A Socio-technical Approach for Group Decision Support in Public Strategic Planning: The Pernambuco PPA Case

被引:49
作者
Bana E Costa, Carlos A. [1 ]
Lourenco, Joao Carlos [1 ]
Oliveira, Monica Duarte [1 ]
Bana e Costa, Joao C. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tecn Lisboa, IST, Ctr Management Studies, CEG IST, P-1049001 Lisbon, Portugal
[2] BANA Consulting Lda, P-1600600 Lisbon, Portugal
关键词
Strategic planning; Decision conferencing; Causal mapping; Multi-criteria decision analysis; Prioritisation; MACBETH; RESOURCE-ALLOCATION; PORTFOLIO; ISSUES; COLLABORATION; MACBETH; MODEL;
D O I
10.1007/s10726-012-9326-2
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
120117 [社会管理工程];
摘要
This article describes a socio-technical approach to public strategic planning. A multi-methodological framework with decision support systems (DSS) of problem structuring, multi-criteria decision analysis and strategic thinking was used in a decision conferencing process to support the key-players of the Pernambuco State Department of Social Development and Human Rights, in Brazil, to elaborate its 2008-2011 Multi-Annual Plan (PPA). This interactive process took place in June 2007, with thirty technical and political actors meeting in 5 consecutive days to discuss what should be the fundamental objectives/development axes of the PPA and to generate, assess and classify intervention programmes to achieve the objectives. Structuring objectives and programmes started by a group causal mapping session supported by the Decision Explorer DSS. Then, a multi-criteria group value model, created on-the-spot by means of the M-MACBETH DSS, helped the politicians in evaluating the overall benefit of each programme. The doability of the programmes was also appraised with MACBETH and, finally, the programmes were classified into four benefit versus doability categories defined in a strategic graph: "pearls" (programmes with high benefit value and easy to implement), "oysters" (high benefit but difficult to implement), "bread and butter" (easy to implement but of low added value) and "white elephants" (low benefit and difficult to implement). The group agreed that at least all pearls and oysters should be selected. The programmes were prioritised based on their value-for-effort and the robustness of the selection was analysed with the PROBE DSS a posteriori.
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 29
页数:25
相关论文
共 66 条
[1]
GSS for multi-organizational collaboration: Reflections on process and content [J].
Ackermann, F ;
Franco, L ;
Gallupe, B ;
Parent, M .
GROUP DECISION AND NEGOTIATION, 2005, 14 (04) :307-331
[2]
Alexander E.R., 2006, EVALUATION PLANNING, P267
[3]
[Anonymous], 2005, BMC MED INFORM DECIS, DOI DOI 10.1186/1472-6947-5-23
[4]
[Anonymous], 1986, Decision Theory: An Introduction to the Mathematics of Rationality
[5]
Bana e Costa C. A., 2006, International Transactions in Operational Research, V13, P279, DOI 10.1111/j.1475-3995.2006.00549.x
[6]
Bana e Costa C. A., 1999, DECIS SUPPORT SYST, P197
[7]
Bana e Costa C. A, 2005, M MACBETH VERSION 1
[8]
Bana E Costa CA, 1999, MATH MODEL-THEOR APP, V4, P131
[9]
A career choice problem: An example of how to use MACBETH to build a quantitative value model based on qualitative value judgments [J].
Bana E Costa, CA ;
Chagas, MP .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2004, 153 (02) :323-331
[10]
Decision Support Systems in action:: Integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process [J].
Bana E Costa, CA ;
Ensslin, L ;
Corrêa, ÉC ;
Vansnick, JC .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1999, 113 (02) :315-335