{"title":"战略决策中的创新专家方法","authors":"D. Gombitová, D. Dokupilová","doi":"10.12776/qip.v26i1.1643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study introduces managerial techniques applied for the first time in the high-level strategic public policy decision-making process in Slovakia with an aim to assess the strategic decision-making of groups of experts in a methodologically supported environment. It compares groups of internal analysts and external specialists and should demonstrate the extent to which these two groups are able to process problems analytically and suppress intuition.\nMethodology/Approach: Multi-criteria decision methods are used when deciding on complex problems. One of the most popular and most frequently used is the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Application of this method enables measurement of preference consistency, and its relationship with cognitive reflection.\nFindings: Consistency of judgement was very similar in both groups. The prioritisation of measures resulted in a similar set of priorities determined by both groups. The assumed relationship of consistency and cognitive reflection score and/or overconfidence was not detected, and decision makers proved to be well calibrated.\nResearch Limitation/Implication: The main limitation of our research was the small sample size of decision makers, which complied with the requirements of the decision method, but was not sufficient to confirm the statistical validity.\nOriginality/Value of paper: The introduction of the multi-criteria decision method into decision-making for public policy strategies combines practical policy exercises with scientific research on high-stakes decisions and enables to carry out participatory decision-making process with relevant stakeholders.","PeriodicalId":44057,"journal":{"name":"Quality Innovation Prosperity-Kvalita Inovacia Prosperita","volume":"222 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Innovative Expert Methods in Strategic Decision Making\",\"authors\":\"D. Gombitová, D. Dokupilová\",\"doi\":\"10.12776/qip.v26i1.1643\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: This study introduces managerial techniques applied for the first time in the high-level strategic public policy decision-making process in Slovakia with an aim to assess the strategic decision-making of groups of experts in a methodologically supported environment. It compares groups of internal analysts and external specialists and should demonstrate the extent to which these two groups are able to process problems analytically and suppress intuition.\\nMethodology/Approach: Multi-criteria decision methods are used when deciding on complex problems. One of the most popular and most frequently used is the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Application of this method enables measurement of preference consistency, and its relationship with cognitive reflection.\\nFindings: Consistency of judgement was very similar in both groups. The prioritisation of measures resulted in a similar set of priorities determined by both groups. The assumed relationship of consistency and cognitive reflection score and/or overconfidence was not detected, and decision makers proved to be well calibrated.\\nResearch Limitation/Implication: The main limitation of our research was the small sample size of decision makers, which complied with the requirements of the decision method, but was not sufficient to confirm the statistical validity.\\nOriginality/Value of paper: The introduction of the multi-criteria decision method into decision-making for public policy strategies combines practical policy exercises with scientific research on high-stakes decisions and enables to carry out participatory decision-making process with relevant stakeholders.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality Innovation Prosperity-Kvalita Inovacia Prosperita\",\"volume\":\"222 3 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality Innovation Prosperity-Kvalita Inovacia Prosperita\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v26i1.1643\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality Innovation Prosperity-Kvalita Inovacia Prosperita","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v26i1.1643","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Innovative Expert Methods in Strategic Decision Making
Purpose: This study introduces managerial techniques applied for the first time in the high-level strategic public policy decision-making process in Slovakia with an aim to assess the strategic decision-making of groups of experts in a methodologically supported environment. It compares groups of internal analysts and external specialists and should demonstrate the extent to which these two groups are able to process problems analytically and suppress intuition.
Methodology/Approach: Multi-criteria decision methods are used when deciding on complex problems. One of the most popular and most frequently used is the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Application of this method enables measurement of preference consistency, and its relationship with cognitive reflection.
Findings: Consistency of judgement was very similar in both groups. The prioritisation of measures resulted in a similar set of priorities determined by both groups. The assumed relationship of consistency and cognitive reflection score and/or overconfidence was not detected, and decision makers proved to be well calibrated.
Research Limitation/Implication: The main limitation of our research was the small sample size of decision makers, which complied with the requirements of the decision method, but was not sufficient to confirm the statistical validity.
Originality/Value of paper: The introduction of the multi-criteria decision method into decision-making for public policy strategies combines practical policy exercises with scientific research on high-stakes decisions and enables to carry out participatory decision-making process with relevant stakeholders.