IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/johsem/v2y2005i1p17n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Stakeholders Perceive Threats and Risks Differently: the Use of Group Support Systems to Develop a Common Understanding and a Shared Response

Author

Listed:
  • Rutkowski Anne-Francoise

    (Tilburg University)

  • Van de Walle Bartel A

    (Tilburg University)

  • van Groenendaal Willem J.H.

    (Tilburg University)

  • Pol Jan

    (@@@@)

Abstract

We present a multi-phased action research project conducted at the department of Information Management - Customer Support and Operations in a large multi-national company. This department is in charge of IT service continuity and was asked to develop an IT response and recovery plan that had to be integrated within the organization's overall business continuity plan. The department's key challenge was to develop a response plan which incorporates the perspectives of the business managers whose perception of the threats and associated risks differed significantly from that of the IT managers. To develop such a shared response plan, we used group support systems and cognitive mapping techniques to identify both stakeholder groups' perceptions of IT threats and risks. This allowed us to raise awareness in both groups for the other group's different perspectives. We aggregated the responses into a shared response and recovery plan, representing the views of both groups. Our research has made clear to the stakeholder groups involved the necessity of sharing information and developing awareness to formulate a shared disaster recovery plan for ensuring business continuity and recovery.

Suggested Citation

  • Rutkowski Anne-Francoise & Van de Walle Bartel A & van Groenendaal Willem J.H. & Pol Jan, 2005. "When Stakeholders Perceive Threats and Risks Differently: the Use of Group Support Systems to Develop a Common Understanding and a Shared Response," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:johsem:v:2:y:2005:i:1:p:17:n:4
    DOI: 10.2202/1547-7355.1107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1107
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1547-7355.1107?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 look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anne-Françoise Rutkowski & Martin Smits, 2001. "Constructionist Theory to Explain Effects of GDSS," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 67-82, January.
    2. Gerardine DeSanctis & R. Brent Gallupe, 1987. "A Foundation for the Study of Group Decision Support Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(5), pages 589-609, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Michael Parent & R. Brent Gallupe, 2001. "The Role of Leadership in Group Support Systems Failure," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(5), pages 405-422, September.
    2. Elfvengren, K.Kalle & Karkkainen, Hannu & Torkkeli, Marko & Tuominen, Markku, 2004. "A GDSS based approach for the assessment of customer needs in industrial markets," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 275-292, June.
    3. Meløn, Mønica García & Aragonés Beltran, Pablo & Carmen González Cruz, M., 2008. "An AHP-based evaluation procedure for Innovative Educational Projects: A face-to-face vs. computer-mediated case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 754-765, October.
    4. Przemysław Polak, 2017. "Problems of the Use of Information Systems Supporting the Conduct of General Elections," Collegium of Economic Analysis Annals, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, issue 45, pages 67-78.
    5. J. Teich & H. Wallenius & J. Wallenius, 1998. "World Wide Web Technology in Support of Negotiation and Communication," Working Papers ir98018, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    6. Jae Kwang Lee & Jae Kyeong Kim & Soung Hie Kim & Hung Kook Park, 2002. "An Intelligent Idea Categorizer for Electronic Meeting Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 363-378, September.
    7. O'Keefe, Robert M., 2016. "Experimental behavioural research in operational research: What we know and what we might come to know," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 899-907.
    8. Luis A. Guerrero & José A. Pino, 2009. "Supporting Discussions for Decision Meetings," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 589-601, November.
    9. Gary V. Howorka & Lorien A. Anderson & K. Michael Goul & Michael Hine, 1995. "A Computational Model of Coordination for the Design of Organizational Decision Support Systems," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 4(1), pages 43-70, March.
    10. Francisco Antunes & João Paulo Costa, 2010. "The Missing Link: Theoretical Reflections On Decision Reconstruction," Portuguese Journal of Management Studies, ISEG, Universidade de Lisboa, vol. 0(2), pages 197-214.
    11. Guo Li & Wenling Liu & Zhaohua Wang & Mengqi Liu, 2017. "An empirical examination of energy consumption, behavioral intention, and situational factors: evidence from Beijing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 507-524, August.
    12. Bexy Alfonso & Vicente Botti & Antonio Garrido & Adriana Giret, 2014. "A MAS-based infrastructure for negotiation and its application to a water-right market," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 183-199, April.
    13. Yoga Nindhita & Budiyanto Budiyanto, 2022. "Do learning ICT usage affect the learning process quality? an empirical study in private university," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 37(1), pages 24-36, November.
    14. Sabrina Bresciani & Martin J. Eppler, 2015. "The Pitfalls of Visual Representations," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(4), pages 21582440156, October.
    15. Yu, Lean & Wang, Shouyang & Lai, Kin Keung, 2009. "An intelligent-agent-based fuzzy group decision making model for financial multicriteria decision support: The case of credit scoring," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(3), pages 942-959, June.
    16. Damart, Sébastien & Roy, Bernard, 2009. "The uses of cost-benefit analysis in public transportation decision-making in France," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 200-212, August.
    17. Rossi De Mio, Ruggero, 2002. "A Method for a Quantitative Measure of Emotional Intelligence in Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Communication," Working Papers 470, IAMSR, Åbo Akademi.
    18. Terri L. Griffith & Mark A. Fuller & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1998. "Facilitator Influence in Group Support Systems: Intended and Unintended Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 20-36, March.
    19. Gregory E. Kersten & Wojtek Michalowski & David Cray & Ian Lee, 1991. "An analytic basis for decision support in negotiations," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 743-761, October.
    20. L White, 2006. "Evaluating problem-structuring methods: developing an approach to show the value and effectiveness of PSMs," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 842-855, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bpj:johsem:v:2:y:2005:i:1:p:17:n:4. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyterbrill.com .

    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.