Adding Value to Bank Branch Performance Evaluation Using Cognitive Maps and MCDA: A Case Study

The performance evaluation of bank branches is a difficult task. One of the main reasons for this difficulty is the complexity inherent in the variety of aspects to be considered in the evaluation, and the multiple and conflicting interests of the different stakeholders involved. In this paper we aim to show how cognitive mapping and the MACBETH approach can be used to support the evaluation of bank branches through the development of multidimensional performance evaluation systems, and to deal explicitly with the trade-offs between the different dimensions of performance and interests of different stakeholders. A case study is discussed where these techniques are used in a constructive way, making the learning activity easier and introducing transparency in the decision making process. The strengths and weaknesses of the integrated use of these two operational research techniques in this context are also discussed.

Multiple criteria decision analysis in the context of health technology assessment: a simulation exercise on metastatic colorectal cancer with multiple stakeholders in the English setting

Background: Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has appeared as a methodology to address limitations of economic evaluation in health technology assessment (HTA), however there are limited empirical evidence from real world applications. The aim of this study is to test in practice a recently developed MCDA methodological framework known as Advance Value Framework (AVF) through a proof-of-concept case study engaging multiple stakeholders. Methods: A multi-attribute value theory methodological process was adopted involving problem structuring, model building, model assessment and model appraisal phases. A facilitated decision analysis modelling approach was used as part of a decision conference with thirteen participants. An expanded scope of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) remit acted as the study setting with the use of supplementary value concerns. Second-line biological treatments were evaluated for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients having received prior chemotherapy, including cetuximab monotherapy, panitumumab monotherapy and aflibercept in combination with FOLFIRI chemotherapy. Initially 18 criteria attributes were considered spanning four value domains relating to therapeutic impact, safety profile, innovation level and socioeconomic impact. Results: Nine criteria attributes were finally included. Cetuximab scored the highest overall weighted preference value score of 45.7 out of 100, followed by panitumumab with 42.3, and aflibercept plus FOLFIRI with 14.4. The relative weights of the two most important criteria (overall survival and Grade 4 adverse events) added up to more than the relative weight of all other criteria together (52.1%). Main methodological limitation was the lack of comparative clinical effects across treatments and challenges included the selection of “lower” and “higher” reference levels on criteria attributes, eliciting preferences across attributes where participants had less experience, and ensuring that all attributes possess the right decision theory properties. Conclusions: This first application of AVF produced transparent rankings for three mCRC treatments based on their value, by assessing an explicit set of evaluation criteria while allowing for the elicitation and construction of participants’ value preferences and their trade-offs. It proved it can aid the evaluation process and value communication of the alternative treatments for the group participants. Further research is needed to optimise its use as part of policy-making

Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps

Idiographic causal maps are extensively employed in Operational Research to support problem structuring and complex decision making processes. They model means-end or causal discourses as a network of concepts connected by links denoting influence, thus enabling the representation of chains of arguments made by decision-makers. There have been proposals to employ such structures to support the structuring of multicriteria evaluation models, within an additive value measurement framework. However, a drawback of this multi-methodological modelling is the loss of richness of interactions along the means-end chains when evaluating options. This has led to the development of methods that make use of the structure of the map itself to evaluate options, such as the Reasoning Maps method, which employs ordinal scales and ordinal operators for such evaluation. However, despite their potential, Reasoning Maps cannot model explicitly value interactions nor perform a quantitative ranking of options, limiting their applicability and usefulness. In this article we propose extending the Reasoning Maps approach through a multilinear evaluation model structure, built with the MACBETH multicriteria method. The model explicitly captures the value interactions between concepts along the map and employs the MACBETH protocol of questioning to assess the strength of influence for each means-end link. The feasibility of the proposed approach to evaluate options and to deal with multicriteria interactions is tested in a real-world application to support the construction of a population health index

Desirability–doability group judgment framework for the collaborative multicriteria evaluation of public policies

Desirability–doability framework (2 × D) is a novel framework for the collaborative evaluation of public policies. Fundamental objectives and performance indicators are agreed upon in workshops, policies are characterised, and barriers to implementation identified. MACBETH interactive protocols are then applied in decision conferences to elicit qualitative judgments about the desirability of policies, within and across objectives; and about their doability under the expected graveness of barriers on contrasting scenarios. Elicited judgments allow, respectively, to construct a shared multicriteria model measuring the overall desirability of policies; and, to measure their doability. Desirability–doability graphs enable visual interactive classification of policies, with sensitivity/robustness analyses of uncertainties. 2 × D was successfully tested in a real-world urban-health policymaking case to evaluate spatial policies. The main novelty of 2 × D is that it bridges the socio-technical gap, present in OR, between the support required by a complex social decision-making process, and that usually offered by analytic techniques – while keeping modeling theoretically sound and simple

Managing enterprises and ERP systems:a contingency model for the enterprization of operations

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems development and emerging practices in the management of enterprises (i.e. parts of companies working with parts of other companies to deliver a complex product and/or service) and identify any apparent correlations. Suitable a priori contingency frameworks are then used and extended to explain apparent correlations. Discussion is given to provide guidance for researchers and practitioners to deliver better strategic, structural and operational competitive advantage through this approach; coined here as the "enterprization of operations". Design/methodology/approach: Theoretical induction uses a new empirical longitudinal case study from Zoomlion (a Chinese manufacturing company) built using an adapted form of template analysis to produce a new contingency framework. Findings: Three main types of enterprises and the three main types of ERP systems are defined and correlations between them are explained. Two relevant a priori frameworks are used to induct a new contingency model to support the enterprization of operations; known as the dynamic enterprise reference grid for ERP (DERG-ERP). Research limitations/implications: The findings are based on one longitudinal case study. Further case studies are currently being conducted in the UK and China. Practical implications: The new contingency model, the DERG-ERP, serves as a guide for ERP vendors, information systems management and operations managers hoping to grow and sustain their competitive advantage with respect to effective enterprise strategy, enterprise structure and ERP systems. Originality/value: This research explains how ERP systems and the effective management of enterprises should develop in order to sustain competitive advantage with respect to enterprise strategy, enterprise structure and ERP systems use

A new parsimonious AHP methodology: assigning priorities to many objects by comparing pairwise few reference objects

We propose a development of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) permitting to use the methodology also for decision problems with a very large number of alternatives and several criteria. While the ap- plication of the original AHP method involves many pairwise comparisons between considered objects, that can be alternatives with respect to considered criteria or criteria between them, our parsimonious proposal is composed of five steps: (i) direct evaluation of the objects at hand; (ii) selection of some reference objects; (iii) application of the original AHP method to the reference objects; (iv) check of the consistency of the pairwise comparisons of AHP and the compatibility between the rating and the prior- itization with a subsequent discussion with the decision maker who can modify the rating or pairwise comparisons of reference objects; (v) revision of the direct evaluation on the basis of the prioritization supplied by AHP on reference objects. Our approach permits to avoid the distortion of comparing more relevant objects (reference points) with less relevant objects. Moreover, our AHP approach avoids rank reversal problems, that is, changes of the order in the prioritizations due to adding or removing one or more objects from the set of considered objects. The new proposal has been tested and experimentally validated