A Socio-technical Approach for Group Decision Support in Public Strategic Planning: The Pernambuco PPA Case

Carlos A. Bana e Costa (), João Carlos Lourenço, Monica Oliveira and João C. Bana e Costa
Additional contact information
Carlos A. Bana e Costa: Technical University of Lisbon
João Carlos Lourenço: Technical University of Lisbon
João C. Bana e Costa: BANA Consulting, Lda.

Group Decision and Negotiation, 2014, vol. 23, issue 1, No 2, 5-29

Abstract: Abstract This article describes a socio-technical approach to public strategic planning. A multi-methodological framework with decision support systems (DSS) of problem structuring, multi-criteria decision analysis and strategic thinking was used in a decision conferencing process to support the key-players of the Pernambuco State Department of Social Development and Human Rights, in Brazil, to elaborate its 2008–2011 Multi-Annual Plan (PPA). This interactive process took place in June 2007, with thirty technical and political actors meeting in 5 consecutive days to discuss what should be the fundamental objectives/development axes of the PPA and to generate, assess and classify intervention programmes to achieve the objectives. Structuring objectives and programmes started by a group causal mapping session supported by the Decision Explorer DSS. Then, a multi-criteria group value model, created on-the-spot by means of the M-MACBETH DSS, helped the politicians in evaluating the overall benefit of each programme. The doability of the programmes was also appraised with MACBETH and, finally, the programmes were classified into four benefit versus doability categories defined in a $$2\times 2$$ strategic graph: “pearls” (programmes with high benefit value and easy to implement), “oysters” (high benefit but difficult to implement), “bread and butter” (easy to implement but of low added value) and “white elephants” (low benefit and difficult to implement). The group agreed that at least all pearls and oysters should be selected. The programmes were prioritised based on their value-for-effort and the robustness of the selection was analysed with the PROBE DSS a posteriori.

Keywords: Strategic planning; Decision conferencing; Causal mapping; Multi-criteria decision analysis; Prioritisation; MACBETH (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (13)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-012-9326-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:grdene:v:23:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-012-9326-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/10726/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10726-012-9326-2

Access Statistics for this article

Group Decision and Negotiation is currently edited by Gregory E. Kersten

More articles in Group Decision and Negotiation from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().