IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v27y2018i5d10.1007_s10726-018-9567-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimental Use of Strategic Choice Approach (SCA) by Individuals as an Architectural Design Tool

Author

Listed:
  • Elena Todella

    (Politecnico di Torino)

  • Isabella Maria Lami

    (Politecnico di Torino)

  • Alessandro Armando

    (Politecnico di Torino)

Abstract

The paper proposes the use of the Strategic Choice Approach as a way of structuring the architectural design process, done by individuals and partly supported by meetings and interviews with DMs, experts, and stakeholders. The aim is to stimulate a debate around the use of SCA and its possible merging with architectural design, also analysing how the micro-processes involved in this merging can work in practice. We reflect on the possible use of SCA to determine prescriptive conditions on physical form at a scale that is still intermediate between the single building and the urban tissue: the method is employed as a design tool to provide alternative transformation scenarios. It represents a way of approaching the challenge of planning in an uncertain world, eliciting guidelines and strategies, and furthermore it produces an architectural project or transformation in a physical sense. Moreover, by investigating what occurs during the different micro-processes with the interviewees, we focus on some behavioural issues and effects, in relation to the context, the models of the application and the different entities involved in the interventions. This proposal shows an application to a real-world problem, currently under debate by the City of Turin (Italy), the re-use of abandoned barracks located in a prestigious residential area.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena Todella & Isabella Maria Lami & Alessandro Armando, 2018. "Experimental Use of Strategic Choice Approach (SCA) by Individuals as an Architectural Design Tool," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 811-826, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:27:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-018-9567-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-018-9567-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-018-9567-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-018-9567-9?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. L A Franco, 2006. "Forms of conversation and problem structuring methods: a conceptual development," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 813-821, July.
    2. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    3. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.
    4. J Mingers, 2003. "A classification of the philosophical assumptions of management science methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(6), pages 559-570, June.
    5. Colin Eden & Sue Jones & David Sims & Tim Smithin, 1981. "The Intersubjectivity Of Issues And Issues Of Intersubjectivity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 37-47, January.
    6. White, Leroy, 2016. "Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 827-841.
    7. Mingers, John & Rosenhead, Jonathan, 2004. "Problem structuring methods in action," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 530-554, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Fran Ackermann & Colin Eden, 2005. "Using Causal Mapping with Group Support Systems to Elicit an Understanding of Failure in Complex Projects: Some Implications for Organizational Research," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 355-376, September.
    10. Elena Fregonara & Rocco Curto & Mario Grosso & Paolo Mellano & Diana Rolando & Jean-Marc Tulliani, 2013. "Environmental Technology, Materials Science, Architectural Design, and Real Estate Market Evaluation: A Multidisciplinary Approach for Energy-Efficient Buildings," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 57-80, October.
    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. Isabella M. Lami & Stefano Moroni, 2020. "How Can I Help You? Questioning the Role of Evaluation Techniques in Democratic Decision-Making Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Lami, Isabella M. & Todella, Elena, 2023. "A multi-methodological combination of the strategic choice approach and the analytic network process: From facts to values and vice versa," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(2), pages 802-812.
    3. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.

    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. White, Leroy, 2016. "Behavioural operational research: Towards a framework for understanding behaviour in OR interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 827-841.
    2. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    3. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    4. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    5. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.
    6. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    7. Jorge Velez-Castiblanco & Diana Londono-Correa & Olandy Naranjo-Rivera, 2018. "The Structure of Problem Structuring Conversations: A Boundary Games Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 853-884, October.
    8. White, Leroy & Burger, Katharina & Yearworth, Mike, 2016. "Understanding behaviour in problem structuring methods interventions with activity theory," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 983-1004.
    9. 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.
    10. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    11. Elena Tavella & L. Alberto Franco, 2015. "Dynamics of Group Knowledge Production in Facilitated Modelling Workshops: An Exploratory Study," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 451-475, May.
    12. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    13. Luke Houghton, 2013. "Why Can't We All Just Accommodate: A Soft Systems Methodology Application on Disagreeing Stakeholders," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 430-443, July.
    14. Patrick Reinwald & Stephan Leitner & Friederike Wall, 2021. "Limited intelligence and performance-based compensation: An agent-based model of the hidden action problem," Papers 2107.03764, arXiv.org.
    15. Ion Georgiou & Joaquim Heck, 2021. "The emergence of problem structuring methods, 1950s–1989: An atlas of the journal literature," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 756-796, November.
    16. 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.
    17. Marleen McCardle-Keurentjes & Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette, 2018. "Asking Questions: A Sine Qua Non of Facilitation in Decision Support?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 757-788, October.
    18. 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.
    19. Henao, Felipe & Franco, L. Alberto, 2016. "Unpacking multimethodology: Impacts of a community development intervention," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(3), pages 681-696.
    20. Franco, L. Alberto & Lord, Ewan, 2011. "Understanding multi-methodology: Evaluating the perceived impact of mixing methods for group budgetary decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 362-372, June.

    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:spr:grdene:v:27:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s10726-018-9567-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.