IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2309.03133.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Risk-reducing design and operations toolkit: 90 strategies for managing risk and uncertainty in decision problems

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Gutfraind

Abstract

Uncertainty is a pervasive challenge in decision analysis, and decision theory recognizes two classes of solutions: probabilistic models and cognitive heuristics. However, engineers, public planners and other decision-makers instead use a third class of strategies that could be called RDOT (Risk-reducing Design and Operations Toolkit). These include incorporating robustness into designs, contingency planning, and others that do not fall into the categories of probabilistic models or cognitive heuristics. Moreover, identical strategies appear in several domains and disciplines, pointing to an important shared toolkit. The focus of this paper is to develop a catalog of such strategies and develop a framework for them. The paper finds more than 90 examples of such strategies falling into six broad categories and argues that they provide an efficient response to decision problems that are seemingly intractable due to high uncertainty. It then proposes a framework to incorporate them into decision theory using multi-objective optimization. Overall, RDOT represents an overlooked class of responses to uncertainty. Because RDOT strategies do not depend on accurate forecasting or estimation, they could be applied fruitfully to certain decision problems affected by high uncertainty and make them much more tractable.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Gutfraind, 2023. "Risk-reducing design and operations toolkit: 90 strategies for managing risk and uncertainty in decision problems," Papers 2309.03133, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2309.03133
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.03133
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victor DeMiguel & Lorenzo Garlappi & Raman Uppal, 2009. "Optimal Versus Naive Diversification: How Inefficient is the 1-N Portfolio Strategy?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(5), pages 1915-1953, May.
    2. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    3. Presley, Theresa J., 2019. "A risk based approach to large datasets: Analysis of time series data for a large merchandising firm," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    4. Moffitt L. Joe & Stranlund John K. & Field Barry C., 2005. "Inspections to Avert Terrorism: Robustness Under Severe Uncertainty," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Ernest H. Forman & Saul I. Gass, 2001. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---An Exposition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 469-486, August.
    6. Stefan Thomke & David E. Bell, 2001. "Sequential Testing in Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 308-323, February.
    7. Borgonovo, E. & Cappelli, V. & Maccheroni, F. & Marinacci, M., 2018. "Risk analysis and decision theory: A bridge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 280-293.
    8. Mark Colyvan, 2008. "Is Probability the Only Coherent Approach to Uncertainty?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(3), pages 645-652, June.
    9. Florian M. Artinger & Gerd Gigerenzer & Perke Jacobs, 2022. "Satisficing: Integrating Two Traditions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(2), pages 598-635, June.
    10. Uzi Ben-Shalom & Eitan Shamir, 2011. "Mission Command Between Theory and Practice: The Case of the IDF," Defense & Security Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 101-117, June.
    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. Shi, Hai-Liu & Chen, Sheng-Qun & Chen, Lei & Wang, Ying-Ming, 2021. "A neutral cross-efficiency evaluation method based on interval reference points in consideration of bounded rational behavior," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(3), pages 1098-1110.
    2. Woike, Jan K. & Hoffrage, Ulrich & Petty, Jeffrey S., 2015. "Picking profitable investments: The success of equal weighting in simulated venture capitalist decision making," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1705-1716.
    3. Knoeri, Christof & Binder, Claudia R. & Althaus, Hans-Joerg, 2011. "Decisions on recycling: Construction stakeholders’ decisions regarding recycled mineral construction materials," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(11), pages 1039-1050.
    4. Sanjit Dhami & Ali al-Nowaihi & Cass R. Sunstein, 2019. "Heuristics and Public Policy: Decision-making Under Bounded Rationality," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 7(1), pages 7-58, June.
    5. Elisa Cavezzali & Gloria Gardenal & Ugo Rigoni, 2012. "Risk taking, diversification behavior and financial literacy of individual investors," Working Papers 17, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    6. Basel, Jörn S. & Brühl, Rolf, 2013. "Rationality and dual process models of reasoning in managerial cognition and decision making," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 745-754.
    7. Amélie Vrijdags, 2013. "Min- and Max-induced rankings: an experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 233-266, August.
    8. Mousavi, Shabnam & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2014. "Risk, uncertainty, and heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1671-1678.
    9. Collewet, Marion & Koster, Paul, 2023. "Preference estimation from point allocation experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    10. Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos, 2011. "Psychological Heuristics for Making Inferences: Definition, Performance, and the Emerging Theory and Practice," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(1), pages 10-29, March.
    11. Leonardo Barros Torres & Gilberto Tadeu Lima & Jaylson Jair da Silveira, 2024. "Endogenous Tax Compliance and Macroeconomic Performance Driven by Satisficing Evolutionary Dynamics," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2024_10, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    12. Torgler, Benno & Schneider, Friedrich & Schaltegger, Christoph A., 2007. "With or Against the People? The Impact of a Bottom-Up Approach on Tax Morale and the Shadow Economy," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt6331x6vz, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    13. Rand Kwong Yew Low, 2018. "Vine copulas: modelling systemic risk and enhancing higher‐moment portfolio optimisation," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 58(S1), pages 423-463, November.
    14. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    15. Christina Leuker & Thorsten Pachur & Ralph Hertwig & Timothy J. Pleskac, 2019. "Do people exploit risk–reward structures to simplify information processing in risky choice?," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 76-94, August.
    16. Jae Wook Yoo & Richard Reed & Shung Jae Shin & David J. Lemak, 2009. "Strategic Choice and Performance in Late Movers: Influence of the Top Management Team's External Ties," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 308-335, March.
    17. Giovanni Calice & Levent Kutlu & Ming Zeng, 2021. "Understanding US firm efficiency and its asset pricing implications," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 803-827, February.
    18. Westerhoff, Frank H. & Dieci, Roberto, 2006. "The effectiveness of Keynes-Tobin transaction taxes when heterogeneous agents can trade in different markets: A behavioral finance approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 293-322, February.
    19. José Castro Caldas & Helder Coelho, 1999. "The Origin of Institutions: Socio-Economic Processes, Choice, Norms and Conventions," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 2(2), pages 1-1.
    20. Nagler Matthew G., 2007. "Understanding the Internet's Relevance to Media Ownership Policy: A Model of Too Many Choices," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2309.03133. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.