IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v60y2009i9d10.1057_palgrave.jors.2008.93.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitative problem structuring methods for multi-actor problems: an analysis of reported applications

Author

Listed:
  • T E van der Lei

    (Delft University of Technology)

  • W A H Thissen

    (Delft University of Technology)

Abstract

Problem structuring methods (PSMs) are proposed as vital tools for coping with complex and unstructured problems that help decision-makers make decisions or come to a shared understanding of a problem situation. Despite their popularity, choosing a PSM for an unstructured problem situation is problematic as good categorization and evaluation of PSMs is lacking. As a first step we postulate a categorization of quantitative PSMs applied to multi-actor situations. We list the different application areas, the types of design that were used, and the type of outcomes the methods provide. To understand why and how certain PSMs are applied, we categorize applications of metagames/conflict analysis, hypergames, drama theory, Q-methodology, and transactional analysis. We find that method choice and validation of the applications are yet underdeveloped for this specific sub-field, and suggest further work on this as it will help to understand the added value of PSMs.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:60:y:2009:i:9:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2008.93
    DOI: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2008.93
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2008.93
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2008.93?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. Bennett, Peter G., 1980. "Bidders and dispenser: manipulative hypergames in a multinational context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 4(5), pages 293-306, May.
    2. Green, Kesten C., 2002. "Forecasting decisions in conflict situations: a comparison of game theory, role-playing, and unaided judgement," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 321-344.
    3. Toddi A. Steelman & Lynn A. Maguire, 1999. "Understanding participant perspectives: Q-methodology in national forest management," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 361-388.
    4. Bryant, James W., 2002. "Confrontations in health service management: Insights from drama theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(3), pages 610-624, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Maurice Rojer, 1999. "Collective Decision-Making Models Applied To Labor Negotiations In The Netherlands: A Comparison Between An Exchange Model And A Conflict Model," Rationality and Society, , vol. 11(2), pages 207-235, May.
    7. Grimble, Robin & Wellard, Kate, 1997. "Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 173-193, October.
    8. T Horlick-Jones & J Rosenhead, 2007. "The uses of observation: combining problem structuring methods and ethnography," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 588-601, May.
    9. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    10. Bryant, James W. & Darwin, John A., 2004. "Exploring inter-organisational relationships in the health service: An immersive drama approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 655-666, February.
    11. I Munro & J Mingers, 2002. "The use of multimethodology in practice—results of a survey of practitioners," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(4), pages 369-378, April.
    12. L White, 2006. "Evaluating problem-structuring methods: developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 842-855, July.
    13. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    14. F B Losa & V Belton, 2006. "Combining MCDA and conflict analysis: an exploratory application of an integrated approach," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(5), pages 510-525, May.
    15. Joldersma, Cisca & Roelofs, Ellie, 2004. "The impact of soft OR-methods on problem structuring," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 696-708, February.
    16. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    17. Bennett, Peter, 1998. "Confrontation analysis as a diagnostic tool," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 465-482, September.
    18. Klein, Jonathan H., 2000. "Telling stories: a metagame description of a conflict," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-15, February.
    19. J Mingers, 2003. "A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(6), pages 559-570, June.
    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. A Paucar-Caceres, 2011. "The development of management sciences/operational research discourses: surveying the trends in the US and the UK," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(8), pages 1452-1470, August.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    5. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.
    6. Small, Adrian & Wainwright, David, 2018. "Privacy and security of electronic patient records – Tailoring multimethodology to explore the socio-political problems associated with Role Based Access Control systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 344-360.
    7. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.
    8. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    9. Yearworth, Mike & White, Leroy, 2013. "The uses of qualitative data in multimethodology: Developing causal loop diagrams during the coding process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 151-161.
    10. 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.
    11. Santos, Sérgio P. & Belton, Valerie & Howick, Susan & Pilkington, Martin, 2018. "Measuring organisational performance using a mix of OR methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 18-30.
    12. 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.
    13. J Bryant, 2007. "Drama theory: dispelling the myths," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 602-613, May.
    14. E D Adamides & P Mitropoulos & I Giannikos & I Mitropoulos, 2009. "A multi-methodological approach to the development of a regional solid waste management system," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(6), pages 758-770, June.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    18. Brocklesby, John & Midgley, Gerald, 2016. "Boundary games: How teams of OR practitioners explore the boundaries of interventionAuthor-Name: Velez-Castiblanco, Jorge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 968-982.
    19. Michael Yearworth & Gordon Edwards, 2014. "On the Desirability of Integrating Research Methods into Overall Systems Approaches in the Training of Engineers: Analysis Using SSM," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 47-66, January.
    20. Irena Ali & Mathew Zuparic & Iain Macleod & Phuong La & Yi Yue, 2017. "Complex socio-organisational phenomena and ill-defined problem spaces: a multi-method approach to the rescue," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(8), pages 919-934, August.

    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:60:y:2009:i:9:d:10.1057_palgrave.jors.2008.93. 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.