Decision Strategy and Performance in Dynamic Tasks: The 2-Layer Process Model

  • Hassan Qudrat-Ullah
Part of the Understanding Complex Systems book series (UCS)


While organizational decisions are made to achieve objectives and goals, a decision strategy sets rules to guide decision-making. For instance, in stable environments, if managers embrace consistency in their decisions, their performance could be improved substantially. However, in dynamic tasks where environments are ever-changing, the effects of consistent decision strategy are difficult to predict.


Organizational decisions Decision strategy Consistency Fishbankile Dynamic decision-making behavior Transfer learning Regression Prior knowledge Structural knowledge Heuristics knowledge Variations-oriented strategy Systematic exploration Decision time Task performance Random variations Designer’s logic Systematic diversity of actions Pathways Dynamic task Operator’s logic Cognitive effort Integrated process model 


  1. 1.
    Cohen, I.: Improving time-critical decision making life-threatening situations: observations and insights. Decis. Anal. 5(2), 100–110 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gröbler, A., Maier, F.H., Milling, P.M.: Enhancing learning capabilities by providing transparency in transparency. Simul. Gaming 31(2), 257–278 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hogarth, R.M., Marridakis, S.: The value of decision making in complex environment: an experimental approach. Manag. Sci. 27, 93–107 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moxnes, E.: Not only the tragedy of the commons: misperceptions of feedback and policies for sustainable development. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 16(4), 325–348 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moxnes, E.: Misperceptions of basic dynamics: the case of renewable resource management. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 20, 139–162 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mun, Y., Davis, D.: Improving computer training effectiveness for decision technologies: behavior modeling and retention enhancement. Decis. Sci. 32(3), 521–544 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Payne, J.W., Bettman, J.R., Johnson, E.J.: The Adaptive Decision Maker. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Plate, R.: Assessing individuals’ understanding of nonlinear casual structures in complex systems. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 28(1), 19–33 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Putz-Osterloh, W., Bott, B., Koster, K.: Modes of learning in problem solving—are they transferable to tutorial systems. Comput. Hum. Behav. 6, 83–96 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Qudrat-Ullah, H., Karakul, M.: Decision making in interactive learning environments: towards an integrated model. J. Decis. Syst. 16(1), 79–99 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Senge, P.: The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday/Currency, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sengupta, K., Abdel-Hamid, T.: Alternative concepts of feedback in dynamic decision environments: An experimental investigation. Manag. Sci. 39(4), 411–428 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Spector, J.M.: System dynamics and interactive learning environments: Lessons learned and implications for the future. Simul. Gaming 31(4), 528–535 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sterman, J.D.: Learning in and abound complex systems. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 10(2–3), 291–323 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sterman, J.D.: Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. McGraw-Hill, New York (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Administrative StudiesYork UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations