A Framework for Selecting Action Portfolios with Incomplete and Action-Dependent Scenario Probabilities

References

• Argyris N, Morton A, Figueira JR (2014) Cut: A multicriteria approach for concavifiable preferences. Oper. Res. 62(3):633–642.Link, Google Scholar
• Barron FH (1987) Influence of missing attributes on selecting a best multiattributed alternative. Decision Sci. 18(2):194–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barron FH, Barrett BE (1996) Decision quality using ranked attribute weights. Management Sci. 42(11):1515–1523.Link, Google Scholar
• Budescu DV, Wallsten TS (1985) Consistency in interpretation of probabilistic phrases. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processing 36(3):391–405.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chermack TJ (2004) Improving decision-making with scenario planning. Futures 36(3):295–309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clemen RT (1996) Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis, vol. 2 (Duxbury Press, Belmont, CA).Google Scholar
• Clemen RT, Smith JE (2009) On the choice of baselines in multiattribute portfolio analysis: A cautionary note. Decision Anal. (Oxford) 6(4):256–262.Link, Google Scholar
• Courtney H, Kirkland J, Viguerie P (1997) Strategy under uncertainty. Harvard Bus. Rev. 75(6):67–79.Google Scholar
• Cox LA Jr, Popken DA, Sun RX (2018) Causal Analytics for Applied Risk Analysis (Springer, Cham, Switzerland).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer JS (2016) Multiattribute utility theory (MAUT). Greco S, Ehrgott M, Figueira JR, eds. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys (Springer, New York), 285–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer JS, Sarin RK (1979) Measurable multiattribute value functions. Oper. Res. 27(4):810–822.Link, Google Scholar
• Fishburn PC (1965) Analysis of decisions with incomplete knowledge of probabilities. Oper. Res. 13(2):217–237.Link, Google Scholar
• Flaig A, Kindström D, Ottosson M (2021) Market-shaping strategies: A conceptual framework for generating market outcomes. Indust. Marketing Management 96(1):254–266.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Franco LA, Montibeller G (2010) Facilitated modelling in operational research. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 205(3):489–500.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallo G, Ülkücü A (1977) Bilinear programming: An exact algorithm. Math. Programming 12(1):173–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodwin P, Wright G (2001) Enhancing strategy evaluation in scenario planning: A role for decision analysis. J. Management Stud. 38(1):1–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gouglas D, Hoyt K, Peacocke E, Kaloudis A, Ottersen T, Røttingen JA (2019) Setting strategic objectives for the coalition for epidemic preparedness innovations: An exploratory decision analysis process. INFORMS J. Appl. Anal. 49(6):430–446.Link, Google Scholar
• Grushka-Cockayne Y, Reyck BD, Degraeve Z (2008) An integrated decision-making approach for improving European air traffic management. Management Sci. 54(8):1395–1409.Link, Google Scholar
• Hagel J, Brown JS, Davison L (2008) Shaping strategy in a world of constant disruption. Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(10):80–89.Google Scholar
• Hämäläinen RP, Alaja S (2008) The threat of weighting biases in environmental decision analysis. Ecological Econom. 68(1–2):556–569.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Howard RA (1988) Decision analysis: Practice and promise. Management Sci. 34(6):679–695.Link, Google Scholar
• Jaspersen JG, Montibeller G (2015) Probability elicitation under severe time pressure: A rank-based method. Risk Anal. (Oxford) 35(7):1317–1335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karvetski CW, Lambert JH, Linkov I (2011) Scenario and multiple criteria decision analysis for energy and environmental security of military and industrial installations. Integrated Environ. Assessment Management 7(2):228–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karvetski CW, Lambert JH, Keisler JM, Linkov I (2010) Integration of decision analysis and scenario planning for coastal engineering and climate change. IEEE Trans. Systems Man Cybernetics Part A Systems Humans 41(1):63–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (1996) Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (2012) Value-focused brainstorming. Decision Anal. (Oxford) 9(4):303–313.Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL, Gregory RS (2005) Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Oper. Res. 53(1):1–11.Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney R, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Kirkwood CW, Sarin RK (1985) Ranking with partial information: A method and an application. Oper. Res. 33(1):38–48.Link, Google Scholar
• Kleinmuntz D (2007) Resource allocation decisions. Edwards W, Miles R, von Winterfeld D, eds. Advances in Decision Analysis (Cambridge University Press, New York), 400–418.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kunc M, O’Brien FA (2019) The role of business analytics in supporting strategy processes: Opportunities and limitations. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 70(6):974–985.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larichev OI (1992) Cognitive validity in design of decision-aiding techniques. J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal. (Oxford) 1(3):127–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lempert RJ, Groves DG, Popper SW, Bankes SC (2006) A general, analytic method for generating robust strategies and narrative scenarios. Management Sci. 52(4):514–528.Link, Google Scholar
• Lewis D (1981) Causal decision theory. Australasian J. Philosophy 59(1):5–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liesiö J, Salo A (2012) Scenario-based portfolio selection of investment projects with incomplete probability and utility information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 217(1):162–172.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liesiö J, Vilkkumaa E (2021) Nonadditive multiattribute utility functions for portfolio decision analysis. Oper. Res. 69(6):1886–1908.Link, Google Scholar
• Liesiö J, Kallio M, Argyris N (2023) Incomplete risk-preference information in portfolio decision analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 304(3):1084–1098.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liesiö J, Mild P, Salo A (2007) Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 181(3):1488–1505.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liesiö J, Mild P, Salo A (2008) Robust portfolio modeling with incomplete cost information and project interdependencies. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 190(3):679–695.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liesiö J, Salo A, Keisler JM, Morton A (2021) Portfolio decision analysis: Recent developments and future prospects. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 293(3):811–825.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lord S, Helfgott A, Vervoort JM (2016) Choosing diverse sets of plausible scenarios in multidimensional exploratory futures techniques. Futures 77(1):11–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ludke RL, Stauss FF, Gustafson DH (1977) Comparison of five methods for estimating subjective probability distributions. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 19(1):162–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matheiss T, Rubin DS (1980) A survey and comparison of methods for finding all vertices of convex polyhedral sets. Math. Oper. Res. 5(2):167–185.Link, Google Scholar
• Montibeller G, Franco A (2010) Multi-criteria decision analysis for strategic decision making. Zopounidis C, Pardalos P, eds. Handbook of Multicriteria Analysis (Springer, Heidelberg, Germany), 25–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Montibeller G, Franco LA (2011) Raising the bar: Strategic multi-criteria decision analysis. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 62(5):855–867.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Montibeller G, von Winterfeldt D (2015) Cognitive and motivational biases in decision and risk analysis. Risk Anal. (Oxford) 35(7):1230–1251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Montibeller G, von Winterfeldt D (2018) Individual and group biases in value and uncertainty judgments. Dias L, Morton A, Quigley J, eds. Elicitation: The Science and Art of Structuring Judgement (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 377–392. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Montibeller G, Gummer H, Tumidei D (2006) Combining scenario planning and multi-criteria decision analysis in practice. J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal. (Oxford) 14(1–3):5–20.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Montiel LV, Bickel JE (2014) A generalized sampling approach for multilinear utility functions given partial preference information. Decision Anal. (Oxford) 11(3):147–170.Link, Google Scholar
• Morgan MG (2017) Theory and Practice in Policy Analysis (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moskowitz H, Preckel PV, Yang A (1993) Decision analysis with incomplete utility and probability information. Oper. Res. 41(5):864–879.Link, Google Scholar
• Parkan C (1994) Decision making under partial probability information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 79(1):115–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pidd M (2004) Contemporary OR/MS in strategy development and policy-making: Some reflections. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 55(8):791–800.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podinovski VV (2014) Decision making under uncertainty with unknown utility function and rank-ordered probabilities. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 239(2):537–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pöyhönen M, Hämäläinen RP (2001) On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 129(3):569–585.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ram C, Montibeller G, Morton A (2011) Extending the use of scenario planning and MCDA for the evaluation of strategic options. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 62(5):817–829.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raynor ME, Leroux X (2004) Strategic flexibility in R&D. Res.-Tech. Management 47(3):27–32.Google Scholar
• Salo A, Keisler J, Morton A (2011) An invitation to portfolio decision analysis. Salo A, Keisler J, Morton A, eds. Portfolio Decision Analysis (Springer, New York), 3–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schirrmeister E, Göhring AL, Warnke P (2020) Psychological biases and heuristics in the context of foresight and scenario processes. Futures Foresight Sci. 2(2):e31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seeve T, Vilkkumaa E (2022) Identifying and visualizing a diverse set of plausible scenarios for strategic planning. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 298(2):596–610.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Skyrms B (1982) Causal decision theory. J. Philosophy 79(11):695–711.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tietje O (2005) Identification of a small reliable and efficient set of consistent scenarios. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 162(1):418–432.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psych. 5(2):207–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1983) Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psych. Rev. 90(4):293.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vilkkumaa E, Salo A, Liesiö J (2014) Multicriteria portfolio modeling for the development of shared action agendas. Group Decision Negotiation 23(1):49–70.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vilkkumaa E, Liesiö J, Salo A, Ilmola-Sheppard L (2018) Scenario-based portfolio model for building robust and proactive strategies. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 266(1):205–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walker W, Lempert RJ, Kwakkel JH (2013) Deep uncertainty. Gass SI, Fu MC, eds. Encylopedia of Operations Research and Management Science, 3rd ed. (Springer, New York), 395–402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weihrich H (1982) The TOWS matrix—A tool for situational analysis. Long Range Planning 15(2):54–66.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weinstein ND (1980) Unrealistic optimism about future life events. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 39(5):806.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weirich P (2001) Decision Space: Multidimensional Utility Analysis (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar