IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v55y2004i5d10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601712.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Problem structuring methods for large group interventions

Author

Listed:
  • D Shaw

    (Aston Business School, Aston Triangle)

  • M Westcombe

    (Attivation Consulting)

  • J Hodgkin

    (Stirling University)

  • G Montibeller

    (Kingston Business School)

Abstract

Problem structuring methods (PSMs) aim to build shared understanding in a group of decision makers. This shared understanding is used as a basis for them to negotiate an agreed action plan that they are prepared to help implement. Engaging in a social process of negotiation with a large number of people is difficult, and so PSMs have typically focused on small groups of less than 20. This paper explores the legitimacy of deploying PSMs in large groups of people (50–1000), where the aim is to negotiate action and build commitment to its implementation. We review the difficulties of facilitating large groups with PSMs, drawing heavily on our experience of working with over 25 large groups. We offer a range of lessons learned and suggest concrete approaches to facilitating large groups to achieve the objectives of PSMs. This paper contributes to the evaluation and development of PSMs.

Suggested Citation

  • D Shaw & M Westcombe & J Hodgkin & G Montibeller, 2004. "Problem structuring methods for large group interventions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(5), pages 453-463, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:55:y:2004:i:5:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601712
    DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601712
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601712?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. Eden, Colin, 1995. "On evaluating the performance of `wide-band' GDSS's," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 302-311, March.
    2. Alan R. Dennis & Joseph S. Valacich & Terry Connolly & Bayard E. Wynne, 1996. "Process Structuring in Electronic Brainstorming," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 268-277, June.
    3. Monica J. Garfield & Nolan J. Taylor & Alan R. Dennis & John W. Satzinger, 2001. "Research Report: Modifying Paradigms—Individual Differences, Creativity Techniques, and Exposure to Ideas in Group Idea Generation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 322-333, September.
    4. Christer Carlsson & Pirkko Walden, 1995. "AHP in Political Group Decisions: A Study in the Art of Possibilities," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 14-29, August.
    5. L White, 2002. "Size matters: large group methods and the process of operational research," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(2), pages 149-160, February.
    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. Ion Georgiou & Joaquim Heck, 2021. "The emergence of problem structuring methods, 1950s–1989: An atlas of the journal literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 756-796, November.
    2. Zemp, Stefan & Stauffacher, Michael & Lang, Daniel J. & Scholz, Roland W., 2011. "Generic functions of railway stations--A conceptual basis for the development of common system understanding and assessment criteria," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 446-455, March.
    3. Sébastien Damart, 2010. "A Cognitive Mapping Approach to Organizing the Participation of Multiple Actors in a Problem Structuring Process," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 505-526, September.
    4. D B O'Brien & C M Brugha, 2010. "Adapting and refining in multi-criteria decision-making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(5), pages 756-767, May.
    5. Hugo Herrera, 2017. "Resilience for Whom? The Problem Structuring Process of the Resilience Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    6. B Casu & D Shaw & E Thanassoulis, 2005. "Using a group support system to aid input–output identification in DEA," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(12), pages 1363-1372, December.
    7. Shaw, Duncan & Blundell, Neil, 2010. "WASAN: The development of a facilitated methodology for structuring a waste minimisation problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 350-362, November.
    8. Phi, Giang & Dredge, Dianne & Whitford, Michelle, 2014. "Understanding conflicting perspectives in event planning and management using Q method," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 406-415.
    9. Ellspermann, Susan J. & Evans, Gerald W. & Basadur, Min, 2007. "The impact of training on the formulation of ill-structured problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 221-236, April.
    10. F O'Brien & M Meadows, 2007. "Developing a visioning methodology: Visioning Choices for the future of operational research," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 557-575, May.
    11. H V Vo & B Chae & D L Olson, 2007. "Developing unbounded systems thinking: using causal mapping with multiple stakeholders within a Vietnamese company," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 655-668, May.
    12. Tako, Antuela A. & Kotiadis, Kathy, 2015. "PartiSim: A multi-methodology framework to support facilitated simulation modelling in healthcare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(2), pages 555-564.
    13. K N Papamichail & G Alves & S French & J B Yang & R Snowdon, 2007. "Facilitation practices in decision workshops," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 614-632, May.
    14. 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.
    15. N J Curtis & P J Dortmans & J Ciuk, 2006. "‘Doing the right problem’ versus ‘doing the problem right’: problem structuring within a Land Force environment," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(11), pages 1300-1312, November.
    16. T E van der Lei & W A H Thissen, 2009. "Quantitative problem structuring methods for multi-actor problems: an analysis of reported applications," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(9), pages 1198-1206, September.
    17. A Morton & F Ackermann & V Belton, 2007. "Problem structuring without workshops? Experiences with distributed interaction within a PSM process," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 547-556, May.
    18. White, Leroy & Bourne, Humphrey, 2007. "Voices and values: Linking values with participation in OR/MS in public policy making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 588-603, October.
    19. D Shaw, 2006. "Journey Making group workshops as a research tool," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 830-841, July.
    20. J Bryant & J Darwin & C Booth, 2011. "Strategy making with the whole organisation: OR and the art of the possible," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(5), pages 840-854, May.

    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. 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.
    2. D Shaw & F Ackermann & C Eden, 2003. "Approaches to sharing knowledge in group problem structuring," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(9), pages 936-948, September.
    3. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    4. D Shaw, 2003. "Evaluating electronic workshops through analysing the ‘brainstormed’ ideas," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(7), pages 692-705, July.
    5. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    6. Wang Kai, 2019. "Towards a Taxonomy of Idea Generation Techniques," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 65-80, January.
    7. Sébastien Damart, 2010. "A Cognitive Mapping Approach to Organizing the Participation of Multiple Actors in a Problem Structuring Process," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 505-526, September.
    8. Jovana Kovacevic & Sophie Hooge & Albert David, 2015. "Analyzing The Micro-Processes Of Collaborative Concept Generation At Ideation Stages: The Case Of Innovation-Oriented Web Community Discussions," Post-Print hal-01138847, HAL.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Gerrit Remane & Andre Hanelt & Jan F. Tesch & Lutz M. Kolbe, 2017. "The Business Model Pattern Database — A Tool For Systematic Business Model Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(01), pages 1-61, January.
    13. William G. Heninger & Alan R. Dennis & Kelly McNamara Hilmer, 2006. "Research Note: Individual Cognition and Dual-Task Interference in Group Support Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 415-424, December.
    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. Rodney J. Scott & Robert Y. Cavana & Donald Cameron, 2016. "Client Perceptions of Reported Outcomes of Group Model Building in the New Zealand Public Sector," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 77-101, January.
    16. Brian BARNARD & Derrick HERBST, 2019. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Creativity: The Creative Process of Entrepreneurs and Innovators," Expert Journal of Business and Management, Sprint Investify, vol. 7(1), pages 107-146.
    17. L A Franco & M Meadows, 2007. "Exploring new directions for research in problem structuring methods: on the role of cognitive style," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(12), pages 1621-1629, December.
    18. Wang Kai & Tao Yu & Wang Hui, 2017. "Combining Ideas in Crowdsourced Idea Generation," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 203-212, February.
    19. Parjanen, Satu & Hyypiä, Mirva, 2019. "Innotin game supporting collective creativity in innovation activities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 26-34.
    20. 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.

    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:pal:jorsoc:v:55:y:2004:i:5:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2601712. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.