Strategic Options Development and Analysis

Ackermann, Fran; Eden, Colin

doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-7472-1_4

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Centrality analysis (Table 2) extends the domain analysis by considering both, direct and indirect links. It reflects the downstream effect and allows a more accurate view of key issues than domain analysis (Ackermann and Eden, 2010). Centrality analysis measures the complexity of the concept's Some concepts that were characterised by the highest domain score also have the highest centrality score.…”

Section: Discussion and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflecting on knowledge management as an enabler of innovation in project-based construction firms

Sergeeva

Duryan

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to explore the ways innovation becomes enabled through knowledge management and sharing which has important implications for establishing and sustaining the culture of innovative thinking in project-based construction firms. This study adopts a reflective practitioner perspective to explore this relationship. Design/methodology/approach In total, 30 semi-structured interviews were conducted with the construction sector professionals whose roles are most relevant in the connection between innovation and knowledge management. Thematic analysis and cognitive mapping techniques were used to analyse the interview data. Findings The research findings indicate that due to the complexity of project-based construction firms, a more holistic approach to knowledge management and organisational learning at the firm level is required. This would enable a culture of continuous and coordinated knowledge flow that facilitates innovation and continuous improvement in project-based firms. Practical implications This paper has important implications for practising managers in project-based construction firms. By better understanding the ways organisational knowledge can be managed to become an enabler of innovation would allow to build and enhance firms’ innovative capabilities, individual and team competencies. There is a real need for innovation knowledge managers as formal job positions in the construction sector. Originality/value This study contributes to construction innovation and project management research and practice by providing insights into establishing and sustaining the culture of learning and innovative thinking.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflecting on knowledge management as an enabler of innovation in project-based construction firms

Sergeeva

Duryan

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These new methodologies are known as problem-structuring methods or soft OR/MS (Kirby, 2007 ; Lami & Tavella, 2019 ; Rosenhead & Mingers, 2001 ). One of the most popular soft approaches to structuring complex problems is the strategic options development and analysis (SODA) method (Ackermann & Eden, 2001 ). This methodology is particularly useful with subjective and difficult to interpret decision problems (Ferreira, 2005 ; Rouwette et al, 2011 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing causes of urban blight using cognitive mapping and DEMATEL

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blight is a concept not commonly discussed. However, blight is a problem that exists in the lives of many people, especially if they reside in urban areas. Blight originates whenever properties are neglected, contributing to both a functional and social depreciation process and ultimately leading to uninhabitable dwellings. Despite being blighted, these properties and surrounding neighborhoods often are occupied by families who fail to have sufficient income to afford residences that meet minimum standards or to live in neighborhoods free from drug trafficking and prostitution or other forms of crime. Blight may spread rapidly, thus, experts must, in a timely manner, analyze its causes, which are essential to preventing and mitigating blight problems. The purpose of this study is to seek an understanding of blight and identify its causal factors. The generic methods commonly applied in previous blight research present limitations that this study aims to overcome by using cognitive mapping and the decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) technique. This dual methodology provides a more transparent and less restrictive approach for analyzing and complying with the dynamics of cause-and-effect relationships among variables. Group debate involving a panel of specialists in this field identified six causation clusters based on the experts’ experience and knowledge. The resulting framework and its application were validated both by these specialists and the head of the Territorial and Environmental Assessment and Monitoring Division of Cascais City Council Strategic Planning Department, Portugal.

show abstract

“…The best known examples of system modeling technologies are probably Strategic Options Development and Analysis or SODA (Ackermann & Eden, 2020;Bryson et al, 2004), Soft Systems Methodology or SSM (Checkland, 2000;Checkland & Poulter, 2020), and facilitated simulation (Monks et al, 2014;Robinson et al, 2014;Vennix, 1996).…”

Section: Systems Modeling Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technologies for Improving Group Decision making

Rouwette¹,

Franco²

2021

The Emerald Handbook of Group and Team Communication Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter focuses on techniques and technologies to aid groups in making decisions, with an emphasis on computer-based support. It is now customary for many office workers to regularly meet colleagues and clients in virtual meetings using videoconferencing platforms, which enable participants to carry out tasks in a manner quite similar to a face-to-face meeting. The development of computer-based platforms to facilitate group tasks can be traced back to the 1960s, and while they support group communication, they do not directly support group decision making. In this chapter we distinguish four technologies developed to provide support to group decisions, clustered into two main traditions. Technologies in the taskoriented tradition are mainly concerned with enabling participants to complete tasks to solve the group's decision problem via computer-supported communications. Group Decision Support Systems and social software technologies comprise the task-oriented tradition.Alternately, in the model-driven tradition, participants use computers to build and use a model that acts as a referent to communicate, mostly verbally, about the group's decision problem. Systems modeling and decision modeling technologies constitute the model-driven tradition.This chapter sketches the history and guiding ideas of both traditions, and describes their associated technologies. Our discussion centers on whether increased availability of online tools will also lead to increased use of group decision support technologies, and the differential impact of communication and decision support.terms technology, technique and tool in specific ways. Technology will refer to a set of techniques and tools plus the guidelines, principles, or assumptions needed to implement and use those. Technique will refer to a set of well-described activities (e.g. Nominal Group Technique). Finally, tool will refer to an artefact (e.g., computer software) that can assist in the deployment of a technique.An influential characterization of levels of group decision-making support is offered by DeSanctis and Gallupe (1987), and may serve to give a first overview of the types of technologies, tecniques and tools available. Level 1 decision support removes communication barriers by offering technical features such as electronic messaging, anonymous gathering, display of ideas on a shared screen, and anonymous clustering and voting. Level 1 tools are similar to videoconferencing in that they facilitate information exhange, but they can also include additional features that directly support decision making, such as anonymous gathering, clustering, and prioritization of ideas. By more fully capturing elements of the discussion, a group memory is created that participants can refer to during and after the meeting. Level 2 decision support adds group decision techniques (e.g., Nominal Group Technique, Delphi). Level 2 tools include decision models to support techniques such as Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis. Level 3 decision support employs machine-induced group co...

show abstract

Strategic Options Development and Analysis

Cited by 14 publications

References 54 publications

Reflecting on knowledge management as an enabler of innovation in project-based construction firms

Reflecting on knowledge management as an enabler of innovation in project-based construction firms

Analyzing causes of urban blight using cognitive mapping and DEMATEL

Technologies for Improving Group Decision making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About