Identifying and Structuring Values to Guide Integrated Resource Planning at BC Gas

Keeney, Ralph L.; McDaniels, Timothy L.

doi:10.1287/opre.47.5.651

Cited by 62 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another example comes from a study to examine integrated resource plans for British Columbia Gas (Keeney and McDaniels 1999). One of the objectives was to minimize social disruption.…”

Section: Developing Constructed Attributesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives

Keeney

Gregory

2005

Operations Research

Self Cite

293

242

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The foundation for any decision is a clear statement of objectives. Attributes clarify the meaning of each objective and are required to measure the consequences of different alternatives. Unfortunately, insufficient thought typically is given to the choice of attributes. This paper addresses this problem by presenting theory and guidelines for identifying appropriate attributes. We define five desirable properties of attributes: they should be unambiguous, comprehensive, direct, operational, and understandable. Each of these properties is discussed and illustrated with examples, including several cases in which one or more of the desirable properties are not met. We also present a decision model for selecting among the different types of natural, proxy, and constructed attributes.

show abstract

“…Another example comes from a study to examine integrated resource plans for British Columbia Gas (Keeney and McDaniels 1999). One of the objectives was to minimize social disruption.…”

Section: Developing Constructed Attributesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives

Keeney

Gregory

2005

Operations Research

Self Cite

293

242

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous work suggesting lists of impacts (Hobbs and Meier, 2000;Keeney and McDaniels, 1999;SRCi, 1996) were considered as useful starting points, which ought to be complemented with inputs from stakeholder representatives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structuring an MCDA model using SSM: A case study in energy efficiency

Neves

Dias

Antunes

et al. 2009

European Journal of Operational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work presents the use of a problem structuring method, Soft Systems Methodology (SSM), to structure a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) model, aimed at appraising energy efficiency initiatives. SSM was useful to help defining clearly the decision problem context and the main actors involved, as well as to unveil the relevant objectives for each stakeholder. Keeney's Value Focused Thinking approach was then used to refine and structure the list of objectives according to the perspective of the main evaluators identified. In addition to describing this particular case study, this paper aims at providing some general guidelines on how SSM may facilitate the emergence of objectives for MCDA models.

show abstract

“…In an application in British Columbia Gas (BCG) [64] much of the work involved eliciting a whole range of objectives and values through discussions with key stakeholders; structuring these into means and ends; and investigating measures of performance and stakeholder views on tradeoffs where they conflicted. Methods used included workshops, workbooks, and influence-type diagrams.…”

Section: Other Related Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soft OR comes of age—but not everywhere!

Mingers

2011

Omega

175

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last forty years new methods and methodologies have been developed to deal with wicked problems or "messes". They are structured and rigorous but non-mathematical. Prime examples are: soft systems methodology (SSM), cognitive mapping/SODA and the strategic choice approach (SCA). Collectively they are known as Soft OR, Soft Systems, or Problem Structuring Methods (PSMs). Soft OR has now come of age in terms both of dealing with complex practical situations and having a presence in the academic literature. However, Soft OR is not recognised, or even seen as a legitimate part of OR, everywhere and this is especially so in the US where top journals such as Operations Research and Management Science do not publish Soft OR papers. The purpose of this paper is to generate an informed discussion and debate which may lead to a greater recognition of the contribution of Soft OR, and to it being seen to be a proper part of the OR discipline worldwide. In order to achieve this, the first section outlines the nature of Soft OR and describes briefly some of the main methods. The second section demonstrates that Soft OR has been successful both in practice and within the academic literature. The third section documents the invisibility of Soft OR within important sections of the OR literature, and the final section then suggests some explanations for this, and also proposes practical actions to try and alleviate the problem. It is not suggested that Soft OR is an alternative to traditional, mathematical OR but, rather, a complement.

show abstract

Identifying and Structuring Values to Guide Integrated Resource Planning at BC Gas

Cited by 62 publications

References 7 publications

Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives

Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives

Structuring an MCDA model using SSM: A case study in energy efficiency

Soft OR comes of age—but not everywhere!

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About