Skip to main content

Decision Support System

Decision Support Systems Origins

In the 1960s, researchers began systematically studying the use of computerized quantitative models to assist in decision making and planning (Raymond, 1966; Turban, 1967; Urban, 1967, Holt and Huber, 1969). Ferguson and Jones (1969) reported the first experimental study using a computer aided decision system. They investigated a production scheduling application running on an IBM 7094. In retrospect, a major historical turning point was Michael S. Scott Morton's (1967) dissertation field research at Harvard University.

Scott Morton’s study involved building, implementing and then testing an interactive, model-driven management decision system. Fellow Harvard Ph.D. student Andrew McCosh asserts that the “concept of decision support systems was first articulated by Scott Morton in February 1964 in a basement office in Sherman Hall, Harvard Business School” (McCosh email, 2002) in a discussion they had about Scott Morton’s dissertation. During 1966, Scott Morton (1971) studied how computers and analytical models could help managers make a recurring key business planning decision. He conducted an experiment in which managers actually used a Management Decision System (MDS). Marketing and production managers used an MDS to coordinate production planning for laundry equipment. The MDS ran on an IDI 21 inch CRT with a light pen connected using a 2400 bps modem to a pair of Univac 494 systems.

The pioneering work of George Dantzig, Douglas Engelbart and Jay Forrester likely influenced the feasibility of building computerized decision support systems. In 1952, Dantzig became a research mathematician at the Rand Corporation, where he began implementing linear programming on its experimental computers. In the mid-1960s, Engelbart and colleagues developed the first hypermedia—groupware system called NLS (oNLine System). NLS facilitated the creation of digital libraries and the storage and retrieval of electronic documents using hypertext. NLS also provided for on-screen video teleconferencing and was a forerunner to group decision support systems. Forrester was involved in building the SAGE (Semi-Automatic Ground Environment) air defense system for North America completed in 1962. SAGE is probably the first computerized data-driven DSS. Also, Professor Forrester started the System Dynamics Group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sloan School. His work on corporate modeling led to programming DYNAMO, a general simulation compiler.

In 1960, J.C.R. Licklider published his ideas about the future role of multiaccess interactive computing in a paper titled “Man-Computer Symbiosis.” He saw man-computer interaction as enhancing both the quality and efficiency of human problem solving and his paper provided a guide for decades of computer research to follow. Licklider was the architect of Project MAC at MIT that furthered the study of interactive computing.

By April 1964, the development of the IBM System 360 and other more powerful mainframe systems made it practical and cost-effective to develop Management Information Systems (MIS) for large companies (cf., Davis, 1974). These early MIS focused on providing managers with structured, periodic reports and the information was primarily from accounting and transaction processing systems, but the systems did not provide interactive support to assist managers in decision making.

Around 1970 business journals started to publish articles on management decision systems, strategic planning systems and decision support systems (cf., Sprague and Watson 1979).. For example, Scott Morton and colleagues McCosh and Stephens published decision support related articles in 1968. The first use of the term decision support system was in Gorry and Scott-Morton’s (1971) Sloan Management Review article. They argued that Management Information Systems primarily focused on structured decisions and suggested that the supporting information systems for semi-structured and unstructured decisions should be termed “Decision Support Systems”.

T.P. Gerrity, Jr. focused on Decision Support Systems design issues in his 1971 Sloan Management Review article titled "The Design of Man-Machine Decision Systems: An Application to Portfolio Management". The article was based on his MIT Ph.D. dissertation. His system was designed to support investment managers in their daily administration of a clients' stock portfolio.

John D.C. Little, also at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was studying DSS for marketing. Little and Lodish (1969) reported research on MEDIAC, a media planning support system. Also, Little (1970) identified criteria for designing models and systems to support management decision-making. His four criteria included: robustness, ease of control, simplicity, and completeness of relevant detail. All four criteria remain relevant in evaluating modern Decision Support Systems. By 1975, Little was expanding the frontiers of computer-supported modeling. His DSS called Brandaid was designed to support product, promotion, pricing and advertising decisions. Little also helped develop the financial and marketing modeling language known as EXPRESS.

In 1974, Gordon Davis, a Professor at the University of Minnesota, published his influential text on Management Information Systems. He defined a Management Information System as "an integrated, man/machine system for providing information to support the operations, management, and decision-making functions in an organization. (p. 5)." Davis's Chapter 12 was titled "Information System Support for Decision Making" and Chapter 13 was titled "Information System Support for Planning and Control". Davis’s framework incorporated computerized decision support systems into the emerging field of management information systems.

Peter Keen and Charles Stabell claim the concept of decision support systems evolved from "the theoretical studies of organizational decisionmaking done at the Carnegie Institute of Technology during the late 1950s and early '60s and the technical work on interactive computer systems, mainly carried out at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the 1960s. (Keen and Scott Morton, 1978)". Herbert Simon’s books (1947, 1960) and articles provide a context for understanding and supporting decision making.

In 1995, Hans Klein and Leif Methlie noted “A study of the origin of DSS has still to be written. It seems that the first DSS papers were published by PhD students or professors in business schools, who had access to the first time-sharing computer system: Project MAC at the Sloan School, the Dartmouth Time Sharing Systems at the Tuck School. In France, HEC was the first French business school to have a time-sharing system (installed in 1967), and the first DSS papers were published by professors of the School in 1970. (p. 112).”

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Advantages and Disadvantages of EIS Advantages of EIS Easy for upper-level executives to use, extensive computer experience is not required in operations Provides timely delivery of company summary information Information that is provided is better understood Filters data for management Improves to tracking information Offers efficiency to decision makers Disadvantages of EIS System dependent Limited functionality, by design Information overload for some managers Benefits hard to quantify High implementation costs System may become slow, large, and hard to manage Need good internal processes for data management May lead to less reliable and less secure data

Inter-Organizational Value Chain

The value chain of   a company is part of over all value chain. The over all competitive advantage of an organization is not just dependent on the quality and efficiency of the company and quality of products but also upon the that of its suppliers and wholesalers and retailers it may use. The analysis of overall supply chain is called the value system. Different parts of the value chain 1.  Supplier     2.  Firm       3.   Channel 4 .   Buyer

Big-M Method and Two-Phase Method

Big-M Method The Big-M method of handling instances with artificial  variables is the “commonsense approach”. Essentially, the notion is to make the artificial variables, through their coefficients in the objective function, so costly or unprofitable that any feasible solution to the real problem would be preferred, unless the original instance possessed no feasible solutions at all. But this means that we need to assign, in the objective function, coefficients to the artificial variables that are either very small (maximization problem) or very large (minimization problem); whatever this value,let us call it Big M . In fact, this notion is an old trick in optimization in general; we  simply associate a penalty value with variables that we do not want to be part of an ultimate solution(unless such an outcome is unavoidable). Indeed, the penalty is so costly that unless any of the  respective variables' inclusion is warranted algorithmically, such variables will never be p