IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tch/wpaper/cep049.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Identifikation, Analyse und Systematisierung von Anforderungen an betriebswirtschaftliche Entscheidungsmodelle - Entwicklung einer Anforderungshierarchie

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Rudolph
  • Anika Suess

    (Professur BWL III: Unternehmensrechnung und Controlling, Fakultaet fuer Wirtschaftswissenschaften)

  • Florian Lindner
  • Kristina Hoese
  • Josephin Haenel
  • Fanny Richter
  • Uwe Goetze

Abstract

Modelle sind vereinfachte Abbilder der Realitaet und koennen zu verschiedenen Zwecken eingesetzt werden. Im Kontext der Betriebswirtschaftslehre dienen sie dem Erkennen und Analysieren von Problemen und letztendlich der Unterstuetzung bei der Entscheidungsvorbereitung. Als Mass zur Beurteilung der Guete und adaequaten Eignung von Modellen tragen Anforderungen im Sinne von zu erfuellenden Voraussetzungen zur zielgerichteten Modellentwicklung bei. In der Literatur existiert kein einheitliches Verstaendnis darueber, welche Anforderungen bei der Modellentwicklung und -bewertung, und im weiteren Verlauf auch bei der Modellanwendung, zu beruecksichtigen sind. Waehrend der Modellentwicklung treten einige Herausforderungen auf - neben der Darstellung komplexer Sachverhalte bestehen in fruehen Phasen der Modellentwicklung hohe Unsicherheiten. Der vorliegende Aufsatz widmet sich deshalb der Identifikation, Analyse und Systematisierung von Anforderungen an betriebswirtschaftliche Entscheidungsmodelle. Ziel ist die Erarbeitung einer Anforderungshierarchie, welche eine unterstuetzende Rolle bei der Entwicklung, Beurteilung und auch Anwendung von Entscheidungsmodellen der Betriebswirtschaftslehre einnimmt. Dazu werden zunaechst die Grundlagen der Entscheidungstheorie, von Modellen und Modellarten sowie der Modellentwicklung erlaeutert. Eine strukturierte Literaturanalyse bildet dann die Grundlage fuer die Systematisierung von Anforderungen, welche die Wirkungszusammenhaenge zwischen diesen verdeutlicht. Abschliessend erfolgt vor dem Hintergrund betriebswirtschaftlicher Modelle eine strukturierte Ueberfuehrung der Ergebnisse in eine Hierarchie.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Rudolph & Anika Suess & Florian Lindner & Kristina Hoese & Josephin Haenel & Fanny Richter & Uwe Goetze, 2021. "Identifikation, Analyse und Systematisierung von Anforderungen an betriebswirtschaftliche Entscheidungsmodelle - Entwicklung einer Anforderungshierarchie," Chemnitz Economic Papers 049, Department of Economics, Chemnitz University of Technology, revised Sep 2021.
    • Handle: RePEc:tch:wpaper:cep049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.tu-chemnitz.de/wirtschaft/vwl1/RePEc/download/tch/wpaper/CEP049_Suess.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2021
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John D. C. Little, 1970. "Models and Managers: The Concept of a Decision Calculus," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(8), pages 466-485, April.
    2. Pfohl, Hans-Christian & Braun, G., 1981. "Entscheidungstheorie. Normative und deskriptive Grundlagen des Entscheidens," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 41746, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    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. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Changing systems for supporting farmers' decisions: problems, paradigms, and prospects," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 179-220, October.
    2. Zhong, Tao & Young, Rhonda, 2010. "Multiple Choice Knapsack Problem: Example of planning choice in transportation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 128-137, May.
    3. Borgonovo, E., 2010. "Sensitivity analysis with finite changes: An application to modified EOQ models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 127-138, January.
    4. Wiesel, Thorsten & Skiera, Bernd & Villanueva, Julian, 2011. "Customer Lifetime Value and Customer Equity Models Using Company-reported Summary Data," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 20-22.
    5. Fuglseth, A. M. & Grønhaug, K., 1997. "IT-enabled redesign of complex and dynamic business processes: the case of bank credit evaluation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 93-106, February.
    6. David A McDonald, 2016. "The weight of water: Benchmarking for public water services," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(11), pages 2181-2200, November.
    7. Stefan N. Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    8. Donald G. Morrison & Jagmohan S. Raju, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: The Marketing Department in Management Science: Its History, Contributions, and the Future," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 425-428, April.
    9. de Brentani, Ulrike, 1995. "New industrial service development: Scenarios for success and failure," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 93-103, February.
    10. McCown, R. L., 2002. "Locating agricultural decision support systems in the troubled past and socio-technical complexity of `models for management'," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 11-25, October.
    11. Albers, Sönke, 2012. "Optimizable and implementable aggregate response modeling for marketing decision support," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 111-122.
    12. John H. Roberts & Charles J. Nelson & Pamela D. Morrison, 2005. "A Prelaunch Diffusion Model for Evaluating Market Defense Strategies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 150-164, August.
    13. Marusia Ivanova, 2007. "Genesis and Evolution of Market Share Predictive Models," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 117-148.
    14. John R. Hauser & Guilherme (Gui) Liberali & Glen L. Urban, 2014. "Website Morphing 2.0: Switching Costs, Partial Exposure, Random Exit, and When to Morph," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1594-1616, June.
    15. Andris A. Zoltners & Prabhakant Sinha, 2005. "The 2004 ISMS Practice Prize Winner—Sales Territory Design: Thirty Years of Modeling and Implementation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 313-331, September.
    16. Eva Ascarza & Scott A. Neslin & Oded Netzer & Zachery Anderson & Peter S. Fader & Sunil Gupta & Bruce G. S. Hardie & Aurélie Lemmens & Barak Libai & David Neal & Foster Provost & Rom Schrift, 2018. "In Pursuit of Enhanced Customer Retention Management: Review, Key Issues, and Future Directions," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 5(1), pages 65-81, March.
    17. Berend Wierenga & Gerrit H. Van Bruggen, 2001. "Developing a Customized Decision-Support System for Brand Managers," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 128-145, June.
    18. Hensher, D. A. & Louviere, J. J. & Hansen, D. E., 2000. "The use of mixtures of market and experimental choice data in establishing guideline weights for evaluating competitive bids in a transport organisation," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 279-286, October.
    19. Dennis Gensch, 2001. "A Marketing-Decision-Support Model for Evaluating and Selecting Concepts for New Products," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 166-183, June.
    20. John R. Hauser & Steven Shugan, 1978. "Intensity Measures of Consumer Preferences," Discussion Papers 291, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.

    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:tch:wpaper:cep049. 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: Christian Kulitza (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwtucde.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.