Strategic Management Thought

Synergy framework of decision-making process knowledge in governmental decisions

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

imam sadiq university

Abstract

The success or failure of individuals, groups, organizations, and societies depends on their decisions more than anything else. The purpose of this research is to design a framework for synergizing the process-building knowledge of Governmental Decisions. For this purpose, we use the design science methodology with the epistemological fundamentalism approach. The results of the research first identify the characteristics of government decision-making:

Content knowledge (which affects the decision in terms of subject and does not interfere in the decision-making process) is different depending on the subject of the decision and practically includes all human knowledge. In our framework, the relationship of each piece of knowledge with governmental decisions and the role it plays during governmental decision-making were explained, focusing on different phases of decision-making. Also, the concept of "satisfactory interdisciplinary distance" was introduced. This concept explains how synergy ultimately occurs between different disciplines in governance decision-making. In the end, the research proposals were presented separately by relevant institutions and organizations and experts and researchers in related fields.

Keywords

Main Subjects

آذر، عادل و مطلبی، مصطفی (1400)، طراحی الگوی حسابرسی هوشمند. رساله دکتری تخصصی. دانشگاه تربیت مدرس. تهران. ایران.
آذر، عادل و عزیزی، مهدی (1400)، طراحی روش شناسی تصمیم گیری نرم در شرایط چندجانبه با رویکرد اسلامی، رساله دکتری تخصصی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران.
قریشی، سید محمدحسین (1400)، چابک سازی دولت از منظر اصلاح نظام اداری ایران: تمایز چابک­سازی و کوچک­سازی. گزارش­های کارشناسی مرکز پژوهشهای مجلس. قابل دستیابی در:                                                   https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/report/show/1678899
خنجرخانی، ذبیح­اله؛ بختیارنصرآبادی، حسنعلی و ابراهیمی دینایی، آرزو (1388). درآمدی بر ضرورت، جایگاه و انواع مطالعات میان­رشته­ا­ی در آموزش عالی. مطالعات میان­رشته­ای در علوم انسانی. 2 (5). 167 – 186.
تکت، آن و وایت، لوری (1399). تصمیمگیری نرم، روش شناسی پاندا. (مترجمان عادل آذر و سیدمهدی عزیزی). تهران: انتشارات سازمان مدیریت صنعتی. (نشر اثر اصلی، 2000).
Adomavicius, Gediminas, Jesse C. Bockstedt, Alok Gupta and Robert J. Kauffman (2008). “Making Sense of Technology Trends in the Information Technology Landscape: A Design Science Approach.” MIS Quarterly. 32 (4). 779-809.
Anzai, T., & Sengoku, S. (2016). Managing academic interdisciplinary research towards innovation: A resource and communication-based approach. Technology Transfer and Entrepreneurship. 3 (2). 70-81.
Arnott, D. (2006). Cognitive biases and decision support systems development: a design science approach. Information Systems Journal. 16 (1). 55-78.
Bell, W. (2011). Foundations of futures studies: human science for a new era: values, objectivity, and the good society. (Vol. 2). Transaction Publishers.
Bronen, R., Pollock, D., Overbeck, J., Stevens, D., Natali, S., & Maio, C. (2020). Usteq: integrating indigenous knowledge and social and physical sciences to coproduce knowledge and support community-based adaptation. Polar Geography. 43 (2-3). 188-205.
Chelimsky, E. (1991). On the social science contribution to governmental decision-making. Science. 254 (5029). 226-231.
Cole, Robert, Sandeep Purao, Matti Rossi and Maung K. Sein (2005). “Being Proactive: Where Action Research Meets Design Research.” In D. Avison, D. Galletta, and J.I. DeGross (eds.). Twenty-Sixth International Conference on Information Systems. Atlanta: Association for Information Systems: 325–336.
Cross, N. (2007). From a design science to a design discipline: Understanding designerly ways of knowing and thinking. In Design research now (pp. 41-54). Birkhäuser Basel.
Gill, S. V., Vessali, M., Pratt, J. A., Watts, S., Pratt, J. S., Raghavan, P., & DeSilva, J. M. (2015). The importance of interdisciplinary research training and community dissemination. Clinical and translational science. 8 (5). 611-614.
Harford, J., Kecskés, A., & Mansi, S. (2018). Do long-term investors improve corporate decision making? Journal of Corporate Finance. 50. 424-452.
Harrison, E. Frank, (1993),"Interdisciplinary Models of Decision Making", Management Decision. 31 (8). Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251749310047124
Hevner, A. R. (2007). A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian journal of information systems. 19 (2). 4.
Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS. 28 (1). 75-105 (31 pages)
Hevner, A., & Chatterjee, S. (2010). Design science research in information systems. In Design research in information systems (pp. 9-22). Springer. Boston. MA.
Hoegen, A., Steininger, D. M., & Veit, D. (2018). How do investors decide? An interdisciplinary review of decision-making in crowdfunding. Electronic Markets. 28 (3). 339-365.
Hogan-Doran, D. (2017). Computer says" no": Automation, algorithms and artificial intelligence in Government decision-making. In Judicial Review: Selected Conference Papers: Journal of the Judicial Commission of New South Wales. The 13 (3). 345-382.
Holmström, J., Ketokivi, M., & Hameri, A. P. (2009). Bridging practice and theory: A design science approach. Decision sciences. 40 (1). 65-87.
Johannesson, P. and Erik Perjons (2014). An Introduction to Design Science. Springer International Publishing.
Lie, R. (2003). Spaces of intercultural communication. An interdisciplinary introduction to communication, culture, and globalizing/localizing identities. Hampton Press.
Newell, W. H. (2007). 13 Decision Making in Interdisciplinary Studies. Handbook of Decision Making.
Offermann, P., Olga Levina, M. Schönherr and Udo Bub (2009). “Outline of a design science research process.” DESRIST.
Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of management information systems. 24 (3). 45-77.
Robinson, B., Vasko, S. E., Gonnerman, C., Christen, M., O’Rourke, M., & Steel, D. (2016). Human values and the value of humanities in interdisciplinary research. Cogent Arts & Humanities. 3 (1). 1123080.
Sein, M. K., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. (2011). Action design research. MIS. 35 (1). 37-56.
Streib, G. (1992). Applying strategic decision making in local government. Public Productivity & Management Review. 22 (3). 341-354.
Toffler, B. L. (1981). Occupational role development: The changing determinants of outcomes for the individual. Administrative Science Quarterly. 26 (3). 396-418.
Vaishnavi, Vijay K. and William L. Kuechler. (2015) Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating Information and Communication Technology. 2nd Edition.” Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Wang, C., Medaglia, R., & Zheng, L. (2018). Towards a typology of adaptive governance in the digital government context: The role of decision-making and accountability. Government Information Quarterly. 35 (2). 306-322.
Wieringa, Roel (2009). “Design science as nested problem solving.” In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology. New York.
Ya Ni, A., & Bretschneider, S. (2007). Th e Decision to Contract Out: A Study of Contracting for E‐Government Services in State Governments. Public Administration Review. 67 (3). 531-544.
Strategic Management Thought
Volume 17, Issue 2 - Serial Number 36
June 2023
Pages 75-102
  • Receive Date: 04 June 2023
  • Revise Date: 21 November 2023
  • Accept Date: 30 December 2023