***********************************************************
DSS News
D. J. Power, Editor
October 12, 2003 -- Vol. 4, No. 21
A Bi-Weekly Publication of DSSResources.COM
************************************************************
Check article by Fisher and Marinos, "Better
Decisions through Better Data Quality Management"
************************************************************
Featured:
* Are there substitutes for computerized decision support?
* What's New at DSSResources.COM?
* DSS News Releases
************************************************************
Put your ad here! Help support DSS News
************************************************************
Are there substitutes for computerized decision support?
by Dan Power
Editor, DSSResources.COM
YES. Some situational factors reduce or mitigate any need for
computerized decision support. During my graduate studies, Steve Kerr's
research and ideas on leadership attracted my attention. Kerr suggested
that substitutes existed for leadership (cf., Kerr and Jermier, 1978).
At the time, Kerr was a Professor of Organizational Behavior. He has
since moved into the corporate world. Until March 2001, he was the Chief
Learning Officer at GE. Currently, Kerr is the Chief Learning Officer
and a Managing Director of Goldman Sachs. When he was thinking about
leadership issues it was "fiction" to think that computerized decision
support could substitute for leadership, but some progress has been made
in that direction. What we do not want to forget is that outstanding
leadership can sometimes substitute for deploying computerized decision
support. Leaders made "effective" decisions for thousands of years
without the assistance of Decision Support Systems (DSS).
Today the increasing complexity and uncertainty in many organizational
decision situations coupled with time pressures and heavy information
loads are encouraging the development of operational, tactical and
strategic DSS. Even so DSS are not always the best or the only solution
for improving and enhancing decision making in admittedly difficult
circumstances. This Ask Dan! addresses a number of potential substitutes
and complements for DSS. Some situational factors are only temporary or
short-run substitutes; some substitutes make computerized decision
support less crucial or even unneccesary, but result in high costs and
create other problems; other factors are really "enhancers" or
complements when used in conjunction with DSS to improve decision
making.
Kerr suggested that certain situational factors or variables reduce the
importance of formal leadership and even substitute for leadership. Such
a substitution phenomenon also seems to occur in many decision
situations and various factors can impact the need for computerized
decision support. Kerr, Jermier, and others have focused on subordinate,
task, and organizational characteristics as potential substitutes for
effective leader behavior and actions. In a similar way task,
organizational and environment characteristics can impact the need for
computerized decision support. Characteristics of leaders/managers and
their subordinates can also impact the need for and use of computerized
decision support systems.
So what can be done to substitute for computerized decision support? For
several months I have thought about and studied this question. Let me
briefly summarize my current thinking in terms of twelve factors that
can impact the need for computerized decision support. Specific factors
help decision makers cope with important, complex decision making tasks.
As a caveat, the following list may be incomplete and overlapping. It
is not an ordered or prioritized list, rather it is more of an
alphabetized list based upon research and brainstorming.
1. Decision authority and centralization -- In a specific situation, the
authority of decision makers impacts the need for and usefulness of a
DSS. The power of competitors and third parties and legal, political and
social constraints often limit decision authority and change decision
support requirements. If a crisis occurs, all decisions may be made at
the highest levels in an organization. In this situation, the computer
decision support requirements will change. In more routine situations,
a DSS may encourage delegation of decisions. Also, to avoid using
computer support for time critical decisions it is sometimes possible to
delegate such decisions to a person with "real-time" knowledge.
2. Decision cycle -- In some situations increasing or extending the
decision cycle (the time and activities spent making a decision) can
reduce the need for computerized decision support or allow decision
makers to make "fewer" decisions without harming the overall outcomes.
For example, if a company has competitive and market superiority, it may
be possible to slow down new product introductions or reduce advertising
expenditures and improve the success of such activities. Reducing time
pressure and more analysis can sometimes increase decision effectiveness
and reduce the need for computerized support.
3. Decision task structure -- Some decision tasks are complex and hence,
if the task is completed by those with less knowledge and skill,
computer support is needed to maintain or improve task proficiency. For
example, the task of configuring computer systems at Digital Equipment
(DEC) became very complex and a knowledge-driven DSS called EXSYS was
built to help with the task. An alternative that was used by
competitors was to simplify the configuration and decision task.
Characteristics of a decision task impact the need for DSS. For
example, for an unambiguous, routine, and highly structured decision
task managers may have only a limited need for computerized decision
support. Also, if decision makers receive frequent feedback concerning
the success of their decisions, then they may be able to incrementally
improve their decisions without any decision support.
4. Formalization -- Rules, planning, procedures, policies and guidance
support decision making. Characteristics of the organization setting,
especially formalization, impact the need for DSS. For example, in
addition to rules and procedures, clear plans and goals and
formalization can reduce the need for DSS. If the rule is "The customer
is always right and we accept all returns", then no computerized
decision support is needed to help customer service representatives.
Good contingency plans can reduce the need for computerized decision
support once a crisis or event triggers a need for a decision. Any
negative anchoring effect of having contingency plans is often more than
outweighed by the "speed" and quality of preparation advantages than are
achieved. Contingency planning can be improved and supported using
appropriate DSS. For example, a knowledge-driven DSS with a document
repository can be developed to support contingency planning.
5. Hard work and effort -- Long hours by staff and decision makers can
substitute for a DSS or compensate for a "poor" DSS, but fatigue can
lead to major errors and staff burnout. Even with decision support
systems, decision making in a crisis is hard, "mentally taxing",
stressful work. The goal in complex, strategic and/or crisis decision
situations is to have decision support technology help increase the
likelihood of success and hopefully reduce stress.
6. Leadership -- To reduce the need for decision support it may be
possible to identify and select managers who can make better decisions
in uncertain, complex, rapidly changing, and ambiguous environments than
most other people. Some people are better able to remain calm and
focused in complex situations and hence will need less computerized
decision support or be better able to use what decision support is
provided. Leadership is about having the respect and trust of those who
will act based upon directions. DSS can not substitute for weak
leaders, but outstanding leaders may require less elaborate or even
different decision support. Leadership skills can substitute for some
computerized decision support capabilities, but not all. Characteristics
of leaders/managers and their subordinates that impact the need for and
usefulness of computerized decision support include ability, experience,
training, and knowledge.
7. Operations technology -- Sometimes constraints created by production
systems add complexity in decision tasks. Removing the constraints
simplifies the decision task. Removing constraints from production
systems often involves overcoming technical barriers and may involve
many trade-offs.
8. Slack resources -- For example, to avoid inventory management and
supply chain decision support one can keep large safety stocks and then
centralize inventory. The trade-off is of course higher inventory
holding costs.
9. Staffing level -- In some situations as decision complexity and
decision volume increases it is possible to increase the number of
expert decision makers, e.g. add more truck dispatchers or air traffic
controllers. DSS can eliminate decision roles in processes and
streamline the process, thereby freeing up experts for other tasks. To
reduce the need for computerized decision support for complex operations
it is often possible to increase the amount of human decision support.
10. Training -- Managers who are well prepared for performing decision
tasks and who have rehearsed the decisions are more likely to be
successful even with limited decision support.
11. Use general purpose computer software tools -- To substitute for
using task specific decision support systems, but gain some benefits of
computerization, one can often use commercial off-the-shelf personal
productivity software like Microsoft Excel, Word and PowerPoint.
Personal productivity software is very useful and it can provide limited
decision support in a complex, multi-decision maker environment.
12. Use non-computerized decision aids -- Managers have used and
continue to use a wide range of non-computerized decision support tools
from books, maps, grease pencils, pen and paper, post it! notes,
calculators, and check lists to assist in decision making.
None of the above substitutes is a "perfect" substitute for computerized
decision support and in reality a combination of the above "substitutes"
and decision support and information technologies will be used in
organizations. Computerized decision support can fail and even lead to
negative consequences. Managers/decision makers need to understand the
strengths and limitations of computerized decision support. Decision
makers must maintain their ability to function effectively without
computerized decision support.
References
Kerr, S., & Jermier, J. M. (1978). Substitutes for leadership: Their
meaning and measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,
22, 375-403.
************************************************************
Tell your friends! Get DSS NEWS free -- send a blank email
to dssresources-subscribe@topica.com.
************************************************************
What's New at DSSResources.COM?
10/04/2003 Updated the DSS Research Centers page.
http://dssresources.com/researchers/researchcenters.html
10/03/2003 Posted redesigned Home page and Top panel. Note new Site
Index page.
10/03/2003 Posted article by Fisher, T. and G. Marinos, "Better
decisions through better data quality management". Check the articles
page.
************************************************************
DSS News Releases - September 29 to October 10, 2003
Read them at DSSResources.COM and search the DSS News Archive
10/10/2003 Northrop Grumman supports NATO visit through role at Joint
National Integration Center.
10/09/2003 The Hive Group introduces Honeycomb 4 for visually analyzing
thousands of rows of data in minutes.
10/09/2003 Air Force Modeling and Simulation (M&S) Conference 2004.
10/09/2003 SAIC launches new generation navigation service.
10/08/2003 BIO-key selected as biometric solution for Entryport of
Canada.
10/08/2003 Lockheed Martin selected to provide $46 million hydrological
forecast system to Romania.
10/08/2003 Oracle Business Flow Accelerator approach enables
dramatically reduced implementation time and lower costs.
10/07/2003 Competitive Intelligence (CI) is the future: Intelligence
drives success.
10/06/2003 NCR selects FaceTime for managing and securing instant
messaging.
10/06/2003 Mindspeed(TM) Technologies adopts joint GRIC - Axcelerant
solution for outside the firewall access.
10/06/2003 Linux Networx provides John Deere Evolocity cluster for
advanced engineering analysis.
10/03/2003 EDS PLM solutions recognized as the leader by industry
research firm in PLM vendor comparison.
10/03/2003 Lockheed Martin highlights transformational systems at
Association of the U.S. Army annual meeting.
10/03/2003 12th NAVMSMO Technical Interchange Meeting announcement.
10/02/2003 Crystal Decisions builds performance management system for
Alderwoods Group.
10/01/2003 Zaplet, Inc. announces availability of Zaplet 3,
collaborative business process management software.
10/01/2003 SAP Mobile Business gains market momentum across multiple
industries.
10/01/2003 Microsoft unveils speech technology joint development program
participants.
10/01/2003 Sabre Airline Solutions announces new profitability system
calibration tool.
09/30/2003 Netcentric Warfare's future and battlefield experiences to be
examined at Aviation Week's Netcentric Conference.
09/29/2003 Evant and IBM to offer next-generation retail management
solutions to retailers, wholesalers and distributors.
09/29/2003 Quantum's new web-based sales tool makes it easy for channel
partners to correctly configure solutions while saving time and money.
09/29/2003 Cognos puts City of Coquitlam on the road to CPM.
09/29/2003 New International Security Study by PricewaterhouseCoopers
and CIO Magazine shows United States ahead of other countries in raising
employee awareness of security policies.
************************************************************
Subscribe to DSSResources.COM. One month $10, six months $25.
Visit http://dssresources.com/subscriber/subscriber.html
************************************************************
DSS News is copyrighted (c) 2003 by D. J. Power. Please send your questions to
daniel.power@dssresources.com.
|