Decision‐Making Fairness and Consensus Building in Multisector Community Health Alliances: A Mixed‐Methods Analysis

Given their inherently diverse composition and potentially competing interests, a foundational activity of community health alliances is establishing consensus on the vision and strategies for achieving its goals. Using an organizational justice framework, we examined whether member perceptions of fairness in alliances' decision‐making processes are associated with the perceived level of consensus among members regarding the alliance vision and strategies. We used a mixed‐methods design to examine the relationship between perceptions of fairness and consensus within fourteen multisector community health alliances. Quantitative analysis found the perceived level of consensus to be positively associated with decision‐making transparency (procedural fairness), inclusiveness (procedural fairness), and benefits relative to costs (distributive fairness). Qualitative analysis indicated that the consensus‐building process is facilitated by using formal decision‐making frameworks and engaging alliance members in decision‐making processes early. Alliance leaders may be more successful at building consensus when they recognize the need to appeal to a member's sense of procedural and distributive fairness, and, perhaps equally important, recognize when one rather than the other is called for and draw upon decision‐making processes that most clearly evoke that sense of fairness. Our findings reinforce the importance of fairness in building and sustaining capacity for improving community health.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/102197/1/21086_ftp.pd

TOPOLOGY-AWARE APPROACH FOR THE EMERGENCE OF SOCIAL NORMS IN MULTIAGENT SYSTEMS

Social norms facilitate agent coordination and conflict resolution without explicit communication. Norms generally involve restrictions on a set of actions or behaviors of agents to a particular strategy and can significantly reduce the cost of coordination. There has been recent progress in multiagent systems (MAS) research to develop a deep understanding of the social norm formation process. This includes developing mechanisms to create social norms in an effective and efficient manner. The hypoth- esis of this dissertation is that equipping agents in networked MAS with “network thinking” capabilities and using this contextual knowledge to form social norms in an effective and efficient manner improves the performance of the MAS. This disser- tation investigates the social norm emergence problem in conventional norms (where there is no conflict between individual and collective interests) and essential norms (where agents need to explicitly cooperate to achieve socially-efficient behavior) from a game-theoretic perspective. First, a comprehensive investigation of the social norm formation problem is performed in various types of networked MAS with an emphasis on the effect of the topological structures on the process. Based on the insights gained from these network-theoretic investigations, novel topology-aware decentralized mech- anisms are developed that facilitate the emergence of social norms suitable for various environments. It addresses the convention emergence problem in both small and large conventional norm spaces and equip agents to predict the topological structure to use the suitable convention mechanisms. It addresses the cooperation emergence prob- lem in the essential norm space by harnessing agent commitments and altruism where appropriate. Extensive simulation based experimentation has been conducted on dif- ferent network topologies by varying the topological features and agent interaction models. Comparisons with state-of-the-art norm formation techniques show that pro- posed mechanisms facilitate significant improvement in performance in a variety of networks

Computational intelligence approaches to robotics, automation, and control [Volume guest editors]

No abstract available

Leading with political astuteness: A study of public managers in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom

Combining quantitative survey data from over 1000 middle and senior public managers, as well as qualitative data from 42 in-depth interviews, the study sheds light on how managers understand politics in their work; how they rate their own and their colleagues’ political skills; how they use their political skills; and how these skills were developed. The report also sets forth recommendations to improve the development of managers’ political astuteness at the level of the individual, the organisation, and the professional body/training provider

Different paths to consensus? The impact of need for closure on model-supported group conflict management

Empirical evidence on how cognitive factors impact the effectiveness of model-supported group decision making is lacking. This study reports on an experiment on the effects of need for closure, defined as a desire for definite knowledge on some issue and the eschewal of ambiguity. The study was conducted with over 40 postgraduate student groups. A quantitative analysis shows that compared to groups low in need for closure, groups high in need for closure experienced less conflict when using Value-Focused Thinking to make a budget allocation decision. Furthermore, low need for closure groups used the model to surface conflict and engaged in open discussions to come to an agreement. By contrast, high need for closure groups suppressed conflict and used the model to put boundaries on the discussion. Interestingly, both groups achieve similar levels of consensus, and high need for closure groups are more satisfied than low need for closure groups. A qualitative analysis of a subset of groups reveals that in high need for closure groups only a few participants control the model building process, and final decisions are not based on the model but on simpler tools. The findings highlight the need to account for the effects of cognitive factors when designing and deploying model-based support for practical interventions

Two stage feedback mechanism with different power structures for consensus in large-scale group decision-making

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. The Publisher's final version can be found by following the DOI link.This paper investigates a two stage consensus feedback mechanism that considers different power structures in large scale group decision making (LSGDM) environments. A Louvain algorithm type is used to detect subgroups in LSGDM by trust relationship. The concepts of internal subgroups and external subgroup consensus levels are defined, and an approach to identify the inconsistent individual/subgroup is developed to avoid the issue of pseudoconsensus. Combined with the background of the companys shareholder power management regulations, three power structures are constructed: absolute power, relative power and democratic power. A two stage feedback mechanism is investigated with minimum adjustments to achieve the optimal power allocation under each power structure. This mechanism supports individuals reach consensus both inside and outside their subgroup. An illustrative example and discussions to verify the validity of the proposed method are reported

Diversity and Social Network Structure in Collective Decision Making: Evolutionary Perspectives with Agent-Based Simulations

Collective, especially group-based, managerial decision making is crucial in organizations. Using an evolutionary theoretic approach to collective decision making, agent-based simulations were conducted to investigate how human collective decision making would be affected by the agents' diversity in problem understanding and/or behavior in discussion, as well as by their social network structure. Simulation results indicated that groups with consistent problem understanding tended to produce higher utility values of ideas and displayed better decision convergence, but only if there was no group-level bias in collective problem understanding. Simulation results also indicated the importance of balance between selection-oriented (i.e., exploitative) and variation-oriented (i.e., explorative) behaviors in discussion to achieve quality final decisions. Expanding the group size and introducing non-trivial social network structure generally improved the quality of ideas at the cost of decision convergence. Simulations with different social network topologies revealed collective decision making on small-world networks with high local clustering tended to achieve highest decision quality more often than on random or scale-free networks. Implications of this evolutionary theory and simulation approach for future managerial research on collective, group, and multi-level decision making are discussed.Comment: 27 pages, 5 figures, 2 tables; accepted for publication in Complexit

Human Dimensions of the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries: An Overview of Context, Concepts, Tools and Methods

This document aims to provide a better understanding of the role of the economic, institutional and sociocultural components within the ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) process and to examine some potential methods and approaches that may facilitate the adoption of EAF management. It explores both the human context for the ecosystem approach to fisheries and the human dimensions involved in implementing the EAF. For the former, the report provides background material essential to understand prior to embarking on EAF initiatives, including an understanding of key concepts and issues, of the valuation of aquatic ecosystems socially, culturally and economically, and of the many policy, legal, institutional, social and economic considerations relevant to the EAF. With respect to facilitating EAF implementation, the report deals with a series of specific aspects: (1) determining the boundaries, scale and scope of the EAF; (2) assessing the various benefits and costs involved, seen from social, economic, ecological and management perspectives; (3) utilizing appropriate decision-making tools in EAF; (4) creating and/or adopting internal incentives and institutional arrangements to promote, facilitate and fund the adoption of EAF management; and (5) finding suitable external (non-fisheries) approaches for financing EAF implementation

Argumentation dialogues in web-based GDSS: an approach using machine learning techniques

Tese de doutoramento em InformaticsA tomada de decisão está presente no dia a dia de qualquer pessoa, mesmo que muitas vezes ela não tenha consciência disso. As decisões podem estar relacionadas com problemas quotidianos, ou podem estar relacionadas com questões mais complexas, como é o caso das questões organizacionais. Normalmente, no contexto organizacional, as decisões são tomadas em grupo. Os Sistemas de Apoio à Decisão em Grupo têm sido estudados ao longo das últimas décadas com o objetivo de melhorar o apoio prestado aos decisores nas mais diversas situações e/ou problemas a resolver. Existem duas abordagens principais à implementação de Sistemas de Apoio à Decisão em Grupo: a abordagem clássica, baseada na agregação matemática das preferências dos diferentes elementos do grupo e as abordagens baseadas na negociação automática (e.g. Teoria dos Jogos, Argumentação, entre outras). Os atuais Sistemas de Apoio à Decisão em Grupo baseados em argumentação podem gerar uma enorme quantidade de dados. O objetivo deste trabalho de investigação é estudar e desenvolver modelos utilizando técnicas de aprendizagem automática para extrair conhecimento dos diálogos argumentativos realizados pelos decisores, mais concretamente, pretende-se criar modelos para analisar, classificar e processar esses dados, potencializando a geração de novo conhecimento que será utilizado tanto por agentes inteligentes, como por decisiores reais. Promovendo desta forma a obtenção de consenso entre os membros do grupo. Com base no estudo da literatura e nos desafios em aberto neste domínio, formulou-se a seguinte hipótese de investigação - É possível usar técnicas de aprendizagem automática para apoiar diálogos argumentativos em Sistemas de Apoio à Decisão em Grupo baseados na web. No âmbito dos trabalhos desenvolvidos, foram aplicados algoritmos de classificação supervisionados a um conjunto de dados contendo argumentos extraídos de debates online, criando um classificador de frases argumentativas que pode classificar automaticamente (A favor/Contra) frases argumentativas trocadas no contexto da tomada de decisão. Foi desenvolvido um modelo de clustering dinâmico para organizar as conversas com base nos argumentos utilizados. Além disso, foi proposto um Sistema de Apoio à Decisão em Grupo baseado na web que possibilita apoiar grupos de decisores independentemente de sua localização geográfica. O sistema permite a criação de problemas multicritério e a configuração das preferências, intenções e interesses de cada decisor. Este sistema de apoio à decisão baseado na web inclui os dashboards de relatórios inteligentes que são gerados através dos resultados dos trabalhos alcançados pelos modelos anteriores já referidos. A concretização de cada um dos objetivos permitiu validar as questões de investigação identificadas e assim responder positivamente à hipótese definida.Decision-making is present in anyone’s daily life, even if they are often unaware of it. Decisions can be related to everyday problems, or they can be related to more complex issues, such as organizational issues. Normally, in the organizational context, decisions are made in groups. Group Decision Support Systems have been studied over the past decades with the aim of improving the support provided to decision-makers in the most diverse situations and/or problems to be solved. There are two main approaches to implementing Group Decision Support Systems: the classical approach, based on the mathematical aggregation of the preferences of the different elements of the group, and the approaches based on automatic negotiation (e.g. Game Theory, Argumentation, among others). Current argumentation-based Group Decision Support Systems can generate an enormous amount of data. The objective of this research work is to study and develop models using automatic learning techniques to extract knowledge from argumentative dialogues carried out by decision-makers, more specifically, it is intended to create models to analyze, classify and process these data, enhancing the generation of new knowledge that will be used both by intelligent agents and by real decision-makers. Promoting in this way the achievement of consensus among the members of the group. Based on the literature study and the open challenges in this domain, the following research hypothesis was formulated - It is possible to use machine learning techniques to support argumentative dialogues in web-based Group Decision Support Systems. As part of the work developed, supervised classification algorithms were applied to a data set containing arguments extracted from online debates, creating an argumentative sentence classifier that can automatically classify (For/Against) argumentative sentences exchanged in the context of decision-making. A dynamic clustering model was developed to organize conversations based on the arguments used. In addition, a web-based Group Decision Support System was proposed that makes it possible to support groups of decision-makers regardless of their geographic location. The system allows the creation of multicriteria problems and the configuration of preferences, intentions, and interests of each decision-maker. This web-based decision support system includes dashboards of intelligent reports that are generated through the results of the work achieved by the previous models already mentioned. The achievement of each objective allowed validation of the identified research questions and thus responded positively to the defined hypothesis.I also thank to Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, for the Ph.D. grant funding with the reference: SFRH/BD/137150/2018