nach oben

Group Decision and Negotiation

Erschienen in:

10.01.2019

Design Theory for Generating Alternatives in Public Decision Making Processes

verfasst von: Irene Pluchinotta, Akin O. Kazakçi, Raffaele Giordano, Alexis Tsoukiàs

Erschienen in: Group Decision and Negotiation | Ausgabe 2/2019

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Literature about public decision making experiences, including stakeholders’ engagement, offers best practices but also reports of unsuccessful case studies. Meaningful participation activities require direct integration of stakeholders into all the phases of the public decision process to unleash innovation. Often, policy making incorporates participation late in the process, after the problem definition has occurred, alternatives have been defined, without considering stakeholders’ knowledge and problem understanding. The early stage of policy alternatives design is essential to the development of policy. Our research presents an extensive literature review with respect to policy design and design theory in order to show that the formal process of generation of alternatives has been little investigated. There is a demand for methodologies aiming at supporting policy makers and relevant stakeholders during policy design. In this regard, this paper introduces (and explores) the operational role of design theory in the policy making process for the generation of policy alternatives. Design thinking, as a way to inform a collective problem definition leading to innovation, highlights the value of early stakeholders’ engagement. The aim of this paper is to understand, from an operational point of view, what “design” means in a policy making context, developing an innovative approach for assisting the formalization of policy design. The paper uses the results of a pilot case study to illustrate the application of the Concepts–Knowledge (C-K) theory framework to support the innovative design of policy alternatives for the groundwater protection policy of the Apulia Region (southern Italy).

Vorheriger Artikel Strategic Analyses of the Hydropolitical Conflicts Surrounding the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam

Nächster Artikel Are You Angry (Happy, Sad) or Aren’t You? Emotion Detection Difficulty in Email Negotiation

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Ackermann F, Eden C (2011) Strategic management of stakeholders: theory and practice. Long Range Plan 44(3):179–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2010.08.001

Ackermann F, Heinzerling L (2004) Priceless: on knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. The New Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.330.7499.1091

Adla A, Zarate P, Soubie J (2011) A proposal of toolkit for GDSS facilitators. Group Decis Negot 20(1):57–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-010-9204-8

Agogué M, Kazakçi AO (2014) 10 Years of C–K theory: a survey on the academic and industrial impacts of a design theory. Anthol Theor Models Des. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6338-1_11

Agogué M, Hooge S, Arnoux F, Brown I (2014) An introduction to innovative design. Elements and applications of C–K theory. TRANSVALOR, Paris

Alexander C (1964) Notes on the synthesis of form. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Alexander ER (1982) Design in the decision-making process. Policy Sci 14:279–292

Alford J (2009) Engaging public sector clients: from service delivery to co-production. Palgrave MacMillan, Houndmills

Alshuwaikhat HM, Nkwenti DI (2002) Visualizing decision making: perspectives on collaborative and participative approach to sustainable urban planning and management. Environ Plan 29(4):513–531. https://doi.org/10.1068/b12818

Ananda J, Herath G (2003) Incorporating stakeholder values into regional forest planning: a value function approach. Ecol Econ 45(1):75–90

Archer LB (1965) Systematic method for designers. The Design Council, London

Archer LB (1970) An overview of the structure of the design process. In: Moore G (ed) Emerging methods in environmental design and planning. MIT, Cambridge, pp 285–307

Bardach E (1977) The implementation game. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Bayazit N (2004) Investigating design: a review of forty years of design research. Des Issues 20(1):16–29

Bayley C, French S (2008) Designing a participatory process for stakeholder involvement in a societal decision. Group Decis Negot 17(3):195–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-007-9076-8

Beierle TC (2002) The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Anal 22(4):739–749. https://doi.org/10.1111/0272-4332.00065

Beierle TC, Cayford J (2002) Democracy in practice: public participation in environmental decisions. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

Bemelmans-Videc M, Vedung E (1998) Conclusion: policy instrument types, packages, choices and evaluation. In: Bemelmans-Videc M, Rist RC, Vedung E (eds) Carrots, sticks and sermons: policy instruments and their evaluation. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, pp 249–273

Bobrow D (2006) Policy design: ubiquitous, necessary and difficult. In: Peters BG, Pierre J (eds) Handbook of public policy. Sage, London, pp 75–96

Bobrow D, Dryzek JS (1987) Policy analysis by design. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh

Bressers H, Klok P (1988) Fundamentals for a theory of policy instruments. Int J Soc Econ 15(3/4):22–41

Brown T (2008) Design thinking. Harvard Bus Rev 84(6):15–24

Brown T (2009) Change by design: how design thinking transforms organisation and inspires innovation. Harper Collins, New York

Brugha R, Varvasovsky Z (2000) Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health Policy Plan 15:239–246

Buchanan R (1992) Wicked problems in design thinking. Des Issues 8(2):5–21

Celino A, Concilio G (2011) Explorative nature of negotiation in participatory decision making for sustainability. Group Decis Negot 20(2):255–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-010-9197-3

Checkland P (2000) Soft systems methodology: a thirty year retrospective. Syst Res Behav Sci 17:S11–S58

Colorni A, Tsoukiàs A (2018) What is a decision problem? designing alternatives. In: Matsatsinis N, Grigoroudis E (eds) Preference disaggregation in multiple criteria decision analysis. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90599-0_1

Creighton JL (2005) The public participation handbook. Jossey-Bass, New York

Daniell KA, Mazri C, Tsoukiàs A (2010) Real world decision-aiding: a case of participatory water management. In: Insua DR, French S (eds) e-Democracy: a group decision and negotiation perspective, vol 5. Springer, Berlin, pp 125–150

De Marchi G, Lucertini G, Tsoukiàs A (2016) From evidence-based policy making to policy analytics. Ann Oper Res 236(1):15–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-014-1578-6

Del Rıo P, Carrillo-Hermosilla J, Konnola T (2010) Policy strategies to promote eco-innovation. J Ind Ecol 14(4):541–557

Dorst K, Cross N (2001) Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem solution. Des Stud 22(5):425–437

Eden C, Ackermann F (2004) Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the public sector. Eur J Oper Res 152(3):615–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00061-4

Eden C, Ackermann F (2013) Problem structuring: on the nature of, and reaching agreement about, goals. EURO J Decis Process 1(1):7–28

Elmore RF (1987) Instruments and strategy in public policy. Policy Stud Rev 7(1):174–186

Elmquist M, Segrestin B (2009) Sustainable development through innovative design: lessons from the KCP method experimented with an automotive firm. Int J Autom Technol Manag 9(2):229–244

Ferretti V, Pluchinotta I, Tsoukiàs A (2019) Studying the generation of alternatives in public policy making processes. Eur J Oper Res 273:353–363

Fischer F (2000) Citizens, experts and the environment: the politics of local knowledge. Duke University Press, Durham

Fischer F, Miller G, Sidney MS (2007) Handbook of public policy: theory, politics, and methods. Sage, London. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608054

Forester J (1999) The deliberative practitioner: encouraging participatory planning processes. MIT Press, Cambridge

Freeman RE (2010) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

French S, Bayley C (2011) Public participation: comparing approaches. J Risk Res 14(2):37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2010.515316

French S, Insua DR, Ruggeri F (2007) E-participation and decision analysis. Decis Anal 4:1–16

Friend J, Hickling A (1987) Planning under pressure. The strategic choice approach. Pergamon, Oxford

Friend J, Power J, Yewlett C (1974) Public planning: the inter-corporate dimension. Tavistock, London

Giordano R, D’Agostino D, Apollonio C, Lamaddalena N, Vurro M (2013) Bayesian belief network to support conflict analysis for groundwater protection: the case of the Apulia Region. J Environ Manag 115:136–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.11.011

Giordano R, D’Agostino D, Apollonio C, Scardigno A, Pagano A, Portoghese I, Lamaddalena N, Piccinni AF, Vurro M (2015) Evaluating acceptability of groundwater protection measures under different agricultural policies. Agric Water Manag 147:54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.07.023

Giordano R, Brugnach M, Pluchinotta I (2017a) Ambiguity in problem framing as a barrier to collective actions: some hints from groundwater protection policy in the Apulia Region. Group Decis Negot 26(5):911–932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9519-1

Giordano R, Pagano A, Pluchinotta I, Olivo R, Hernandez SM, Lafuente ES (2017b) The complexity of the network of interactions in flood emergency management: the Lorca flash flood case. Environ Model Softw 95:180–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.026

Gregory R, Fischhoff B, McDaniels T (2005) Acceptable input: using decision analysis to guide public policy deliberations. Decis Anal 2:4–16

Gunningham N, Grabosky P, Sinclair D (1998) Smart regulation: designing environmental policy. Clarendon Press, Oxford

Hand LC (2012) Public policy design and assumptions about human behaviour. In: Western political science association’s annual conference

Harrison S, Qureshi M (2000) Choice of stakeholder groups and members in multicriteria decision models. Nat Resour Forum 24(1):11–19

Hatchuel A, Weil B (1999) Pour une théorie unifiée de la conception, Axiomatiques et processus collectifs. CGS Ecole des Mines, GIS cognition-CNRS

Hatchuel A, Weil B (2002) C–K theory: notions and applications of a unified design theory. In: Proceedings of the Herbert Simon international conference on «design sciences», pp 1–22

Hatchuel A, Weil B (2003) A new approach of innovative design: an introduction to CK theory. In: XIVth international conference on engineering design, Stockholm, Sweden, 19th–21st August

Hatchuel A, Weil B (2009) C–K design theory: an advanced formulation. Res Eng Des 19(4):181–192

Hatchuel A, Le Masson P, Weil B (2004) C–K theory in practice: lessons from industrial applications. Des Conf 2004:245–258

Hatchuel A, Le Masson P, Weil B (2008) Teaching innovative design reasoning: how could C–K theory help? In: Proceedings of 10th international conference on engineering and product design education pp 73–78

Hatchuel A, Le Masson P, Weil B, Agogué M, Kazakçi AO, Hooge S (2015) Multiple forms of applications and impacts of a design theory-ten years of industrial applications of C-K theory. In: Lindemann ACU (ed) Impact of design research on industrial practice—tools, technology, and training, December. Springer, Munich, pp 189–209

Hood C (1986) The tools of government. Chatham House, Chatham

Hooge S, Béjean M, Arnoux F (2016) Organising for radical innovation: the benefits of the interplay between cognitive and organisational processes in Kcp workshops. Int J Innov Manag 20(4):1–33. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919616400041

Howlett M (2004) Beyond good and evil in policy implementation: instrument mixes, implementation styles and second generation theories of policy instrument choice. Policy Soc 23(2):1–17

Howlett M (2011a) Designing public policies: principles and instruments. Routledge, London

Howlett M (2011b) Revisiting policy design: the rise and fall (and rebirth?) of policy design studies. In: General conference of the European consortium for political research (ECPR), pp 1–32

Howlett M (2014) From the ‘old’ to the ‘new’ policy design: design thinking beyond markets and collaborative governance. Policy Sci 47(3):187–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-014-9199-0

Howlett M, Lejano R (2013) Tales from the crypt: the rise and fall (and re-birth?) of policy design studies. Adm Soc 45(3):356–380

Howlett M, Mukherjee I, Woo JJ (2015) From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: the new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy Polit 43(2):291–311

Hysing E (2009) From government to governance? a comparison of environmental governing in Swedish forestry and transport. Governance 22:547–672

Kazakçi AO, Tsoukiàs A (2005) Extending the C–K design theory: a theoretical background for personal design assistants. J Eng Des 16(4):399–411

Keyes JM (1996) Power tools: the form and function of legal instruments for government action. Can J Adm Law Pract 10:133–174

Kim WC, Mauborgne RA (1995) A procedural justice model of strategic decision-making: strategy content implications in the multinational. Organ Sci 6(1):44–61. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.1.44

Kim WC, Mauborgne RA (1998) Procedural justice, strategic decision making, and the knowledge economy. Strateg Manag J 19(4):323–338

Lasswell H (1954) Key symbols, signs and icons. In: Bryson L, Finkelstein L, MacIver RM (eds) Symbols and values: an initial study. Harper & Bros, New York, pp 77–94

Lasswell H (1956) The decision process: seven categories of functional analysis. Bureau of Governmental Research, College of Business and Public Administration, University of Maryland

Lasswell H (1971) A pre-view of policy sciences. American Elsevier, New York

Lavin J (2010) Participatory processes and instruments. In: Rios Insua D, French S (eds) E-participation. A group decision and negotiation perspective. Springer, Dordrecht

Le Masson P, Weil B, Hatchuel A (2014) Théorie, méthodes et organisations de la conception. TRANSVALOR, Paris

Levi-Faur D (2012) The Oxford handbook of governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Liedtka J, King A, Bennett K (2013) Solving problems with design thinking: ten stores of what works. Columbia University Press, New York

Lienert J, Schnetzer F, Ingold K (2013) Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes. J Environ Manag 125:134–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.052

Linder SH, Peters BG (1984) From social theory to policy design. J Public Policy 4(3):237–259. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X0000221X

Lowi T (1985) The state in politics: the relation between policy and administration. In: Noll R (ed) Regulatory policy and the social sciences. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 67–105

Lynn LE, Gould SG (1980) Designing public policy: a casebook on the role of policy analysis. Goodyear Publishing Company, Santa Monica

Majone G (1993) Pitfalls of analysis. In: Majone G, Quade E (eds) International series on applied system analysis. Wiley, New York, pp 7–22

Martin R (2009) The design of businesses: why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Harvard Business Press, Boston

Marttunen M, Mustajoki J, DufvaM Karjalainen T (2013) How to design and realize participation of stakeholders in MCDA processes? a framework for selecting an appropriate approach. EURO J Decis Process 3(1–2):187–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070-013-0016-3

May PJ (1981) Hints for crafting alternative policies. Policy Anal 7(2):227–244

May PJ (1991) Reconsidering policy design: policies and publics. J Public Policy 11(02):187. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X0000619X

May PJ (2003) Policy design and implementation. In: Guy Peters B, Pierre J (eds) Handbook of public administration. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 223–233

Mayntz R (1979) Public bureaucracies and policy implementation. Int Soc Sci J 31(4):633–645

Mayntz R (1981) The changing conditions of effective public policy: a new challenge for. Policy Anal II(2):123–143

Mazri C (2007) Apport méthodologique pour la structuration de processus de décision publique en contexte participatif. Le cas des risques industriels majeurs en France. Université Paris-Dauphine, Paris

Mintrom M, Luetjens J (2016) Design thinking in policy making processes: opportunities and challenges. Aust J Public Adm 75(3):391–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12211

Moore MH (1995) Creating public value: strategic management in government. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Nogueira F, Borges M, Wolf JH (2017) Collaborative decision-making in non-formal planning settings. Group Decis Negot 26(5):875–890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9518-2

Norese M, Rolando D, Fregonara E (2015) Integration of problem structuring methods: a methodological proposal for complex regional decision-making processes. Int J Decis Support Syst Technol 7(2):58–83. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDSST.2015040104

O’Toole L (2000) Research on policy implementation: assessment and prospects. J Public Adm Res Theor 10(2):263–288

Oppl S (2017) Supporting the collaborative construction of a shared understanding about work with a guided conceptual modeling technique, vol 26. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9485-7

Ostanello A, Tsoukiàs A (1993) An explicative model of ‘public’ interorganizational interactions. Eur J Oper Res 70:67–82

Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Ostrom E (2010) Governing a commons from a Citizen’s perspective. Heinrich-Boell Stiftung, Cologne, pp 1–9

Pahl G, Beitz W (1984) Engineering design, a systematic approach. The Design Council, London

Peters BG, Pierre J (1998) Governance without government? rethinking public administration. J Public Adm Res Theor 8(2):223–244

Pidd M (2004) Complementarity in systems modelling. In: Pidd Michael (ed) Systems modelling: theory and practice theory and practice. Wiley, Chichester, pp 1–20

Pluchinotta I (2015) Multi-agent modelling for distributed intelligent decision in water management. Doctoral thesis Université Paris Dauphine, PSL Univ, France and Techinical University of Bari, Italy

Pluchinotta I, Pagano A, Giordano R, Tsoukiàs A (2018) A system dynamics model for supporting decision makers in irrigation water management. J Environ Manag 223:815–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.083

Pollock S, Rothkopf M, Barnett A (1994) Operational research and the public sector. North Holland, Amsterdam

Portoghese I, D’Agostino D, Giordano R, Scardigno A, Apollonio C, Vurro M (2013) An integrated modelling tool to evaluate the acceptability of irrigation constraint measures for groundwater protection. Environ Model Softw 46:90–103

Reed M, Graves A, Dandy N, Posthumus H, Hubacek K, Morris J, Prell C, Quinn CH, Stringer LC (2009) Who’s in and why? a typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J Environ Manag 90(5):1933–1949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001

Renn O (2006) Participatory processes for designing environmental policies. Land Use Policy 23(1):34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.005

Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

Rosenhead J (2006) Past, present and future of problem structuring methods. J Oper Res Soc 57(7):759–765. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602206

Rowe P (1998) Design thinking. MIT Pres, Cambridge

Rowe GT, Horlick-Jones JW, Pidgeon N (2005) Difficulties in evaluating public engagement initiatives: Reflections on an evaluation of the UK GM Nation? public debate. Public Underst Sci 14:331–352

Sabatier P (2007) Theories of the policy process. Westview Press, Boulder

Salamon L (1981) Rethinking public management: third party government and the changing forms of government action. Public Policy 29(3):255–275

Santoro S, Pluchinotta I, Pagano A, Pengal P, Cokan B, Giordano R (2019) Assessing stakeholders’ risk perception to promote nature based solutions as flood protection strategies: the case of the Glinšˇcica river (Slovenia). Sci Total Environ 655:188–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.11.116

Schneider A, Ingram H (1997) Policy design for democracy. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence

Schon D (1983) The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Basic Books (Reprinted 1995), New York

Ullah AMMS, Rashid MM, Tamaki J (2012) On some unique features of C–K theory of design. CIRP J Manufact Sci Technol 5(1):55–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirpj.2011.09.001

Simon HA (1954) Some strategic considerations in the construction of social science models. In: Simon H (ed) Models of bounded rationality: behavioural economics and business organization. MIT Press, Cambridge

Simon HA (1969) The sciences of the artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge

Simon HA (1976) From substantive to procedural rationality. In: Latsis S (ed) Method and appraisal in economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Sterman JD (2000) Business dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. McGraw-Hill, Boston. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601336

Sterner T (2003) Policy instruments for environmental and natural resource management. Resource for the Future Press, Washington, DC

Suh N (1990) Principles of design. Oxford University Press, New York

Tavella E, Franco LA (2015) Dynamics of group knowledge production in facilitated modelling workshops: an exploratory study. Group Decis Negot 24(3):451–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-014-9398-2

Tsoukiàs A (2007) On the concept of decision aiding process: An operational perspective. Ann Oper Res 154(1):3–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-007-0187-z

Tsoukiàs A, Montibeller G, Lucertini G, Belton V (2013) Policy analytics: an agenda for research and practice. EURO J Decis Process 1(1–2):115–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40070-013-0008-3

UNDP UNDP (2012) Multi-stakeholder decision-making a guidebook for establishing a multi-stakeholder decision-making process to support green. Low-Emission and Climate-Resilient Development Strategies

Utterback J, Abernathy W (1975) A dynamic model of process and product innovation. Omega 3(6):639–665

Vennix JAM (1996) Group model-building: tackling messy problems. Syst Dyn Rev 15(4):379–401

Webler T, Renn O (1995) A brief primer on participation: philosophy and practice. In: Renn O, Webler T, Wiedemann P (eds) Fairness and competence in citizen participation evaluating models for environmental discourse. Springer, Berlin, pp 17–33

Weimer D (1992) The craft of policy design: can it be more than art? Rev Policy Res 11(3–4):370–388. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1992.tb00479.x

Wildavsky A (1979) Speaking truth to power: the art and craft of policy analysis. Little-Brown, Boston

Wilensky R (1981) Meta-planning: representing and using knowledge about planning in problem solving and natural language understanding. Cogn Sci 5:197–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-4832-1446-7.50044-3

Woodside K (1986) Policy instruments and the study of public policy. Can J Polit Sci 19(4):775–793. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423900055141

Zarate P (2013) Tools for collaborative decision-making. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118574690

Titel: Design Theory for Generating Alternatives in Public Decision Making Processes
verfasst von: Irene Pluchinotta
Akin O. Kazakçi
Raffaele Giordano
Alexis Tsoukiàs
Publikationsdatum: 10.01.2019
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Group Decision and Negotiation / Ausgabe 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0926-2644
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-9907
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-018-09610-5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2019

Strategic Analyses of the Hydropolitical Conflicts Surrounding the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam

Zeuthen–Hicks Bargaining in Electronic Negotiations

Nash-2 Equilibrium: Selective Farsightedness Under Uncertain Response

Knowledge Acquisition Using Group Support Systems

Are You Angry (Happy, Sad) or Aren’t You? Emotion Detection Difficulty in Email Negotiation

Interval-Valued Atanassov Intuitionistic Fuzzy CODAS Method for Multi Criteria Group Decision Making Problems