Exploring new directions for research in problem structuring methods: on the role of cognitive style

Prior research has argued that cognitive style can have a significant impact on group decision making. In addition, several scholars have proposed that cognitive style can play a key role in the design and use of group decision support systems. However, cognitive style has not received a great deal of attention in the problem structuring methods (PSMs) community. This is surprising, given that PSMs are specifically developed to support a group in their decision making. The purpose of this paper is thus to examine the significance of cognitive style within PSMs. The paper identifies and explores the role of four different cognitive style functions in problem structuring interventions. This analysis is carried out by focusing on the different tasks embedded within a group process supported by PSMs. Implications for the research and practice of PSMs are then discussed.     

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

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.     

Problem structuring in project management: an application of soft systems methodology (SSM)

Recent research suggests a major role for problem structuring methods (PSMs) in the field of project management, particularly at the front-end of projects, where objectives are often unclear and where different constituencies have conflicting aims. This paper presents a case example of soft systems methodology (SSM) at the front-end of a major project within Tesco Stores Ltd. A detailed account of the intervention is given, including the results achieved and a discussion of how the methodology was used for multiple purposes within the same intervention. Within the literature, there remains a lack of detailed examples from which people can learn more about the use of PSMs in project management. By providing a detailed example of SSM in action, this paper seeks to highlight the importance of problem structuring at the front-end of projects and the potential role an approach such as SSM can play at this crucial stage.     

Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: a conceptual development

Problem structuring methods (PSMs) are a family of participatory and interactive methods whose purpose is to assist groups of diverse composition tackle a complex problematic situation of common interest. This is achieved through modelling and facilitation, with a view to generating consensus on problem structure, and agreement on initial commitments. Despite the apparent success of PSMs reported in the literature, little progress has been made towards the development of theoretical models that integrate these experiences and guide PSM practitioners and academics in developing and implementing effective PSM interventions. In particular, no theoretical models have been presented concerning how conversational processes within a group are affected by PSMs. This paper develops a theoretical model of conversation intended to provide a means to identify a specific role for the analytical assistance provided through PSMs, and for evaluating their effectiveness. The hypothesis articulated from this model is that PSMs have the potential to improve the quality of the conversation in which actors participate. PSMs generate this effect through facilitating the structuring and sense-making activities embedded within a conversation. Improvement in the quality of conversation should tend to help actors engage in dialogue as a particular form of conversation, achieve shared understanding, and increase the actors’ ownership of the commitments achieved during the conversation. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications of the model for research and practice.     

On becoming expert in the use of problem structuring methods

While much has been written about the theory and practice of using problem structuring methods (PSMs) there is little formal discussion of how individuals may effectively learn about their use. In this paper it is argued that a foundation for designing and providing a suitable learning environment lies in understanding the nature of being an expert user of PSMs and the knowledge that such experts hold and deploy. An analysis of how knowledge and expertise are grounded in the work involved in using PSMs is offered. This leads to some proposals for what is required if processes to support the acquisition of expertise in the use of PSMs are to be implemented.     

Assessing the impact of problem structuring methods in multi-organizational settings: an empirical investigation

Problem structuring methods (PSMs) have most commonly been employed with groups operating within single-organizational contexts. This paper argues that PSMs are by their nature also appropriate for supporting the work of multi-organizational groups (MOGs) operating within a partnership context. An experience of the use of a PSM in this context is reported and evaluated. The research findings suggest that there is indeed scope for the use of PSMs with MOGs, and that these methods do appear to have a positive role in achieving some of the products claimed for PSM interventions. In particular, the experience as a whole tends to demonstrate that mutual accommodations between the organizations represented in the MOG can be the result of the use of PSMs. The paper concludes with a discussion of the significance of the experience, and proposes some directions for further research.     

Problem structuring methods for large group interventions

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.     

Towards understanding problem structuring and groups with triple task methodology ‘<Emphasis Type="Italic">e</Emphasis>’

The many issues which confront Problem Structuring Groups (PSGs) engaging in applying problem structuring methods (PSMs) are well reported in the literature. Often group problem structuring work is well organised around an array of processes and methods which has received wide-ranging testing in the field however, the assessment of the group in terms of its output, group dynamic and self-assessment tends to be handled piecemeal at best. Triple task methodology (TTM) has been described as a means to manage the three group assessments—group output, dynamic and self-assessment in one frame. In this paper an experimental version of TTM (TTMe) is described in use in an Education project setting in Abu Dhabi. It was intended to make TTM less cumbersome and time consuming and, at the same time, more systemically integrated, a significant objective being to make it easier to use by practitioners who have not used it before or who have only small prior use of group assessment methods. The paper describes the application of TTMe, provides an overall assessment of the value of the exercise, discusses the outputs of the group work and points to the value of TTMe in identifying and clarifying unique group qualities or signatures. The major contribution of the paper is to bring to PSG processes a degree of rapid, non-specialist, empirically comparable assessment on the richness of the group use of PSMs.     

Problem structuring methods ‘in the Dock’: Arguing the case for Soft OR

Problem structuring methods (‘soft’ OR) have been around for approximately 40 years and yet these methods are still very much overlooked in the OR world. Whilst there is almost certainly a number of explanations for this, two key stumbling blocks are: (1) the subjective nature of the modelling yielding insights rather than testable results, and (2) the demand on users to both manage content (through modelling) and processes (work with rather than ‘on behalf’ of groups). However, as evidenced from practice there are also a number of significant benefits. This paper therefore aims to examine the case of Soft OR through examining the case for and against problem structuring methods.     

Approaches to sharing knowledge in group problem structuring

Problem-structuring techniques are an integral aspect of ‘Soft-OR’. SSM, SAST, Strategic Choice, and JOURNEY Making, all depend for their success on a group developing a shared view of a problem through some form of explicit modelling. The negotiated problem structure becomes the basis for problem resolution. Implicit to this process is an assumption that members of the group share and build their knowledge about the problem domain. This paper explores the extent to which this assumption is reasonable. The research is based on detailed records from the use of JOURNEY Making, where it has used special purpose Group Support software to aid the group problem structuring. This software continuously tracks the contributions of each member of the group and thus the extent to which they appear to be ‘connecting’ and augmenting their own knowledge with that of other members of the group. Software records of problem resolution in real organisational settings are used to explore the sharing of knowledge among senior managers. These explorations suggest a typology of knowledge sharing. The implications of this typology for problem structuring and an agenda for future research are considered.     

Past,present and future of problem structuring methods

To be able to exploit the future opportunities for Operational Research (OR), we need to prepare for them now. To conceptualize alternative futures for OR, we need to understand the potentialities of the present. To understand the present, we need to have a grasp of the past history that gave us the OR that we have, rather than some other analytic practice. OR was thrown up by a situation where traditional management methods were proving inadequate to handle the growing complexity of organizational arrangements. Problem structuring methods (PSMs) in turn were generated out of a sense that the trajectory of OR had led it away from important areas of social decision-making. PSMs have made great strides but are still encountering barriers to acceptance. This paper will explore the factors that presently constrain PSMs, and what developments could take them into new fields.     

Beyond problem structuring methods: reinventing the future of OR/MS

Some of the most influential pioneers of OR felt disappointed by the way it developed in the 1960s and 1970s. In their view, the original intention to create a holistic, interdisciplinary science addressed to strategic problems was betrayed. Problem structuring methods (PSMs) have made a significant contribution to taking OR/MS forward again in the direction charted by those pioneers. From a theoretical perspective, however, it is clear that the opportunities provided by PSMs tend to be limited to those drawn from the interpretive paradigm. That is only one way of adding to the positivist/quantitative approach of classical OR/MS. This paper suggests that OR has an obligation to explore a wider range of theoretical options and to convert the possibilities offered by all of these into a form that managers and management scientists can use. Only in this way can OR be reinvented to live up to the ambitions of its founders.     

Journey Making group workshops as a research tool

Problem-structuring group workshops can be used in organizations as a consulting tool and as a research tool. One example of the latter is using a problem-structuring method (PSM) to help a group tackle an organizational issue; meanwhile, researchers collect the participants’ initial views, discussion of divergent views, the negotiated agreement, and the reasoning for outcomes emerging. Technology can help by supporting participants in freely sharing their opinions and by logging data for post-workshop analyses. For example, computers let participants share views anonymously and without being influenced by others (as well as logging those views), and video-cameras can record discussions and intra-group dynamics. This paper evaluates whether technology-supported Journey Making workshops can be effective research tools that can capture quality research data when compared against theoretical performance benchmarks and other qualitative research tools.     

Evaluating problem-structuring methods: developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs

This paper discusses the challenges associated with the evaluation of problem-structuring methods (PSMs). PSMs are seen as complex interventions that seek wide-level change and action at many levels including individual and system. There is now a widespread acceptance that the traditional evaluation approaches are inappropriate for the evaluation of PSMs. The difficulty is compounded when PSMs are used in multi-agency settings. The paper proposes that evaluation, while pragmatic and situated, must be a theory-based exercise. Part of the challenge is to provide a narrative of the intervention as well as an agreed assessment.     

Integration and propagation of a multi-criteria decision making model in constraint programming

In this paper we propose a general integration scheme for a Multi-Criteria Decision Making model of the Multi-Attribute Utility Theory in Constraint Programming. We introduce the Choquet integral as a general aggregation function for multi-criteria optimization problems and define the Choquet global constraint that propagates this function during the Branch-and-Bound search. Finally the benefits of the propagation of the Choquet constraint are evaluated on the examination timetabling problem.     

Domain structuring for knowledge-based multiattribute classification (a verbal decision analysis approach)

Classification problems in decision making are, at least, ill-structured or even unstructured ones, since, among other things, human judgments (i.e., Decision Maker preferences and/or expert knowledge) are the primary sources of information for their solving. Thus, not only the classification rules eliciting, but the application domain structuring as well, is a complex problem itself. The paper focuses on knowledge-based classification problem structuring in the context of complete (up to the expert knowledge) and consistent knowledge base construction for a Diagnostic Decision Support System. Two structuring techniques are proposed as expert aids, as well as an approach to large-size problem decomposition. It is asserted that application domain structuring and classification rules eliciting have to be arranged as interconnected procedures.     

Systemic problem structuring applied to community involvement in water conservation

Many advocates of problem structuring approaches mix methods to enhance the flexibility and responsiveness of OR practice. A number of ‘multi-methodology’ approaches have been developed to support practitioners in doing this, and one of these is systemic intervention. A distinguishing feature of systemic intervention is boundary critique: a theory and set of methodological ideas for exploring the inclusion, exclusion and marginalization of both people and issues. This paper argues that boundary critique can enhance the choice and process of application of problem structuring methods. An application of boundary critique is presented to illustrate the argument, focusing on community participation in the management of ongoing water shortages in a small seaside town in New Zealand. The theory of boundary critique helped to reframe people's understanding of a 30-year conflict between the District Council and community. This led to the design of a participative problem structuring workshop, and a way forward was identified that both the District Council and community could accept. Feedback from the workshop participants suggested that the intervention generated valuable results for all the parties involved. The paper concludes with some brief reflections on how the research agenda on boundary critique and problem structuring methods can be progressed into the future.     

Problem structuring without workshops? Experiences with distributed interaction within a PSM process

Problem structuring methods (PSMs) have been widely and successfully used in many organizations, but the reliance on face-to-face meetings and workshops makes a typical PSM project difficult and time-consuming to organize, and means that the process may only involve a narrow cross-section of the organization. Yet much interaction in organizations is neither face-to-face nor even synchronous. This research seeks to (1) explore how the issues that arise in moderating such distributed interaction differ from the issues involved in facilitating a workshop and (2) identify the circumstances under which it makes sense to consider using the distributed mode of interaction within a PSM process. Three pairs of action research case studies using a distributed variant on the strategic options development and analysis (SODA) process are described, together with our answers to the above questions.     

From vicious to virtuous circles: problem structuring for quantified decision making in operationalization of corporate social responsibility

There is no formalised approach for problem structuring and quantitative decision support to operationalise corporate social responsibility (CSR) implementation. In this paper, techniques for considering criteria relationships are outlined and a holistic, systematic framework combining a qualitative and quantitative method for practical CSR integration is provided. Cognitive mapping (CM) is applied to structure the problem picture, and the cause–effect relationships between decision elements. Soft CM methodology is employed to assess the cross-criteria interactions, at both an individual and a collective level. The interactions of criteria can have a significant impact upon CSR implementation. Such impacts can be direct or indirect through their close linkages to other criteria. The causal strategic map serves as an input to the analytic network process (ANP) to carry out the multi-criteria decision analysis. Then, CM and ANP are applied in a comparative analysis to verify whether the measures of criteria significance do correspond. The key criteria in networks are identified using centrality in CM and single limited priorities in ANP. This study demonstrates that using criteria without considering their interactions will result in shortcomings in the evaluation and assessment of CSR programmes. The holistic framework, combining CM and ANP proposed in this work, enhances the process of problem structuring and supports preference-based evaluation of decision alternatives. The results of our study yield that the mapping procedure has an influence on the criteria significance in networks. The correspondence between CM and ANP is stronger when cause relationships are rigidly interpreted. More unambiguous interpretations of causal relations can be achieved if methods are used jointly and common peaks of importance in both CM and ANP could potentially serve as indications of key decision elements.