IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v126y2018icp138-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking fields with GMA: Sustainability, companies, people and Operational Research

Author

Listed:
  • Teles, Maria de Fátima
  • Freire de Sousa, Jorge

Abstract

This article is about making decisions concerning the management of sustainability, decisions that may influence the use or protection of natural resources or address difficult societal choices. Managers have more and more to tackle a diversity of problems in a rigorous and transparent way. One of the distinctive features of these decisions is that managers must give attention to both the values of people affected and factual information concerning the potential consequences of actions. This imposes the adoption of new methods for structuring spaces, strategy alternatives, and organizational planning. The support from operational research analysts becomes increasingly important, as we are dealing with people mostly without strong quantitative or model-building backgrounds. With the presence of different perspectives and mental models, behavior elements are at the core of the problem and unintentional biases in model use may occur. Our intention is to help promote the transference of knowledge to and within companies so that they may assure resilience. We found in general morphological analysis a great help for that. We want to make available a meta-model based on Operational Research for fields involving public resources and multiple interests to aid current and future managers of companies. We conclude the article with two case studies to illustrate our approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Teles, Maria de Fátima & Freire de Sousa, Jorge, 2018. "Linking fields with GMA: Sustainability, companies, people and Operational Research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 138-146.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:126:y:2018:i:c:p:138-146
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004016251730625X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.012?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. Duncan Shaw & Alberto Franco & Mark Westcombe, 2006. "Problem structuring methods: new directions in a problematic world," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 757-758, July.
    2. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    3. Robinson, Stewart & Kotiadis, Kathy, 2016. "Can involving clients in simulation studies help them solve their future problems? A transfer of learning experimentAuthor-Name: Monks, Thomas," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 919-930.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Patricia Elgoibar & Elio Shijaku, 2022. "Bringing the Social Back into Sustainability: Why Integrative Negotiation Matters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-12, May.
    2. Fotis Kitsios & Maria Kamariotou & Michael A. Talias, 2020. "Corporate Sustainability Strategies and Decision Support Methods: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.

    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. Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Hujala, Teppo & Wolfslehner, Bernhard & Vacik, Harald, 2013. "Problem structuring in participatory forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Proudlove, N.C. & Bisogno, S. & Onggo, B.S.S. & Calabrese, A. & Levialdi Ghiron, N., 2017. "Towards fully-facilitated discrete event simulation modelling: Addressing the model coding stage," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(2), pages 583-595.
    3. 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.
    4. Kotiadis, K. & Tako, A.A., 2018. "Facilitated post-model coding in discrete event simulation (DES): A case study in healthcare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(3), pages 1120-1133.
    5. Khannoussi, Arwa & Meyer, Patrick & Chaubet, Aurore, 2023. "A multi-criteria decision aiding approach for upgrading public sewerage systems and its application to the city of Brest," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    6. Nina Tura & Lea Hannola & Mikko Pynnönen, 2017. "Agile Methods for Boosting the Commercialization Process of New Technology," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(03), pages 1-23, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    9. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    10. Hugo Herrera & Nuno Videira & Hubert P.L.M. Korzilius & Kathya Lorena Cordova‐Pozo & Marleen H.F. McCardle‐Keurentjes, 2022. "Reflecting on factors influencing long‐lasting organisational effects of group model‐building interventions," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(2), pages 190-209, April.
    11. Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael & Scholz, Roland W., 2012. "Linking stakeholder visions with resource allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 762-772.
    12. 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.
    13. Carland, Corinne & Goentzel, Jarrod & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2018. "Modeling the values of private sector agents in multi-echelon humanitarian supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 532-543.
    14. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    15. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    16. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    17. Nguyen, Le Khanh Ngan & Howick, Susan & Megiddo, Itamar, 2024. "A framework for conceptualising hybrid system dynamics and agent-based simulation models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(3), pages 1153-1166.
    18. 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.
    19. Elena Tavella & L. Alberto Franco, 2015. "Dynamics of Group Knowledge Production in Facilitated Modelling Workshops: An Exploratory Study," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 451-475, May.
    20. Esposito Amideo, A. & Scaparra, M.P. & Kotiadis, K., 2019. "Optimising shelter location and evacuation routing operations: The critical issues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(2), pages 279-295.

    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:tefoso:v:126:y:2018:i:c:p:138-146. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.