Evaluating a Framework for Multi-Stakeholder Decision Support in Water Resources Management

In this paper we describe a framework for multicriteria modeling and support of multi-stakeholder decision processes. We report on its testing in the development of a new water level management policy for a regulated lake-river system in Finland. In the framework the stakeholders are involved in the decision process from the problem structuring stage to the group consensus seeking stage followed by a stage of seeking public acceptance for the policy. The framework aims at creating an evolutionary learning process. In this paper we also focus on the use of a new interactive method for finding and identifying Pareto-optimal alternatives. Role playing experiments with students are used to test the practical applicability of a negotiation support procedure called the method of improving directions. We also describe the preference programming approach for the aggregation of the stakeholder opinions in the final evaluation of alternatives and consensus seeking.     

Qualitative representations of negotiations: Tutorial on a rule-based approach

This article introduces a logic-based approach for structuring and representing negotiation problems and for supporting negotiators. It is argued that rule-based formalism allows for integrating decision-making aspects unique and specific to negotiations with general reasoning mechanisms based on rationality postulates. The discussion of the rule-based systems and its application to negotiation modeling and support is preceded by an outline of qualitative and quantitative approaches to problem representation and reasoning, and an overview of predicate calculus. The advantages and disadvantages of rule-based systems and their ability to capture complex negotiation decision processes and reasoning are also given.     

TOPSIS Based Approach to Scoring Negotiating Offers in Negotiation Support Systems

In this paper we analyze the possibility of applying the technique for order preferences by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) to building the scoring system for negotiating offers. TOPSIS is a multiple criteria decision making method that is based on measuring distances between alternatives under consideration and two bipolar reference alternatives, a positive and negative ideal. Thus the criteria used for the evaluation of alternatives should be described using strong scales. However, in the negotiation, the issues are very often described qualitatively, which results in ordinal or even nominal variables that must be taken into consideration in offers’ evaluation process. What is more, TOPSIS may be applied to solving the discrete decision problems while the negotiation space may be defined by the means of continuous variables too. In this paper we try to modify the TOPSIS algorithm to make it applicable to negotiation support and, moreover, discuss the following methodological issues: using TOPSIS for a negotiation problem with continuous negotiation space; selecting the distance measure for adequate representation of negotiator’s preferences and measuring distances for qualitative issues. Finally, we propose a simple additional mechanism that allows for building the TOPSIS-based scoring system for negotiating offers and does not involve negotiators in time consuming and tiresome preference elicitation process. This mechanism requires from negotiators to construct examples of offers that represent some categories of quality and then by using a goal programming approach it infers all the parameters required by the TOPSIS algorithm. We also show a simple prototype software tool that applies the TOPSIS modified algorithm and may be used in electronic negotiation support.     

A Multiagent Model for Coordinated Distribution Chain Planning

The aim of this article is to show the advantages that the use of a multiagent model can provide in implementing vertical and lateral coordination among the components of a noncentralized distribution chain. This model has been implemented in Java language in order to allow for the development of a Web-based decision support system that can perform the coordination strategies, simulated in this article in a real logistics chain.

This article, after introducing the main concepts related to the adoption of coordination mechanisms within a supply chain, the main issues of agent-oriented technology, and a brief review of the related literature, presents the structure of the proposed model and the static and dynamic behaviors of the decision-making agents. The design issues of specific coordination models, the negotiation mechanisms introduced, and their proper tuning are then discussed. The models have been applied to a real two-level distribution system of an electromechanical company, made up of a supplier and a geographically distributed network of retailers. Experimental results showed the benefits derived from the adoption of coordination-based models, above all in supply contexts, characterized by relevant information sharing among the main tiers of the chain.     

Accessibility of Computer-based Simulation Models in Inherently Conflict-Laden Negotiations

The use of computer-based simulation models has a long history in areas such as environmental planning and policy-making, and particularly in water management. Policy making in these areas is often characterized by inherent conflict among diverse stakeholders with divergent interests. Although simulation models have been shown to be helpful for such problems, they are typically under the control of a technical analyst or governmental agency and are not available to negotiators in real time. Recent trends in computer technology and user expectations raise the possibility of real-time, user-controlled models for supporting negotiation. But is such accessibility likely to be helpful? This study used a "compressed" longitudinal experiment to investigate the impacts of different scenarios of accessibility of computer-based simulation models. The task was based on a real-life problem in Colorado River water management. Results revealed no significant differences among conditions for either solution quality or satisfaction. These results suggest that the common notion of "more is better" may be inappropriate, and resources for improving computer support of negotiation might best be focused elsewhere.     

Explorative Nature of Negotiation in Participatory Decision Making for Sustainability

Land use planning and policy making for environmental systems involve uncertainty, long time scales, and complex socio-natural systems and processes; most decisions are often characterized by conflict and tension and give rise to disagreements which are widely considered and managed as disagreement about socio-environmental values. Although the growing acceptance of participatory models in environmental planning and policy making is forcing the public authorities to implement participatory mechanisms, participation practices are not showing much effectiveness in reducing conflict and tension. This paper argues that negotiation approaches in participatory decision making often pose the attention on disputing actors and their related values (in the field of environmental planning, on socio-environmental values) thus amplifying the risk for conflict to sharpen. Participation practices, in fact, often use Decision and Conflict Analysis models as means to disclose structures of parties’ values and preferences to parties themselves, thus risking to enhance sources for conflict and tension. In this article, participation is conceptualized as an exploration process looking for decision ‘opportunities’ which allow transforming participatory decision making into operational collaboration. To illustrate the discussion we present a case of participatory decision making process in the Torre Guaceto wetland, a Natural Reserve in Southern Italy. The process refers to the formulation of the land use plan and is analysed by the application of a cognitive model. The analysis shows how the negotiation process evolves from a conflict to collaboration and becomes centred on the content of the decision rather than the social and environmental values involved.     

Negotiation via the World Wide Web: A Cross-cultural Study of Decision Making

INSPIRE is a Web-based system for the support and conduct of negotiations. The primary uses of the system are training and research. Between July 1996 and April 1997, 281 bilateral negotiations were conducted through the system by managers, engineers and students from over 50 countries. INSPIRE has been used at eight universities and training centers. In research it is being used to study cross-cultural differences in decision making and the use of computer support in negotiation. This paper outlines the system, the negotiation methodology embedded in it, and reports the initial results of the experimental study of the impact of culture on Web-based bilateral negotiation.     

A prototype NSS based on problem structure and suggestions toward more comprehensive negogiation support

Seeking an effective approach to supporting negotiation through the use of computer technology, we have constructed a prototype negotiation support system based on the concept of problem structure. Problem structure refers to the characteristics of the feasible settlement space and efficient frontiers as defined by the joint utility distribution of negotiators' utilities. Problem structure is recognized as playing a major role in negotiation processes and outcomes. The cognitive complexity and inherent uncertainty of typical negotiations make it difficult for negotiators to effectively visualize and “navigate” the settlement space defined by the problem structure. As a result, negotiators often resort to suboptimizing heuristics which produce inefficient and/or unsatisfying outcomes. It follows that a promising approach to negotiation support is to exploit the computational speed and graphics capabilities of computer technology to make problem structure and its implications more accessible. Thus, our prototype is designed to allow negotiators to hypothesize problem structure and to explore and manipulate the resulting settlement space quickly and easily. Preliminary experimentation has demonstrated the value of this approach and has suggested areas for extended, comprehensive support. A negotiation process formalism, Cognitive Action Theory, neural network technology, and computer simulation are well-suited to providing more comprehensive support, and we suggest an architecture for delivery through NSS.     

Modeling e-Negotiation Processes for a Service Oriented Architecture

Most of today's e-marketplaces support a single negotiation protocol. The protocol is usually built into the e-marketplace infrastructure, therefore if a new one is introduced then a time consuming and complex process of implementing it takes place. Moreover, participants in the e-marketplace need to adapt their interfaces to the new protocol, especially if they use automated tools to interact with the e-marketplace. This paper reports on a model-driven approach and a framework for rapid and user-friendly development of configurable service oriented e-negotiation systems. We believe that a formal specification of negotiation protocols and their separation from the market infrastructure that implements them is a step towards configurable e-negotiation systems. The protocols are graphically designed for the e-marketplace then mapped into web service orchestrations. Participants use automated negotiation systems to interact with the e-marketplace. These systems are generated based on the negotiation protocol implemented on the e-marketplace. A declarative language is used to specify negotiation strategies and tactics. We propose an algorithm to map Statechart models of negotiation protocols into web service orchestrations and we report on the current implementation of our framework.     

Negotiation Support and E-negotiation Systems: An Overview

With negotiation being an often difficult process involving complex problems, computer-based support has been employed in its various phases and tasks. This article provides a historical overview of software used to support negotiations, aid negotiators, and automate one or more negotiation activities. First, it presents several system classifications, including implemented models, system architectures, and configurations of various systems interacting with human negotiators. Then, it focuses on NSSs (negotiation support systems) and related systems introduced in the early 1980s and on ENSs (e-negotiation systems), which are deployed on the web. These broad categories are discussed from four perspectives: real-life applications, systems used in research and training, research results, and research frameworks.     

Embedding Decision Support in E-Sourcing Tools: Quotes, A Case Study

In the everyday business world, the sourcing process of multiple goods and services usually involves complex negotiations that include discussion of product and service features. Currently, this is a high-cost process due to the scarce use of tools that streamline negotiations and assist purchasing managers' and providers' decision-making. With the advent of Internet-based technologies, it became feasible the idea of tools enabling low-cost, assisted, fluid, on-line dialogs between buyer enterprises and their providers located anywhere. This article presents Quotes, an iSOCO's commercial application that, in addition to cover the whole sequence of sourcing tasks, incorporates decision support facilities based on Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques that successfully address highly challenging issues in automated negotiation within a single and coherent framework.     

A Framework for Adopting Collaboration 2.0 Tools for Virtual Group Decision Making

Decision making in virtual teams is gaining momentum due to globalization, mobility of employees, and the need for collective and rapid decision making by members who are in different locations. These factors resulted in a proliferation of virtual team software support tools for decision making, the latest of which is social software (also known as collaboration 2.0), which includes tools such as wikis, blogs, microblogs, discussion forums, and social networking platforms. This paper describes the potential use of collaboration 2.0 software for improving the process and the specific tasks in virtual group decision making. The paper proposes a framework for exploring the fitness between social software and the major activities in the group decision making process and how such tools can be successfully adopted. Specifically, we use a fit-viability model to help assessing whether social software fit a decision task and what organizational factors are important for such tools to be effective. Representative research issues related to the use of such tools are also presented.     

A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis

A distinctive tradition within group decision support uses models to structure managerial problems. In this tradition, stakeholders jointly construct a model on their issue of concern in facilitated workshops. In the past decades a wide variety of theoretical insights into and techniques for model-based decision support have been proposed and tested in practical applications. Methods are designed and used by experts; guidelines on their use are not completely spelled out in the literature. This lack of transparency may lead to difficulties in showing the value of methods to researchers in other fields, limit transferability of methods and complicate recombining elements of methods into a multimethodology. In this paper we aim to contribute to transparency by contrasting two model-driven methods: group model building (GMB) and Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA). We first develop a framework for comparing methods on a theoretical and practical level. Second, we describe the separate use of each approach, on one and the same issue, with a similar group of participants. By contrasting the choices made in a practical application we clarify process and results in different phases of problem analysis. Our conclusion is that theoretical assumptions of both approaches are more similar than expected. Each method captures different aspects of the problem and in this sense methods may supplement one another: where SODA focuses on the future and identification of actions, GMB aims to create insight into the relation between (past) behavior and structure of the problem. In choosing which element of the methods to use, it is important to realize that each element strikes a particular balance between costs (e.g. time taken from participants or modelers) and benefits (e.g. level of involvement or model verification). For instance, some elements speed up the process but do so at the cost of lowering participants’ involvement. A practical combination of elements of GMB and SODA thus requires the user to assess the relative importance of insight and action as project deliverables, weigh costs and benefits of elements of either method and string these together in a logical sequence that creates the outcomes required.     

Negotiation support using the Decision Support System GMCR

The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution constitutes a unique and flexible approach to the representation, analysis, and understanding of strategic conflict. This methodology, as implemented in the Decision Support System GMCR, constitutes a useful tool for negotiation support. Because GMCR includes efficient algorithms for calculating the stability of states, it encourages extensive comparisons of the consequences of different models of negotiators' decision making. GMCR also facilitates modifications to the way in which the conflict is represented, encouraging sensitivity and what-if analyses. The applicability of GMCR to negotiations is discussed in general, and in the context of a specific case study in environmental conflict resolution.     

The Interplay of Communication and Decisions in Electronic Negotiations: Communicative Decisions or Decisive Communication?

Whilst much research has been conducted on decision support for electronic negotiations and some research has been done on communication support in this area, there is a lack of research on the interplay between these two elements of negotiations. The questions whether both are equally important, whether one effects the other, or whether they show counter-effects are important both for negotiation training (i.e. what should be the focus for becoming a good negotiator) and for system research (i.e. which system support elements need to be developed). The current paper presents results of a controlled laboratory experiment with negotiators that were provided with decision support and communication support and negotiators that had only communication support available. The impact of decision support on the communication process and on outcome dimensions as well as the impact of communication behaviour on the negotiation process and the qualitative dimensions of the outcome will be discussed.     

Why so Serious? Theorising Playful Model-Driven Group Decision Support with Situated Affectivity

An integrative approach to theorising behavioural, affective and cognitive processes in model-driven group decision support (GDS) interventions is needed to gain insight into the (micro-)processes by which outcomes are accomplished. This paper proposes that the theoretical lens of situated affectivity, grounded in recent extensions of scaffolded mind models, is suitable to understand the performativity of affective micro-processes in model-driven GDS interventions. An illustrative vignette of a humorous micro-moment in a group decision workshop is presented to reveal the performativity of extended affective scaffolding processes for group decision development. The lens of situated affectivity constitutes a novel approach for the study of interventionist practice in the context of group decision making (and negotiation). An outlook with opportunities for future research is offered to facilitate an integrated approach to the study of cognitive–affective and behavioural micro-processes in model-driven GDS interventions.     

Getting to Yes in China: Exploring Personality Effects in Chinese Negotiation Styles

Researchers believe that personality affects both the negotiation process and outcomes, but have yet to provide reliable evidence. Using a culturally balanced personality scale SAPPS, we explore the impact of personality on negotiation within a collectivist context–China. Hypothesized relationships based on a buyer/seller model are supported that assertive negotiators are more likely to behave competitively, which leads to better economic outcomes, and open-minded negotiators are more likely to use an integrative approach, which leads to higher satisfaction. This result, similar to those obtained in North America, suggests a universal model of negotiation might exist. Our study also indicates, however, that personality only accounts for a small portion of variance in negotiation behaviors. More research from other perspectives is needed for further exploration.     

Configurable e-negotiation systems for large scale and transparent decision making

Participatory democracy is one of several conceptions of democracy which strives to create opportunities for all members of a group to contribute to the decision making process. Recent developments in information technologies in general and Internet technologies in particular are affecting the existing democratic mechanisms, hence enabling citizens and organizations to participate widely, efficiently and transparently in the decision making process and, most importantly, to arrive at better decisions faster, through negotiation. E-negotiation systems rely on such technologies to implement protocols ranging from motion raising and voting to auctions, and to make them available on the web for general use. E-negotiation systems can be used for political and societal decision making as well as business dealings within e-government and B2B settings. In order for these systems to fulfill their promise of bringing decision making opportunities to all, we need a structured approach and a configurable framework for designing, implementing and deploying them. The resulting systems should be web-based, easy to use, affordable, traceable, reliable, secure, flexible, efficient, and open for integration with other systems. This paper starts by examining leading research initiatives to devise such a framework and discussing the motivations behind them. We then introduce several design requirements derived from the expectations of e-negotiation systems providers and users. We argue that meeting these requirements fosters a more democratic and efficient decision making process. We also present our approach and vision of a configurable framework for designing, implementing and deploying e-negotiation systems.     

Arguing over Goals for Negotiation: Adopting an Assumption-Based Argumentation Decision Support System

Computational models of argumentation has been put forward as a promising approach to support decision making. In this context several recent works have proposed argumentation-based frameworks for decision making. In this paper we describe an application based on an argumentation-based mechanism for decision-making to concede. Adopting the assumption-based approach of argumentation, we propose an argumentation framework in which preferences are attached to goals. Arguments are defined as tree-like structures. Our framework is equipped with a computational counterpart for solving a decision problem, modeling the intuition that high-ranked goals are preferred to low-ranked goals which can be withdrawn. In this way, our framework suggests some decisions and provides an interactive and intelligible explanation of this choice. Our implementation, called MARGO, has been used for service selection within the ArguGRID project. We illustrate our approach with an industrial application, and illustrate the operation of the system with a running example.     

Innovative and creative entrepreneurship support services at universities

In the context of entrepreneurial universities, new stakeholders and new roles for old ones have emerged. Accordingly, university entrepreneurship support services have to behave in a creative and innovative manner to actively support business creation at universities. This means that a common framework is necessary that includes the different stakeholders and goals, which gives a clear picture of the process of entrepreneurship encouragement and business development support (EE&BDS). We present a model for knowledge transfer and company growth within the context of entrepreneurial universities. This alternative integrative approach of the different stakeholders, actors, activities, tools, goals, and needs helps us to arrange and manage them in a better way. Our analysis allows us to show the role and relationships among the different university stakeholders and how this integrative approach contributes to the enhancement of the EE&BDS process for this institution.