The Intellectual Structure of Decision Support Systems Research (1991–2004)

Eom, Sean B.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-6181-5_3

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The bioenergy DSS models reviewed in this research are all model-orientated, spanning the representation and optimisation categories in Alter's [8] classification, most support systems in use today are in these two categories [4]. Model-orientated decision support systems are typified by their user(s) and whether they integrate knowledge.…”

Section: Developments and Issues With Decision Support Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Decision support systems have been extensively applied to a myriad of industries and problems over the past four decades, with Eom [4] reviewing over 25,000 published articles; however, he concluded theory-practice divide issues still persist. A paper by Arnott and Pervan [5] reduced the field's problems to eight issues, of which the research has selected four relating to the theory-practice divide have been selected, listed in table 2: …”

Section: Group Support Systems (Gss)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although, this literature rarely considers the most critical issue; the theory-practice divide in DSS research [4]. At present, there is no research to understand the lack of practical application of decision support tools in the bioenergy sector.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At present, there is no research to understand the lack of practical application of decision support tools in the bioenergy sector. With the dire need for bioenergy project support tools to aid decisionmaking and in turn sector growth in the UK, but with a persistent disconnect between theory and practice [4,5], a lack of relevance [5] and little evidence to show that these tools are ever really adopted [6] -can a decision support system really ever have a pragmatic contribution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Bioenergy Decision Support Systems: Worth the Effort?

Wright¹,

Dey²,

Brammer³

et al. 2011

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The purpose of this research is to explore the disparity between the existing model-orientated bioenergy decision support system (DSS) functions and what is desired by practitioners, in particular bioenergy project developers. This research has compiled the published bioenergy project development models, to highlight the characteristics emphasised by academics. When contrasted against a UK practitioner's perspective through the administration of a Likert style questionnaire, it is clear that the general DSS issues still persist. Finally, the research suggests how this 'theory-practice' divide could be addressed. The research contributes by giving a unique insight into the demands of a practitioner, but is currently limited by a small sample size.

show abstract

Section: Developments and Issues With Decision Support Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Group Support Systems (Gss)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bioenergy Decision Support Systems: Worth the Effort?

Wright¹,

Dey²,

Brammer³

et al. 2011

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Over the years, various forms of research have examined the range of disciplines relevant to DSS (Eom, 2011) and the areas of DSS applications (Eom, 2008;Eom & Lee, 1990). These researchers conducted a rigorous examination of the field by assessing whether articles fell within a classic definition of DSS; in the structure of the decision, the interaction with the user and the use of models and databases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in DSS disciplines in the Web of Science

Keenan

2016

Journal of Decision Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Actor networks and the construction of applicable knowledge: the case of the Timbre Brownfield Prioritization Tool

Alexandrescu

Klusáček

Bartke

et al. 2017

Clean Techn Environ Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article deals with experiences acquired during the process of developing the Timbre Brownfield Prioritization Tool (TBPT). Developing a decision support tool that takes into account the expectations and experiences of its potential users is similar to creating applicable knowledge by the joint action of scientists and heterogeneous actors. Actor network theory is used to explore the construction of this form of applicable knowledge as a process of actor network creation. Following the French sociologist Callon, networks are seen to be initiated and carried out by a group of scientists (tool developers) via four moments of translation, called problematization, interessement, enrolment and mobilization. Each step in the construction of the TBPT-from the initial research question to the final model-can be linked in retrospect to changing configurations of actor networks. Based on the experiences of the tool developers in the Czech Republic, Poland, Germany and Romania, we illustrate how these configurations varied across space and time. This contribution emphasizes the ability to correlate gains in knowledge with the more visible changes in the scope of actor networks in order to highlight achievements but also limitations in acquiring applicable knowledge.

show abstract

The Intellectual Structure of Decision Support Systems Research (1991–2004)

Cited by 6 publications

References 98 publications

Bioenergy Decision Support Systems: Worth the Effort?

Bioenergy Decision Support Systems: Worth the Effort?

Changes in DSS disciplines in the Web of Science

Actor networks and the construction of applicable knowledge: the case of the Timbre Brownfield Prioritization Tool

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About