamental assumptions. The first assumption is that of rationality. We assume reasonable actors who choose their actions with certain objectives in mind. The objective might be as simple as hanging a painting on a wall, or it might be something more complicated. Let me be clear here. That we assume rationality does not mean that we assume actors who know everything. They may be misinformed, confused, or see only a part of the picture. We only assume that they do have certain objectives, interests, or values that help to explain their actions. The second assumption is that of resource dependence. We assume that actors depend on resources controlled by others. Resource dependence can take various forms and gradations, but the idea is simple. Someone wants to hang a painting to the wall and someone else has the tools required for the job. Based on these two assumptions, we can try to sketch actor behavior. Let's have a look at the core elements needed for making such a sketch. Actors interact in a certain setting and in a certain network. We call this a decision arena. This can be a neighborhood, a management team, or a professional platform. The arena determines who is involved and how they interact. This means that every arena consists of actors and the rules that guide their relations. Relations and rules can be formal as well as informal. Formal rules are often written down and officially approved. Informal rules, for instance, tell you what is appropriate when talking to your neighbors or when you are participating in a different setting of a management meeting. Within an arena, three basic concepts explain the actions of a strategic actor. Values tell us what matters to a particular actor. You might value a pleasant environment and therefore your objective might be to hang something nice on the wall. It's not a very urgent desire, but it would be nice at some time in the future. Resources tell us what means actors have to influence the world around them. You don't have a nice painting yet to put on your wall, but you have money to buy one. And you're not in a hurry anyway, so you also have time. Third, perceptions tell us how actors understand their situations. How do they think the world works? What do they know about the state that the world is in? Let's assume that your best friend is planning to bring you a beautiful painting tomorrow. He didn't tell you because it's a surprise. And precisely today, your neighbor is driving you crazy by constantly hammering nails into the wall. You lose your temper and get into a dispute with your neighbor, swearing at her about her stupid hammer. If you would know that you would need that very same hammer the next day, your actions would probably be different. Together, these concepts provide a framework for actor modeling. Different actor models focus on different parts of this framework. Comparative cognitive mapping helps to analyze perceptions. Social network analysis helps to analyze the relations among actors. Game theory models help to analyze the resources of different actors. So we have looked at the conceptual framework for actor modeling because this helps us to understand why we are using a particular type of actor model. There are two fundamental assumptions and different basic concepts at network level and at actor level. We now have a sound basis for the use and selection of actor models. But of course there is more to it than this. A case illustration of different models will help to get more insight.