Decision conferencing

Decision conferencing is a common approach in decision analysis. It is a socio-technical process to engage key players in solving an issue of concern by (1) developing a shared understanding of the issue, (2) creating a sense of common purpose, and (3) generating a commitment to the way forward. It consists in a series of working meetings, called 'decision conferences'. During a decision conference an impartial facilitator helps participants in developing a formal model of the problem on-the-go.[1][2][3]

History

The idea of decision conferencing is attributed to Cameron Peterson and his colleagues at the Decision & Design Inc. in the late 1970s, which was then developed by the Decision Analysis Unit of the London School of Economics and Political Science led by Lawrence D. Phillips.[4]

Methodology

Socio-technical approaches derive from the seminal work of Eric Trist and Fred Emery, who studied the interaction between people and technology in the work environment.

The technical element of decision conferencing typically consists in the development of a multiple criteria decision analysis model to represent the multiplicity of conflicting objectives involved in a decision.[5]

The social aspect of decision conferencing draws from the literature on group decision processes. Some of this research shows that groups rarely outperform their most knowledgeable members, unless the interaction is mediated by impartial facilitation, decision modelling and information technology.[6]

Some authors argue that the key process taking place in decision conferencing is the behavioral aggregation of expert judgments.[7]

Other authors embed decision conferencing in the larger family of 'facilitated decision modelling' approaches originated in operations research.[8]

Notable applications

Some notable applications of decision conferencing are:

See also

References
  1. Edwards, Ward; Miles, Ralph F.; von Winterfeldt, Detlof (2007). Advances in Decision Analysis. From Foundations to Applications. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 375–399. ISBN 978-0-521-68230-5.
  2. Phillips, Lawrence D. (2006). "Decision Conferencing" (PDF). London School of Economics and Political Science. Retrieved 6 July 2016.
  3. Phillips, Lawrence D.; Bana e Costa, Carlos A. (2007-05-17). "Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing" (PDF). Annals of Operations Research. 154 (1): 51–68. doi:10.1007/s10479-007-0183-3.
  4. "Decision conferencing". www.lawrencephillips.net. Archived from the original on 2014-12-28. Retrieved 2016-07-06.
  5. Drugs, Committee on Ethical and Scientific Issues in Studying the Safety of Approved; Practice, Board on Population Health and Public Health; Medicine, Institute of (2012-05-01). Decision Conferencing and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. National Academies Press (US).
  6. Reagan-Cirincione, Patricia (1994-05-01). "Improving the Accuracy of Group Judgment: A Process Intervention Combining Group Facilitation, Social Judgment Analysis, and Information Technology". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 58 (2): 246–270. doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1036.
  7. Reagan-Cirincione, Patricia; Rohrbaugh, John (1992-01-01). Wright, George; Bolger, Fergus (eds.). Decision Conferencing A Unique Approach to the Behavioral Aggregation of Expert Judgment. Springer US. pp. 181–201. doi:10.1007/978-0-585-34290-0_9. ISBN 9780306438622.
  8. Franco, Luis A.; Montibeller, Gilberto; Cochran, James J.; Cox, Louis A.; Keskinocak, Pinar; Kharoufeh, Jeffrey P.; Smith, J. Cole (2010-01-01). "On-The-Spot" Modeling And Analysis: The Facilitated Modeling Approach. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. doi:10.1002/9780470400531.eorms0975. ISBN 9780470400531.
  9. CoRWM (2006). "Recommendation to Government" (PDF). Retrieved 6 July 2016.
  10. Airoldi, Mara; Morton, Alec; Smith, Jenifer A. E.; Bevan, Gwyn (2014-11-01). "STAR--people-powered prioritization: a 21st-century solution to allocation headaches" (PDF). Medical Decision Making. 34 (8): 965–975. doi:10.1177/0272989X14546376. ISSN 1552-681X. PMID 25118084.
  11. Airoldi, Mara (2013-12-01). "Disinvestments in practice: overcoming resistance to change through a sociotechnical approach with local stakeholders". Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law. 38 (6): 1149–1171. doi:10.1215/03616878-2373175. ISSN 1527-1927. PMID 23974471.
  12. Bana e Costa, Carlos A.; Lourenço, João Carlos; Duarte Oliveira, Mónica; Bana e Costa, João C. (2013-01-12). "A socio-technical approach for group decision support in public strategic planning: The Pernambuco PPA case". Group Decision and Negotiation. 23 (1): 5–29. doi:10.1007/s10726-012-9326-2.
  13. Bana e Costa, Carlos A.; Fernances, Tânia G.; Correia, Paulo V. D. (2006-07-01). "Prioritisation of public investments in social infrastructures using multicriteria value analysis and decision conferencing: a case study" (PDF). International Transactions in Operational Research. 13 (4): 279–297. doi:10.1111/j.1475-3995.2006.00549.x.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.