IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v278y2019i3p869-882.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What to do when decision-makers deviate from model recommendations? Empirical evidence from hydropower industry

Author

Listed:
  • Käki, Anssi
  • Kemppainen, Katariina
  • Liesiö, Juuso

Abstract

Decision makers do not always follow recommendations from model-based decision support systems. We suggest that analyzing the differences between decision recommendations produced by prescriptive models and the behavior of the decision makers provides valuable insights that can be utilized to improve model-based decision support processes. Specifically, we develop an intervention process in the context of hydropower production planning to study the motivations of decision makers and the ramifications of their behavior. The analysis is based on deviations between recommendations of an in-house optimization tool and actual decisions, enhanced by planner feedback collected from a daily web-survey. We find that even though the planners make some adjustments with positive financial impact, their actions mainly worsen the performance of the production plan. Using the collected data, we identify several reasons for the deviations and recommend multiple enhancements to the planning process. For example, we propose a shift from output-adjusting to input-adjusting interaction between human planner and model. Altogether our facilitated modeling project shows that combining objective and judgmental process feedback is superior for recognizing corrective actions and systematically improving model-driven decision processes. Furthermore, the intervention process developed for this case gives structure for the lifecycle management of model-based decision support systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Käki, Anssi & Kemppainen, Katariina & Liesiö, Juuso, 2019. "What to do when decision-makers deviate from model recommendations? Empirical evidence from hydropower industry," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(3), pages 869-882.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:278:y:2019:i:3:p:869-882
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2019.04.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221719303418
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.04.021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karel H. van Donselaar & Vishal Gaur & Tom van Woensel & Rob A. C. M. Broekmeulen & Jan C. Fransoo, 2010. "Ordering Behavior in Retail Stores and Implications for Automated Replenishment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 766-784, May.
    2. John D. C. Little, 1970. "Models and Managers: The Concept of a Decision Calculus," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(8), pages 466-485, April.
    3. Wedad Elmaghraby & Wolfgang Jank & Shu Zhang & Itir Z. Karaesmen, 2015. "Sales Force Behavior, Pricing Information, and Pricing Decisions," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 495-510, October.
    4. Gary E. Bolton & Elena Katok, 2008. "Learning by Doing in the Newsvendor Problem: A Laboratory Investigation of the Role of Experience and Feedback," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 519-538, September.
    5. Stephen J. Hoch & David A. Schkade, 1996. "A Psychological Approach to Decision Support Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 51-64, January.
    6. Weron, Rafał, 2014. "Electricity price forecasting: A review of the state-of-the-art with a look into the future," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1030-1081.
    7. Matthew J. Liberatore & Wenhong Luo, 2010. "The Analytics Movement: Implications for Operations Research," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 313-324, August.
    8. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    9. Anssi Käki & Juuso Liesiö & Ahti Salo & Srinivas Talluri, 2015. "Newsvendor decisions under supply uncertainty," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(5), pages 1544-1560, March.
    10. Maurice E. Schweitzer & Gérard P. Cachon, 2000. "Decision Bias in the Newsvendor Problem with a Known Demand Distribution: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 404-420, March.
    11. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    12. Vidgen, Richard & Shaw, Sarah & Grant, David B., 2017. "Management challenges in creating value from business analytics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 626-639.
    13. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Luoma, Jukka & Saarinen, Esa, 2013. "On the importance of behavioral operational research: The case of understanding and communicating about dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(3), pages 623-634.
    14. Fleten, Stein-Erik & Kristoffersen, Trine Krogh, 2007. "Stochastic programming for optimizing bidding strategies of a Nordic hydropower producer," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 916-928, September.
    15. Toni Wäfler & Rüdiger Weth & Johan Karltun & Ulrike Starker & Kathrin Gärtner & Roland Gasser & Jessica Bruch, 2010. "Human Control Capabilities," Springer Books, in: Jan C. Fransoo & Toni Waefler & John R. Wilson (ed.), Behavioral Operations in Planning and Scheduling, chapter 0, pages 199-230, Springer.
    16. Jan Riezebos & Jean-Michel Hoc & Nasser Mebarki & Christos Dimopoulos & Wout Wezel & Guillaume Pinot, 2010. "Design of Scheduling Algorithms," Springer Books, in: Jan C. Fransoo & Toni Waefler & John R. Wilson (ed.), Behavioral Operations in Planning and Scheduling, chapter 0, pages 299-321, Springer.
    17. Petropoulos, Fotios & Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul, 2016. "Do ‘big losses’ in judgmental adjustments to statistical forecasts affect experts’ behaviour?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 842-852.
    18. Ujwal Kayande & Arnaud De Bruyn & Gary L. Lilien & Arvind Rangaswamy & Gerrit H. van Bruggen, 2009. "How Incorporating Feedback Mechanisms in a DSS Affects DSS Evaluations," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 527-546, December.
    19. Mortenson, Michael J. & Doherty, Neil F. & Robinson, Stewart, 2015. "Operational research from Taylorism to Terabytes: A research agenda for the analytics age," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(3), pages 583-595.
    20. Liberatore, Matthew J. & Hatchuel, Armand & Weil, Benoit & Stylianou, Antonis C., 2000. "An organizational change perspective on the value of modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(1), pages 184-194, August.
    21. Gilberto Montibeller & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2015. "Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Decision and Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1230-1251, July.
    22. Ian N. Durbach & Gilberto Montibeller, 2019. "Behavioural Analytics: Exploring judgments and choices in large data sets," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(2), pages 255-268, February.
    23. Ralph Riedel & Jan Fransoo & Vincent Wiers & Katrin Fischer & Julien Cegarra & David Jentsch, 2010. "Building Decision Support Systems for Acceptance," Springer Books, in: Jan C. Fransoo & Toni Waefler & John R. Wilson (ed.), Behavioral Operations in Planning and Scheduling, chapter 0, pages 231-295, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sroginis, Anna & Fildes, Robert & Kourentzes, Nikolaos, 2023. "Use of contextual and model-based information in adjusting promotional forecasts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1177-1191.
    2. Nguyen, Duy Tan & Adulyasak, Yossiri & Landry, Sylvain, 2021. "Research manuscript: The Bullwhip Effect in rule-based supply chain planning systems–A case-based simulation at a hard goods retailer," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    3. Khosrowabadi, Naghmeh & Hoberg, Kai & Imdahl, Christina, 2022. "Evaluating human behaviour in response to AI recommendations for judgemental forecasting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(3), pages 1151-1167.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhavani Shanker Uppari & Sameer Hasija, 2019. "Modeling Newsvendor Behavior: A Prospect Theory Approach," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 481-500, July.
    2. Anna‐Lena Sachs & Michael Becker‐Peth & Stefan Minner & Ulrich W. Thonemann, 2022. "Empirical newsvendor biases: Are target service levels achieved effectively and efficiently?," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(4), pages 1839-1855, April.
    3. Johnson, Michael P. & Midgley, Gerald & Chichirau, George, 2018. "Emerging trends and new frontiers in community operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1178-1191.
    4. Villa, Sebastián & Castañeda, Jaime Andrés, 2018. "Transshipments in supply chains: A behavioral investigation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 715-729.
    5. Yun Shin Lee & Enno Siemsen, 2017. "Task Decomposition and Newsvendor Decision Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(10), pages 3226-3245, October.
    6. Conboy, Kieran & Mikalef, Patrick & Dennehy, Denis & Krogstie, John, 2020. "Using business analytics to enhance dynamic capabilities in operations research: A case analysis and research agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(3), pages 656-672.
    7. Katsikopoulos, Konstantinos V. & Egozcue, Martin & Garcia, Luis Fuentes, 2022. "A simple model for mixing intuition and analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(2), pages 779-789.
    8. Harper, Alison & Mustafee, Navonil & Yearworth, Mike, 2021. "Facets of trust in simulation studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(1), pages 197-213.
    9. Tom F. Tan & Bradley R. Staats, 2020. "Behavioral Drivers of Routing Decisions: Evidence from Restaurant Table Assignment," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(4), pages 1050-1070, April.
    10. Isabelle Piot-Lepetit & Joseph Nzongang, 2021. "Business analytics for managing performance of microfinance Institutions: A flexible management of the implementation process," Post-Print hal-03209188, HAL.
    11. Isabelle Piot-Lepetit & Joseph Nzongang, 2021. "Business Analytics for Managing Performance of Microfinance Institutions: A Flexible Management of the Implementation Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, April.
    12. Becker-Peth, Michael & Thonemann, Ulrich W., 2016. "Reference points in revenue sharing contracts—How to design optimal supply chain contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1033-1049.
    13. Kalakbandi, Vinay Kumar, 2018. "Managing the misbehaving retailer under demand uncertainty and imperfect information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(3), pages 939-954.
    14. Duan, Yanqing & Cao, Guangming & Edwards, John S., 2020. "Understanding the impact of business analytics on innovation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(3), pages 673-686.
    15. Burger, Katharina & White, Leroy & Yearworth, Mike, 2019. "Developing a smart operational research with hybrid practice theories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(3), pages 1137-1150.
    16. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Lahtinen, Tuomas J., 2016. "Path dependence in Operational Research—How the modeling process can influence the results," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 3(C), pages 14-20.
    17. Stewart Robinson & Stavrianna Dimitriou & Kathy Kotiadis, 2017. "Addressing the sample size problem in behavioural operational research: simulating the newsvendor problem," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(3), pages 253-268, March.
    18. Hindle, Giles A. & Vidgen, Richard, 2018. "Developing a business analytics methodology: A case study in the foodbank sector," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 836-851.
    19. Ian Durbach & Gilberto Montibeller, 2018. "Predicting in shock: on the impact of negative, extreme, rare, and short lived events on judgmental forecasts," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 6(1), pages 213-233, June.
    20. He, Haonan & Wang, Shanyong, 2019. "Cost-benefit associations in consumer inventory problem with uncertain benefit," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 271-284.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:278:y:2019:i:3:p:869-882. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.