Summary
The fine art of human action in its possible fields has led man's interest in the very abstraction of the selection and decision process to understand or elucidate before a great variety of events that surround him. All with the purpose of reaching the best possible selection and that it is known in a fallible time frame, computer technology being an ally in the development of this knowledge, bringing its practicality and verification to what today we call decision support systems..
Decision Support System a legacy of options
The fine art of human action in its possible fields has led man's interest in the very abstraction of the selection and decision process to understand or elucidate before a great variety of events that surround him. All with the purpose of reaching the best possible selection and that it is known in a fallible time frame, computer technology being an ally in the development of this knowledge, bringing its practicality and verification to what today we call decision support systems..
When analyzing this perspective, we find among the first pieces different phases that is the attempt to put together a decision process. There are currently a wide variety of alternative models to make decisions. These range from a merely theoretical view to others that have been applied. The number of phases also varies from 2 to 8 depending on the model, some being highly complex. Among the most widely adopted is the Kepner-Tregoe (1965) model. This method, with four decades since its emergence, has been positioned in the use of companies through the company Kepner-Tregoe Inc., achieving that practicality that companies seek, so it is interesting to observe how its theoretical bases are formed. Also another model to consider is the 4-phase model of Simon (1977) which is considered by E.Turban as “the most concise and even the most complete model for decision-making from a rational perspective. "(one).
In Simon's model (1997) we find 4 phases:
- Intelligence Design Choice Implementation
Being in the election phase the act that will propitiate the chain of events to its implementation or as E. Turban mentions it “is the phase in which the election is made and is directed to form a certain course of action…” (1). Ultimately, the choice is permeable with the design that shows a simplified reality of relationships and behaviors that provide a solution to the model that, being reasonable, will be implemented in the real problem that was examined in the intelligence phase.
While in the model of Kepner_Tregoe (1965) we find 3 main phases that clearly find the same abstraction in the phases of the model of Simon (1997):
- Problem analysis Decision analysis Potential problem analysis
Already expanded in the model according to Kepner_Tregoe (1973) the steps to its methodologies are defined by:
- Decision purpose status General Alternatives Establish objectives (Identify what should be, what is wanted and quantify them) Rank them by importance Evaluate alternatives against objectives Make tentative choices Analyze adversities and consequences Make the final decision
An important element when considering the model of Kepner_Tregoe (1973) and observing them others is that the phases or steps can be carried out in parallel or have an entry and return movement to the phase. This is more easily observable at the graphic level or as explained by E. Turban when speaking of the Simon model (1997) where he specifies that many times the division between its design phase and its choice phase is not clear where one returns to the other and vice versa taking place an iteration effect that is part of the refinement of the model and the proposed solution.
When comparing these models of the decision process, we can see how the abstraction of the selection and decision process has passed to a rationalized conception that actually share more similarities than differences, as stated by E. Trurban. Actually by observing the extended version of the Kepner_Tregoe (1973) model in a natural way we can make the relationships from one model to another, trying to accommodate the phases between them. For example the Intelligence phase with the Analysis of the problems which point exactly to the same principle and in the case of choice and implementation with making the final choice. This vision of convergence is more obvious as more models and perspectives are observed allowing us by inference to really grasp the substance of a decision process.
The reality that the human being is on a world of apparent chaos that is shown day by day both from one subjective perspective to another or from a family environment to a business one is part of the same engine of rationality that man seeks to perpetuate in order and of which he seeks to take him a participant in his day to day in each decision to a new vision. This is the momentum of the legacy of options that man builds and uses. Being part of the framework that allows progress and the structure for the emergence of decision support systems
Bibliography
1.-Turban, Efraim. "Decision Support Systems and Intelligent Systems" 6th Ed. Prentice Hall, 2001.
2.- Murchison James M. "Decision Support Systems (DSS) and Personal Decision Support Systems (PDSS): An Overview" Columbia TN, 38401, November 2000
3.-Mallach, EG (1994). " Understanding Decision Support Systems and Expert ”Systems.Chicago, Irwin.
