D-side: A facility and workforce planning group multi-criteria decision support system for Johnson Space Center

Computers and Operations Research

Volumn 34, Issue 6 SPEC. ISS., 2007, Pages 1646-1673

  Tavana, Madjid ^a   Smither, James W ^a   Anderson, Ralph V ^b  

^a LA SALLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NASA JOHNSON SPACE CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

3 D Modeling; AHP; Decision support system; Euclidean distance; Facility planning; Multi criteria decision making; NASA; Workforce planning

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; GRAPH THEORY; INVESTMENTS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PERSONNEL;

3-D MODELING; AHP; EUCLIDEAN DISTANCE; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; NASA; WORKFORCE PLANNING;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

EID: 33749660556     PISSN: 03050548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cor.2005.06.020     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Gregory R.A., and Pearce A.R. Cost effective allocation of research funds for the development of emerging technologies. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 125 3 (1999) 88-93
2. Garrison R.H., and Noreen E.W. Managerial accounting (2002), Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA
3. Expert Choice [Computer Software]. McLean, VA: Decision Support Software; 2004.
4. DeSanctis G.L., and Gallupe R.B. A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Science 33 5 (1987) 589-609
5. Schoemaker P.J.H., and Russo J.E. A pyramid of decision approaches. California Management Review 36 1 (1993) 9-31
6. Arrow K.J. Social choice and individual values. 2nd ed. (1963), Wiley, New York, NY
7. Cao PP, Burstein FV, San Pedro JC. Coordinating distributed group multiple criteria decision-making processes: preliminary results from a laboratory experiment. Ustron, Poland: Proceedings of the 7th international conference of the international society for decision support systems (ISDSS'03), 2003.
8. Barkhi R. The effects of decision guidance and problem modeling on group decision-making. Journal of Management Information Systems 18 3 (2002) 259-285
9. Fjermestad J., and Hiltz S. Group support systems: a descriptive evaluation of case and field studies. Journal of Management Information Systems 17 3 (2001) 115-159
10. Lam S.S.K. The effects of group decision support systems and task structures on group communication and decision quality. Journal of Management Information Systems 13 4 (1997) 193-215
11. Antelman A., and Miller A. Mission dependency index validation report (SP-2113-SHR) (2002), Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center Publications, Port Hueneme, CA
12. Tufte E.R. Envisioning information (1990), Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT
13. Tufte E.R. The visual display of quantitative information. 2nd ed. (2001), Graphics Press, Cheshire, CT
14. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA Strategic Plan. Washington, DC: NASA; 2003.
15. Saaty S.L. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15 3 (1977) 234-281
16. Saaty T.L., and Vargas L.G. Diagnosis with dependent symptoms: bayes theorem and the analytic hierarchy process. Operations Research 46 4 (1998) 491-502
17. Forman E.H., and Gass S.I. The analytic hierarchy process-an exposition. Operations Research 49 4 (2001) 469-486
18. Rush SC. Managing the facilities portfolio. Washington, DC: National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO); 1991.
19. Gilliland S.W., and Langdon J.C. Creating performance management systems that promote perceptions of fairness. In: Smither J.W. (Ed). Performance appraisal. state-of-the-art in practice (1998), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
20. Taylor M.S., Tracy K.B., Renard M.K., Harrison J.K., and Carroll S.J. Due process in performance appraisal: a quasi-experiment in procedural justice. Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (1995) 495-523
21. Kozlowski S.W.J., Chao G.T., and Morrison R.F. Games raters play: politics, strategies, and impression management in performance appraisal. In: Smither J.W. (Ed). Performance appraisal. state-of-the art in practice (1998), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
22. Hauenstein N.M.A. Training raters to increase the accuracy of appraisals and the usefulness of feedback. In: Smither J.W. (Ed). Performance appraisal. state-of-the-art in practice (1998), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
23. Shrout P.E., and Fleiss J.L. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin 86 2 (1979) 420-428
24. Rothstein H.R. Interrater reliability of job performance ratings: Growth to asymptote level with increasing opportunity to observe. Journal of Applied Psychology 75 (1990) 322-327
25. Nunnally J.C. Psychometric theory (1978), McGraw-Hill, New York
26. Khalifa M., Davison R., and Kwok R.-W. The effects of process and content facilitation restrictiveness on GSS-mediated collaborative learning. Group Decision and Negotiation 11 5 (2002) 345-361
27. Bharati P., and Chaudhury A. An empirical investigation of decision-making satisfaction in web-based decision support systems. Decision Support Systems 37 2 (2004) 187-197
28. Benbasat I., and Lim L. The effects of group, task, context, and technology variables on the usefulness of group support systems: a meta-analysis of experimental studies. Small Group Research 24 4 (1993) 430-462
29. DeLone W.H., and McLean E.R. Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Success 3 1 (1992) 60-95
30. Gallupe R., DeSanctis G., and Dickson G. Computer-based support for group problem-finding: an experimental investigation. MIS Quarterly 12 2 (1988) 277-296
31. Limayem M., and DeSanctis G. Providing decisional guidance for multicriteria decision making in groups. Information Systems Research 11 4 (2000) 386-401
32. Aldag R., and Power D. An empirical assessment of computer assisted decision analysis. Decision Sciences 17 4 (1986) 572-588
33. Davis F. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13 3 (1989) 319-340
34. Niederman F., and DeSanctis G. The impact of a structured argument approach on group problem formulation. Decision Sciences 26 4 (1995) 451-474
35. Watson R.T., DeSanctis G., and Poole M.S. Using GDSS to facilitate group consensus: some intended and unintended consequences. MIS Quarterly 12 3 (1988) 463-478
36. Srinivasan A. Alternative measures of system effectiveness: associations and implications. MIS Quarterly 9 3 (1985) 243-253
37. Campbell D.T., and Fiske D.W. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 56 2 (1959) 81-105
38. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (1988), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ
39. Zahedi F. The analytic hierarchy process-a survey of the method and its applications. Interfaces 16 4 (1986) 96-108
40. Golden B.L., Wasil E.A., and Levy D.E. Applications of the analytic hierarchy process: a categorized, annotated bibliography. In: Golden B.L., Harker P.T., and Wasil E.A. (Eds). Analytic hierarchy process (1989), Springer, New York, NY
41. Russo J.E., and Schoemaker P.J.H. Decision traps (1989), Fireside, New York