Use of management information in hospital decision-making

The research presents the scope and use of management information in health care institutions. The area has diverse international literature, so the article limit to logic of hospital operation, result of role conflict, economic and clinical factors in decision-making. In the research qualitative methodology was used for data collection: managerial interviews and in case of decision support, homogeneous focus group interviews. The top managers typically put emphasis on financial information, and examine mostly the historical data, with negligible future scopes. The head of department (physician) decide on the basis of professional and use non-financial indicators. The use of management information in decision-making has more diagnostic style, only a few managers apply interactive controlling systems, basically in the absence of strategic thinking. The author proposes to strengthen the use of controlling systems, which most important elements are the development of institutional internal communication and economic and managerial skills

Knowledge Acquisition and Structuring by Multiple Experts in a Group Support Systems Environment

This study addresses the impact of Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) on expert system development by multiple Domain Experts. Current approaches to building expert systems rely heavily on knowledge acquisition and prototyping by a Knowledge Engineer working directly with the Domain Expert. Although the complexity of knowledge domains and new organizational approaches demand the involvement of multiple experts, standard procedures limit the ability of the Knowledge Engineer to work with more than one expert at a time. Group Decision Support Systems offer a networked computerized environment for group work activities, in which multiple experts may express their ideas concurrently and anonymously through the electronic channel. GDSS systems have been widely used in other applications to support idea generation, conflict management, and the organizing, prioritizing, and synthesizing of ideas. The effects of many group process and technical factors on GDSS have been widely studied and documented. A review of the literature on expert systems, GDSS, and GDSS in relation to expert systems was conducted. Knowledge gained from this review was applied in the construction of an exploratory research model intended to provide the necessary breadth to identify factors worthy of future, more statistically-based, investigation. Domain Experts represented by college students were charged with developing and prioritizing ideas for creating a pre-prototypical expert system. The treatment group worked in a GDSS environment with a facilitator; a control group worked with a facilitator but without the assistance of GDSS. Each group then exchanged facilitators and technology to address another real-life problem. Additional groups worked with GDSS over time, addressing both problems. Data were gathered, analyzed and discussed relating to group efficiency factors, group process factors, attitudinal factors, and product quality factors. Independent Knowledge Engineers and Domain Experts evaluated the validity and verifiability of the group products. Analysis focused on the effect of GDSS in facilitating the acquisition and structuring of ideas for expert systems by multiple Domain Experts

Defining agents’ behaviour for negotiation contexts

Agents who represent participants in the group decision-making context require a certain number of individual traits in order to be successful. By using argumentation models, agents are capable to defend the interests of those who they represent, and also justify and support their ideas and actions. However, regardless of how much knowledge they might hold, it is essential to define their behaviour. In this paper (1) is presented a study about the most important models to infer different types of behaviours that can be adapted and used in this context, (2) are proposed rules that must be followed to affect positively the system when defining behaviours and (3) is proposed the adaptation of a conflict management model to the context of Group Decision Support Systems. We propose one approach that (a) intends to reflect a natural way of human behaviour in the agents, (b) provides an easier way to reach an agreement between all parties involved and (c) does not have high configuration costs to the participants. Our approach will offer a simple yet perceptible configuration tool that can be used by the participants and contribute to more intelligent communications between agents and makes possible for the participants to have a better understanding of the types of interactions experienced by the agents belonging to the system.This work is part-funded by ERDF - European Regional Development Fund through the COMPETE Programme (operational programme for competitiveness) within project FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-028980 (PTDC/EEISII/1386/2012) and by National Funds through the FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology) with the João Carneiro PhD grant with the reference SFRH/BD/89697/2012.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Incorporating stakeholders’ knowledge in group decision-making

International audienc

Designing Integrated Conflict Management Systems: Guidelines for Practitioners and Decision Makers in Organizations

A committee of the ADR (alternative dispute resolution) in the Workplace Initiative of the Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (SPIDR) prepared this document for employers, managers, labor representatives, employees, civil and human rights organizations, and others who interact with organizations. In this document we explain why organizations should consider developing integrated conflict management systems to prevent and resolve conflict, and we provide practical guidelines for designing and implementing such systems. The principles identified in this document can also be used to manage external conflict with customers, clients, and the public. Indeed, we recommend that organizations focus simultaneously on preventing and managing both internal and external conflict. SPIDR recognizes that an integrated conflict management system will work only if designed with input from users and decision makers at all levels of the organization. Each system must be tailored to fit the organization\u27s needs, circumstances, and culture. In developing these systems, experimentation is both necessary and healthy. We hope that this document will provide guidance, encourage experimentation, and contribute to the evolving understanding of how best to design and implement these systems

Team Learning: A Theoretical Integration and Review

With the increasing emphasis on work teams as the primary architecture of organizational structure, scholars have begun to focus attention on team learning, the processes that support it, and the important outcomes that depend on it. Although the literature addressing learning in teams is broad, it is also messy and fraught with conceptual confusion. This chapter presents a theoretical integration and review. The goal is to organize theory and research on team learning, identify actionable frameworks and findings, and emphasize promising targets for future research. We emphasize three theoretical foci in our examination of team learning, treating it as multilevel (individual and team, not individual or team), dynamic (iterative and progressive; a process not an outcome), and emergent (outcomes of team learning can manifest in different ways over time). The integrative theoretical heuristic distinguishes team learning process theories, supporting emergent states, team knowledge representations, and respective influences on team performance and effectiveness. Promising directions for theory development and research are discussed

Participation Versus Procedures in Non-Union Dispute Resolution

This study examines the resolution of conflict in non-union workplaces. Employee participation in workplace decision making and organizational dispute resolution procedures are two factors hypothesized to influence the outcomes of conflicts in the non-union workplace. The adoption of high involvement work systems is found to produce an organizational context in which both triggering events for conflict, such as disciplinary and dismissal decisions, and dispute resolution activities, such as grievance filing and appeals, are reduced in frequency. Dispute resolution procedures have mixed impacts. Greater due process protections in dispute resolution procedures in non-union workplaces are associated with increased grievance filing and higher appeal rates but do not have significant impacts on the precursors to conflict. This study provides evidence of substantial organizational level variation in non-union conflict resolution, suggesting the importance of expanding the predominant individual and group-level focus of current conflict management research to include more organizational-level factors. It also supports the importance to non-union employee representation of direct participation strategies involving employee involvement in the workplace, in addition to procedures that provide for off-line representation

Supporting Coordinators of Large Units An Integrated, Team Approach - The OK Caral Model – From Peru’s Sandy Caral To Academe’s Stony Walls - Collaboration for Professional Development is OK!

In 2001, the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) Teaching and Learning Committee approved funding for a professional development program for Coordinators of Large Units (CLU) for 2002. This program is jointly facilitated by the Human Resources Department (HR) and Teaching and Learning Support Services (TALSS). The program is unique in both its focus and the way it has harnessed the distinct development responsibilities of two departments – HR for development in management and leadership and TALSS for development in teaching and learning. The CLU program facilitation team comprises two staff members from each Department along with joint administrative support. The focus of the CLU program is twofold: a) to support CLUs as a staff cohort with unique and specific needs and b) to acknowledge and make visible the systemic issues associated with teaching large groups of students