IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sgh/annals/i45y2017p67-78.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Problems of the Use of Information Systems Supporting the Conduct of General Elections

Author

Listed:
  • Przemysław Polak

    (Szkoła Główna Handlowa w Warszawie)

Abstract

A heated public discussion in Poland has arisen around recurring problems with IT systems used in general elections. Problems of the use of information technology in the election information systems have also occurred in many other countries. The article presents an analysis of the complexity of such systems and a short review of failures. The author has identified the most vulnerable functional areas of the systems and has qualified the failures taking place in Poland to the proposed framework.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:sgh:annals:i:45:y:2017:p:67-78
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://rocznikikae.sgh.waw.pl/p/roczniki_kae_z45_05.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bezalel Gavish & John Gerdes, 1997. "Voting mechanisms and their implications in a GDSS environment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 71(0), pages 41-74, 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert & Andrew B. Whinston, 2001. "Research Commentary: Introducing a Third Dimension in Information Systems Design—The Case for Incentive Alignment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 225-239, September.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Luis A. Guerrero & José A. Pino, 2009. "Supporting Discussions for Decision Meetings," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 589-601, November.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Sabrina Bresciani & Martin J. Eppler, 2015. "The Pitfalls of Visual Representations," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(4), pages 21582440156, October.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Mi, Hwang, 1998. "Did Task Type Matter in the Use of Decision Room GSS? A Critical Review and a Meta-analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-15, February.
    14. Gebauer, Judith & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2013. "Joining Supply and Demand Conditions of IT Enabled Change: Toward an Economic Theory of Inter-firm Modulation," Working Papers 13-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    15. Steven Way & Yufei Yuan, 2014. "Transitioning From Dynamic Decision Support to Context-Aware Multi-Party Coordination: A Case for Emergency Response," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 649-672, July.
    16. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
    17. Teich, Jeffrey E. & Wallenius, Hannele & Kuula, Markku & Zionts, Stanley, 1995. "A decision support approach for negotiation with an application to agricultural income policy negotiations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 76-87, February.
    18. Qureshi, S. & Hlupic, V., 2000. "Managing Knowledge in a Distributed Decision Making Context," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2000-16-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    19. Pedro Antunes & Tânia Ho, 2001. "The Design of a GDSS Meeting Preparation Tool," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 5-25, January.
    20. Jacqueline Ng Lane & Bruce Ankenman & Seyed Iravani, 2018. "Insight into Gender Differences in Higher Education: Evidence from Peer Reviews in an Introductory STEM Course," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 442-456, December.

    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:sgh:annals:i:45:y:2017:p:67-78. 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: Michał Bernardelli (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sgwawpl.html .

    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.