IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hin/complx/7954289.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Strategic Decision-Making as a Complex Adaptive System: A Conceptual Scientific Model

Author

Listed:
  • Dewey Wollmann
  • Maria Teresinha Arns Steiner

Abstract

A company in a competitive environment that wishes to be a benchmark in the business world needs a management model that enables the development of systemic thinking on the part of its executives. In addition to systemic thinking, it is also necessary that executives (i) are aware that the decision-making processes should be shared, (ii) have bounded rationality, and (iii) exert political influence according to their preferences. In this context, the aim of this paper is to describe a conceptual scientific model for strategic decision-making from rules originating from Complex Adaptive Systems and the following mathematical techniques: Analytic Network Process and Linear Programming. This applied and quantitative study is a theoretical essay developed from an integrative review of the aforementioned concepts and techniques, resulting in the proposition of a scientific and conceptual mathematical model that can be applied to a wide variety of business environments. The results obtained from a hypothetical example (Strategic Operation Management Decision) show that the model is able to rank a set of strategic decisions in the environment of most companies and generate information to minimize the negative effects of shared decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Dewey Wollmann & Maria Teresinha Arns Steiner, 2017. "The Strategic Decision-Making as a Complex Adaptive System: A Conceptual Scientific Model," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-13, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:hin:complx:7954289
    DOI: 10.1155/2017/7954289
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/8503/2017/7954289.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/8503/2017/7954289.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1155/2017/7954289?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gustavo Barros, 2010. "Herbert A. Simon and the concept of rationality: Boundaries and procedures," Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, Center of Political Economy, vol. 30(3), pages 455-472.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    3. Samuel D. Bond & Kurt A. Carlson & Ralph L. Keeney, 2008. "Generating Objectives: Can Decision Makers Articulate What They Want?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(1), pages 56-70, January.
    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. Young, Robert Alan, 2022. "Using intervention research to adopt evidence-based management as a practical leadership capability," Journal of Applied Leadership and Management, Hochschule Kempten - University of Applied Sciences, Professional School of Business & Technology, vol. 10, pages 22-40.

    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. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid, 2018. "Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 462-471.
    2. Liangliang Song & Qiming Li & George F. List & Yongliang Deng & Ping Lu, 2017. "Using an AHP-ISM Based Method to Study the Vulnerability Factors of Urban Rail Transit System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    3. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Ritika & Nawal Kishor, 2020. "Development and validation of behavioral biases scale: a SEM approach," Review of Behavioral Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 14(2), pages 237-259, November.
    5. Jelena Lukić & Mirjana Misita & Dragan D. Milanović & Ankica Borota-Tišma & Aleksandra Janković, 2022. "Determining the Risk Level in Client Analysis by Applying Fuzzy Logic in Insurance Sector," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(18), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Kulisic, Biljana & Dimitriou, Ioannis & Mola-Yudego, Blas, 2021. "From preferences to concerted policy on mandated share for renewable energy in transport," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    7. Răzvan Cătalin Dobrea & Gabriela Molănescu & Cristian Buṣu, 2015. "Food Sustainable Model Development: An ANP Approach to Prioritize Sustainable Factors in the Romanian Natural Soft Drinks Industry Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-14, July.
    8. Zhaoyu Cao & Yucheng Zou & Xu Zhao & Kairong Hong & Yanwei Zhang, 2021. "Multidimensional Fairness Equilibrium Evaluation of Urban Housing Expropriation Compensation Based on VIKOR," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-26, February.
    9. Thanh Quang Nguyen & Sonia Longo & Maurizio Cellura & Le Quyen Luu & Alessandra Bertoli & Letizia Bua, 2024. "Evaluating and Prioritizing Circular Supply Chain Alternatives in the Energy Context with a Holistic Multi-Indicator Decision Support System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-32, October.
    10. Jian-Zhang Wu & Yi-Ping Zhou & Li Huang & Jun-Jie Dong, 2019. "Multicriteria Correlation Preference Information (MCCPI)-Based Ordinary Capacity Identification Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-13, March.
    11. Schaller, Lena & Targetti, Stefano & Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Zasada, Ingo & Kantelhardt, Jochen & Arriaza, Manuel & Bal, Tufan & Fedrigotti, Valérie Bossi & Giray, F. Handan & Häfner, Kati & Majews, 2018. "Agricultural landscapes, ecosystem services and regional competitiveness—Assessing drivers and mechanisms in nine European case study areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 735-745.
    12. Yinrunjie Zhang & Decui Liang & Zeshui Xu, 2025. "Cross-platform hotel evaluation by aggregating multi-website consumer reviews with probabilistic linguistic term set and Choquet integral," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 348(1), pages 221-255, May.
    13. Junpai Chen & Yue Chen & Yitong Zhu & Mingyan Xiao & Hongfei Yang & Huaming Huang & Linli Li, 2023. "Assessing the Sustainability of Urban Community Renewal Projects in Southern China Based on a Hybrid MADM Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-33, February.
    14. Ashley B. C. Goode & Erin Rivenbark & Jessica A. Gilbert & Conor P. McGowan, 2023. "Prioritization of Species Status Assessments for Decision Support," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 311-325, December.
    15. Paulo Cesar Schotten & Leydiana Sousa Pereira & Danielle Costa Morais, 2022. "Credit granting sorting model for financial organizations," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    16. Luo, Xu & Ge, Zhexue & Zhang, ShiGang & Yang, Yongmin, 2021. "A method for the maintainability evaluation at design stage using maintainability design attributes," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).
    17. Ulrike Reisach, 2016. "The creation of meaning and critical ethical reflection in operational research," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 4(1), pages 5-32, June.
    18. Tim Höfer & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Reinhard Madlener, 2019. "Using Value-Focused Thinking and Multi-Criteria Group Decision-Making to Evaluate Energy Transition Alternatives," FCN Working Papers 4/2019, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    19. 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.
    20. Gabriel Marín Díaz & Ramón Alberto Carrasco & Daniel Gómez, 2021. "RFID: A Fuzzy Linguistic Model to Manage Customers from the Perspective of Their Interactions with the Contact Center," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(19), pages 1-27, September.

    More about this item

    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:hin:complx:7954289. 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: Mohamed Abdelhakeem (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.hindawi.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.