Structuring the decision process : an evaluation of methods in the structuring the decision process

This chapter examines the effectiveness of methods that are designed to provide structure and support to decision making. Those that are primarily aimed at individual decision makers are examined first and then attention is turned to groups. In each case weaknesses of unaided decision making are identified and how successful the application of formal methods is likely to be in mitigating these weaknesses is assessed

What is Community Operational Research?

Community Operational Research (Community OR) has been an explicit sub-domain of OR for more than 30 years. In this paper, we tackle the controversial issue of how it can be differentiated from other forms of OR. While it has been persuasively argued that Community OR cannot be defined by its clients, practitioners or methods, we argue that the common concern of all Community OR practice is the meaningful engagement of communities, whatever form that may take – and the legitimacy of different forms of engagement may be open to debate. We then move on to discuss four other controversies that have implications for the future development of Community OR and its relationship with its parent discipline: the desire for Community OR to be more explicitly political; claims that it should be grounded in the theory, methodology and practice of systems thinking; the similarities and differences between the UK and US traditions; and the extent to which Community OR offers an enhanced understanding of practice that could be useful to OR more generally. Our positions on these controversies all follow from our identification of ‘meaningful engagement’ as a central feature of Community OR

Structuring Decisions Under Deep Uncertainty

Innovative research on decision making under ‘deep uncertainty’ is underway in applied fields such as engineering and operational research, largely outside the view of normative theorists grounded in decision theory. Applied methods and tools for decision support under deep uncertainty go beyond standard decision theory in the attention that they give to the structuring of decisions. Decision structuring is an important part of a broader philosophy of managing uncertainty in decision making, and normative decision theorists can both learn from, and contribute to, the growing deep uncertainty decision support literature

Understanding and profiling user requirements to support the conceptual design of an integrated land monitoring system

Acquiring and organizing knowledge and information elements can be essential not only to understand, but also to eliminate, reduce and control complexity and uncertainty. An integration of tools from different disciplines could systematically help in the construction of an agreed framework for problem formulation, above all when the situation is "new". An application was de-veloped in relation to an industrial project, in order to propose profiles of the potential users of an innovative system and of their requirements, and to for-mally develop models that can orient analysis, decision and action. Some ele-ments and results of this integrated application of "soft" and "hard" decision aid tools are here proposed as steps of an organizational learning cycle, which is a basic element of each innovation proces

A problem structuring method for ecosystem-based management : the DPSIR modelling process

The purpose of this paper is to learn from Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) theory to inform the development of Problem Structuring Methods (PSMs) both in general and in the specific context of marine management. The focus on marine management is important because it is concerned with a CAS (formed through the interconnection between natural systems, designed systems and social systems) which exemplifies their particularly ‘wicked' nature. Recognition of this compels us to take seriously the need to develop tools for knowledge elicitation and structuring which meet the demands of CAS. In marine management, chief among those tools is the DPSIR (Drivers - Pressures - State Changes - Impacts - Responses) model and, although widely applied, the extent to which it is appropriate for dealing with the demands of a CAS is questionable. Such questioning is particularly pertinent in the context of the marine environment where there is a need to not only recognise a broad range of stakeholders (a question of boundary critique) but also to manage competing knowledge (economic, local and scientific) and value claims. Hence this paper emphasises how a CAS perspective might add impetus to the development of a critical perspective on DPSIR and PSM theory and practice to promote a more systemic view of decision-making and policy development

Eco-innovative Method to Improve the Distribution Phase of Product

The integration of the environmental dimension is crucial in industrial activity. Designers should integrate the new environmental constraints to adapt their approaches and methodologies in the framework of eco-innovation of industrial products and consumer goods. This paper proposes a new method integrating ecological aspects into the innovation process composed of three main stages: an analysis and structuring of the product, the formalization of the problem and the resolution phase. According to the structuring and the design objectives, actions can be selected and allow to guide the design to the most relevant modification to perform on the product. An illustration of the approach is applied on the optimization of the environmental impacts related to the logistical aspects

A systematic review of protocol studies on conceptual design cognition: design as search and exploration

This paper reports findings from the first systematic review of protocol studies focusing specifically on conceptual design cognition, aiming to answer the following research question: What is our current understanding of the cognitive processes involved in conceptual design tasks carried out by individual designers? We reviewed 47 studies on architectural design, engineering design and product design engineering. This paper reports 24 cognitive processes investigated in a subset of 33 studies aligning with two viewpoints on the nature of designing: (V1) design as search (10 processes, 41.7%); and (V2) design as exploration (14 processes, 58.3%). Studies on search focused on solution search and problem structuring, involving: long-term memory retrieval; working memory; operators and reasoning processes. Studies on exploration investigated: co-evolutionary design; visual reasoning; cognitive actions; and unexpected discovery and situated requirements invention. Overall, considerable conceptual and terminological differences were observed among the studies. Nonetheless, a common focus on memory, semantic, associative, visual perceptual and mental imagery processes was observed to an extent. We suggest three challenges for future research to advance the field: (i) developing general models/theories; (ii) testing protocol study findings using objective methods conducive to larger samples and (iii) developing a shared ontology of cognitive processes in design