Imminent Decision Support

Interacting new directions
  • Nikitas-Spiros Koutsoukis
  • Gautam Mitra
Part of the Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series book series (ORCS, volume 26)

Abstract

In the global economy era, organisational success has become a challenging objective. Contemporary organisations increasingly become susceptible to and are directly or indirectly influenced by events and developments taking place in remote parts of the world. Unfortunate events, such as terrorist attacks, as well as fortunate events, such as positive progress in science and technology around the world, progressively (and sometimes rapidly) have global effects. Such events affect markets worldwide, concurrently or serially. For instance, consider the tragic events and aftermath of September 11, 2001, and the, since then, ‘war on terror.’ Similarly consider ‘Dolly’ the successful sheep-clone, the World Wide Web, mobile phones, dot-com organisations, and the single European Currency. They are prime examples of events that assert a (progressive or immediate) global influence. From a decision support and operational research perspective, this global setting is ceaselessly (re)shaped along four generic headings: Political, Economic, Social and Technical trends ([Ormerod, 1997).

Keywords

Transportation Ozone Marketing Conglomerate Dial 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, International convergence of capital measurement and capital standards, Basle, July 1988.Google Scholar
  2. Bienstock D., Shapiro J.F., Optimising resource acquisition decisions by stochastic programming, Management Science Vol. 34, No. 2, 1984.Google Scholar
  3. Bloemhof-Ruwaard J.M., van Beek P., Hordijk L. and Van Wassenhove L.N., Interaction between operational research and environmental management, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 85, Issue 2, 7 September 1995, pp. 229–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carey A., Turnbull N., The boardroom imperative on internal control, in Pickford J., (Editor), Mastering Risk-Vol. 1: Concepts, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, 2001.Google Scholar
  5. Dantzig G.B., Linear programming under uncertainty, Management Science, 1, 197–206, 1955.Google Scholar
  6. Dantzig G.B., Linear programming and extensions, Princeton University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  7. Denton G. A. and White B., Implementing a Balanced-scorecard Approach to Managing Hotel Operations: The Case of White Lodging Services, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 41, Issue 1, February 2000, pp. 94–107Google Scholar
  8. Drucker, P., Planning for Uncertainty, The Wall Street Journal, 22 July 1992.Google Scholar
  9. Dupačová J., Applications of stochastic programming: Achievements and questions, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 140, No. 2, July 2002, pp. 281–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dyson R. G., Strategy, performance and operational research, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 51, No. 1, January 2000.Google Scholar
  11. Forret M. L., Sullivan S. E., A Balanced Scorecard Approach to Networking: A Guide to Successfully Navigating Career Changes, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 245–258, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gaivoronski A. and Stella F., On-line portfolio selection using stochastic programming, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Vol. 27, No 6, April 2003, pp. 1013–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haeckel S., Adaptive enterprise: Creating and Leading Sense and Respond organisations, Harvard Business School Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  14. Haeckel S., The premise and Promise of Sense and Respond, IBM Global Services, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. Hunter W. C. and Smith S. D., Risk management in the global economy: A review essay, Journal of Banking & Finance 26 (2002) pp. 205–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Infanger G., Planning under uncertainty: Solving large scale stochastic linear programs, Boyd and Fraser, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. Institute for chartered accountants in England and Wales, Internal Control: Guidance for directors on the combined code, Institute for chartered accountants in England and Wales, September 1999. Also known as the Turnbull Report. Google Scholar
  18. IISD - International Institute for Sustainable Development, Earth Enterprise(tm) Toolkit, International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1994.Google Scholar
  19. Isaac I., Training in risk management, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 13, No 4, pp. 225–229, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jansen L., The challenge of sustainable development, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 11, No. 3, May 2003, pp. 231–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnson S. D., Identification and Selection of Environmental Performance Indicators: Application of the Balanced Scorecard Approach, Corporate Environmental Strategy, Vol. 5, Issue 4, Summer 1998, pp. 34–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaplan, R. S., and Norton, D. P., The Balanced Scorecard-Measures that drive performance, Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992, in Harvard Business Review, Business Classics: Fifteen Key Concepts for Managerial Success, Harvard Business Review, 1998.Google Scholar
  23. Keen, P.G.W., Scott Morton, M. S., Decision Support Systems: An organizational perspective, Addison-Wesley, 1978.Google Scholar
  24. Kerr R., Cosbey A., and Ron Yachnin, Beyond Regulation: Exporters and Voluntary Environmental Measures, International Institute for Sustainable Development-USD, 1998.Google Scholar
  25. Korhonen A., Strategic financial management in a multinational financial conglomerate: A multiple goal stochastic programming approach, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 128, No 2, January 2001, pp. 418–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lin G., Buckley S., Cao H., Caswell N., Ettl M., Kapoor S., Koenig L., Katircioglu K., Nigam A., Ramachandran B., and Wang K.Y., The Sense-and-Respond enterprise, ORMS Today, Vol. 29, No. 2, April 2002, pp. 34–39.Google Scholar
  27. Lyytinen K., Mathiassen L. and Ropponen J., Attention Shaping and Software Risk: A Categorical Analysis of Four Classical Risk Management Approaches, Information Systems Research, Vol. 9, No. 3, September 1998, pp. 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Markowitz H., Portfolio Selection, Journal of Finance, Vol 7., No. 1, pp77–91, March 1952.Google Scholar
  29. Martinsons M., Davison R., Tse D., The balanced scorecard: A foundation for the strategic management of information systemsGoogle Scholar
  30. Messina E. and Mitra G., Modelling and Analysis of multistage stochastic programming problems: a software environment, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 101, No. 2, September 1997, pp. 343–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meulbroek L., Total strategies for company-wide risk control, in Pickford J., (Editor), Mastering Risk-Vol. 1: Concepts, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, 2001Google Scholar
  32. MirHassani A., Lucas C., Mitra G., Messina E. and Poojari C., Computational solution of capacity planning models under uncertainty, Parallel Computing, Vol. 26, Issue 5, March 2000, pp. 511–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Montgomery C. A. and Porter M. E., Editors, Strategy: Seeking and securing competitive advantage, Harvard Business Review Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  34. Moris H., Vesset D., From Strategy to Action: Linking analytic and operational applications, IDC White Paper, 2000.Google Scholar
  35. Mulvey J. M., Rosenbaum D. P., Shetty B., Strategic financial risk management and operations research, European Journal of Operational Research, 97 (1997), pp. 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Narodoslawsky M., Krotscheck C., Integrated ecological optimization of processes with the sustainable process index, Vol. 20, Issue 8, December 2000, pp. 599–603.Google Scholar
  37. Ormerod R.J., the role of OR in shaping the future: Smart bits, helpful ways and things that matter, Journal of the Operational Research Society, (1997) 48, pp. 1045–1056Google Scholar
  38. Porter M.E., Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance, Free Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  39. Rouse P., Putterill M., Ryan D., Integrated performance measurement design: insights from an application in aircraft maintenance, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 13, Issue 2, June 2002, pp. 229–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sammer J., The three faces of Risk Management, Business Finance magazine, December 2000.Google Scholar
  41. Sammer J., Combating Risk, Business Finance magazine, April 2002.Google Scholar
  42. Shapiro J., On the connections among activity-based costing, mathematical programming models for analyzing strategic decisions, and the resource-based view of the firm, European Journal of Operational Research, Volume 118, No. 2, October 1999, pp. 295–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schrage L., Optimization Modeling with LINDO, 5th Edition, Duxbury Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  44. Vlahos, Kiriakos, Tooling up for Risky Decisions, in Pickford J., (Editor), Mastering Risk - Vol. 1: Concepts, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, 2001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikitas-Spiros Koutsoukis
    • 1
  • Gautam Mitra
    • 1
  1. 1.Brunel UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations