Communication in Decision Support

Prospects and Limitations
  • H. A. Higgo


The complexity usually embedded with understanding organisations and their decision making processes, necessitates a theoretical framework where knowledge can be represented and communicated. It is the systems thinking approach as a way of intervening to improve problem situations, which is equipped to embark itself in this trans-disciplinary type of study. This paper is enshrined upon communication as the basic pre-requisite in dealing with decision problems in organisational contexts. Getting people together to negotiate their differences, in a problem context, necessitates the existence of a facilitator equipped with his or her skills and qualifications, to influence the situation and to understand the initial problem language or the access language depending on the context of the problem. Understanding of such a language may facilitate developing an extended language which may contribute and enhance the problem solution. This paper is meant to contribute to the paradigm shift in the process of support needed and the potential role of the computer. It is also meant to emphasize the possibility of embedding a computer based-system in this negotiation process, to facilitate an extended language and to increase the communicative competence between the participants.


Decision Support System Negotiation Process Communicative Competence Extended Language Management Support System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Angell, I., and Smithson, S., 1991, “Information Systems Management: Opportunities and Risks”; Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  2. de Zeeuw, G., 1992, Soft language accumulation and the use of competence, Systems Practice, 5, 192–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Habermas, J., 1987, “The Theory of Communicative Actions: The Critique of Functionalist Reason”, Volume II, Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  4. Handy, C., 1993, “Understanding Organisations” (4th edition), Penguin, London.Google Scholar
  5. Hawgood, J., and Humphreys, P., 1987, “Effective Decision Support Systems”, Technical Press, London.Google Scholar
  6. Humphreys, P.C., 1989, Intelligence in decision support: a process model, in: “Knowledge Based Management Support Systems”, G.I. Doukidis, F. Land, and E. Miller (eds.) Ellis Horwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
  7. Humphreys, P.C., and Wisudaha, A., “Techniques and Tools providing Strategic Support: A Framework, Review and Guidelines”. Decision Analysis Unit Technical Report 89-1, LSE, 89, London.Google Scholar
  8. Jackson, M.C., 1992, “Systems Methodology for the Management Sciences”, Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Jannis, I.L., and Mann, L., 1977, “Decision Making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice, and Commitment”, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Jaques, E., 1989, “Requisite Organisation: The CEO’s Guide”, Casson Hall, Arlington, Virginia.Google Scholar
  11. Paprika, Z., and Kiss, I., 1985, Interactions in decision support systems: division of labour in DSSs, Engineering Costs and Production Economics, 8, 281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Phillips, L.D, 1986, Conferencing to consensus, Datamation, April, 26–29.Google Scholar
  13. Raifa, H., 1982, “Communication Between Negotiators and the Role of the Mediator”, Addison Wesley, Reading, Mass.Google Scholar
  14. Simon, H.A., 1972, Theories of bounded rationality, in: “Decision and Organisation”, C.B. Mcguire and R. Rander, ed., Amsterdam, Holland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. A. Higgo
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computing and Information SystemsUniversity of HumbersideHullUK

Personalised recommendations