IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v317y2024i1p205-218.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Configuring systems to be viable in a crisis: The role of intuitive decision-making

Author

Listed:
  • Fattoum, Ayham
  • Chari, Simos
  • Shaw, Duncan

Abstract

Decision-making in complex systems becomes even more challenging when the environment creates volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous conditions that disrupt operations. In these settings, the viable system model (VSM) advocates that delegated autonomy, appropriately calibrated, can help decision-makers deal with disruptions quickly to preserve system viability and performance. However, the delegated authority to act also requires the confidence and knowledge to make effective decisions and, in this vein, we explore the role of intuition as an enabler of autonomy in emergency response systems. Intuition allows decision-makers who confront a novel situation to translate their experience, knowledge, and protocols in creative ways – innovations permitted by their delegated authority. This study contributes to VSM literature by a) demonstrating how VSM's structure and complexity management principles can support the analysis of viability in multi-agency emergency systems and b) using VSM to design a systems model to explain the role of autonomy and intuition in supporting decision-making and complexity management in viable systems. Methodologically, the study uses a multi-stage discovery-oriented approach (DOA) to develop theory, with each stage combining literature, data analysis, and model/theory development and identifying further questions to inform the subsequent stage. Through the DOA, we synthesise literature (e.g. on VSM, complexity management) with seven months of field-based insights (from interviews, workshops, and observation of a live disaster exercise) to develop VSM models. This research makes two contributions to soft operational research (OR) literature: taking a black-box approach to theory development in soft OR to uncover the role of autonomy and intuition in managing complexity and demonstrating DOA as a methodology that can provide fresh insights for behavioural soft OR studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Fattoum, Ayham & Chari, Simos & Shaw, Duncan, 2024. "Configuring systems to be viable in a crisis: The role of intuitive decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(1), pages 205-218.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:317:y:2024:i:1:p:205-218
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2024.03.034
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221724002340
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2024.03.034?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Schoenberg & Pål Davidsen & Robert Eberlein, 2020. "Understanding model behavior using the Loops that Matter method," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(2), pages 158-190, April.
    2. Jeffrey Butler & Luigi Guiso & Tullio Jappelli, 2014. "The role of intuition and reasoning in driving aversion to risk and ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(4), pages 455-484, December.
    3. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    4. Lowe, David & Espinosa, Angela & Yearworth, Mike, 2020. "Constitutive rules for guiding the use of the viable system model: Reflections on practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1014-1035.
    5. Espinosa, A. & Duque, C., 2018. "Complexity management and multi-scale governance: A case study in an Amazonian indigenous association," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1006-1020.
    6. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    7. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    8. Preece, Gary & Shaw, Duncan & Hayashi, Haruo, 2015. "Application of the Viable System Model to analyse communications structures: A case study of disaster response in Japan," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 312-322.
    9. Brocklesby, John, 2016. "The what, the why and the how of behavioural operational research—An invitation to potential sceptics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 796-805.
    10. Carlos A. Delgado-Álvarez & Yris Olaya-Morales, 2019. "Modeling Disaster Operations Management Problems with System Dynamics," Springer Books, in: Sebastián Villa & Gloria Urrea & Jaime Andrés Castañeda & Erik R. Larsen (ed.), Decision-making in Humanitarian Operations, chapter 10, pages 223-248, Springer.
    11. Ackermann, Fran, 2012. "Problem structuring methods ‘in the Dock’: Arguing the case for Soft OR," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 652-658.
    12. Dane, Erik & Rockmann, Kevin W. & Pratt, Michael G., 2012. "When should I trust my gut? Linking domain expertise to intuitive decision-making effectiveness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 187-194.
    13. Franco, L. Alberto & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A. & Leppänen, Ilkka, 2021. "Taking stock of behavioural OR: A review of behavioural studies with an intervention focus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 401-418.
    14. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    15. ., 1999. "Bounded rationality," Chapters, in: The Economics of the Mind, chapter 4, pages 41-49, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Vincent, Vinod U., 2021. "Integrating intuition and artificial intelligence in organizational decision-making," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 425-438.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sydelko, Pamela & Espinosa, Angela & Midgley, Gerald, 2024. "Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: A viable system model board game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 312(2), pages 746-764.
    2. Lowe, David & Espinosa, Angela & Yearworth, Mike, 2020. "Constitutive rules for guiding the use of the viable system model: Reflections on practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1014-1035.
    3. Hart, Diane & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2017. "A utilisation focussed and viable systems approach for evaluating technology supported learning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(2), pages 626-641.
    4. Lane, David C. & Rouwette, Etiënne A.J.A., 2023. "Towards a behavioural system dynamics: Exploring its scope and delineating its promise," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 777-794.
    5. Harper, Alison & Mustafee, Navonil & Yearworth, Mike, 2021. "Facets of trust in simulation studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 197-213.
    6. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    7. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    8. Rodrigues, Teresa C. & Montibeller, Gilberto & Oliveira, Mónica D. & Bana e Costa, Carlos A., 2017. "Modelling multicriteria value interactions with Reasoning Maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1054-1071.
    9. Johnson, Michael P. & Midgley, Gerald & Chichirau, George, 2018. "Emerging trends and new frontiers in community operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1178-1191.
    10. Howick, Susan & Ackermann, Fran & Walls, Lesley & Quigley, John & Houghton, Tom, 2017. "Learning from mixed OR method practice: The NINES case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 70-81.
    11. White, Leroy, 2016. "Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 827-841.
    12. Espinosa, Angela & Walker, J., 2013. "Complexity management in practice: A Viable System Model intervention in an Irish eco-community," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 225(1), pages 118-129.
    13. Jorge Velez-Castiblanco & Diana Londono-Correa & Olandy Naranjo-Rivera, 2018. "The Structure of Problem Structuring Conversations: A Boundary Games Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 853-884, October.
    14. Franco, L. Alberto & Greiffenhagen, Christian, 2018. "Making OR practice visible: Using ethnomethodology to analyse facilitated modelling workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(2), pages 673-684.
    15. Aubert, Alice H. & Lienert, Judit, 2024. "Operational Research for, with, and by citizens: An overview," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 316(3), pages 800-814.
    16. Konrad, Renata A. & Maass, Kayse Lee & Dimas, Geri L. & Trapp, Andrew C., 2023. "Perspectives on how to conduct responsible anti-human trafficking research in operations and analytics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(1), pages 319-329.
    17. Hugo Herrera, 2017. "Resilience for Whom? The Problem Structuring Process of the Resilience Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    18. Sondoss Elsawah & Elena Bakhanova & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "A Competency Framework for Participatory Modeling," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 569-601, June.
    19. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    20. Andrea C. Martinez‐Lozada & Angela Espinosa, 2022. "Corporate viability and sustainability: A case study in a Mexican corporation," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 143-158, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:317:y:2024:i:1:p:205-218. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.