{"title":"识别小规模群体决策中的阻塞行为及其对共识结果的影响:森林管理案例研究","authors":"Manon Enjolras, Maxence Arnould, Mauricio Camargo","doi":"10.1002/mcda.1819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Group decision-making (GDM) problems usually include stakeholders with different views and opinions. In order to find a collective solution, it is necessary to achieve a consensus reaching process (CRP) that may lead to the emergence of non-cooperative behaviors within the group. This article proposes to study how these non-cooperative behaviors appear in a group of decision-makers and what their level of impact is on the evolution of consensus and on the final decision. To provide some answers to this research problem, we propose a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology implementing analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in order to provide a visualization of the CRP evolution and observe four non-cooperative behaviors within small-scale GDM: (1) collective agreement, (2) blocking behavior, (3) leadership demonstration, and (4) experts' coalition. We implement our methodology within a pedagogical framework, in 29 small-scale groups of masters and engineering students, through a case study related to the implementation of forest management scenarios in France. Our results show the evolution of the four non-cooperative behaviors within the groups, as well as their impact on the CRP outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":45876,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","volume":"30 5-6","pages":"219-237"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying blocking behaviors in small-scale group decision-making and their impact on consensus outcomes: A case study on forest management\",\"authors\":\"Manon Enjolras, Maxence Arnould, Mauricio Camargo\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mcda.1819\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Group decision-making (GDM) problems usually include stakeholders with different views and opinions. In order to find a collective solution, it is necessary to achieve a consensus reaching process (CRP) that may lead to the emergence of non-cooperative behaviors within the group. This article proposes to study how these non-cooperative behaviors appear in a group of decision-makers and what their level of impact is on the evolution of consensus and on the final decision. To provide some answers to this research problem, we propose a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology implementing analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in order to provide a visualization of the CRP evolution and observe four non-cooperative behaviors within small-scale GDM: (1) collective agreement, (2) blocking behavior, (3) leadership demonstration, and (4) experts' coalition. We implement our methodology within a pedagogical framework, in 29 small-scale groups of masters and engineering students, through a case study related to the implementation of forest management scenarios in France. Our results show the evolution of the four non-cooperative behaviors within the groups, as well as their impact on the CRP outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis\",\"volume\":\"30 5-6\",\"pages\":\"219-237\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mcda.1819\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mcda.1819","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Identifying blocking behaviors in small-scale group decision-making and their impact on consensus outcomes: A case study on forest management
Group decision-making (GDM) problems usually include stakeholders with different views and opinions. In order to find a collective solution, it is necessary to achieve a consensus reaching process (CRP) that may lead to the emergence of non-cooperative behaviors within the group. This article proposes to study how these non-cooperative behaviors appear in a group of decision-makers and what their level of impact is on the evolution of consensus and on the final decision. To provide some answers to this research problem, we propose a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodology implementing analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in order to provide a visualization of the CRP evolution and observe four non-cooperative behaviors within small-scale GDM: (1) collective agreement, (2) blocking behavior, (3) leadership demonstration, and (4) experts' coalition. We implement our methodology within a pedagogical framework, in 29 small-scale groups of masters and engineering students, through a case study related to the implementation of forest management scenarios in France. Our results show the evolution of the four non-cooperative behaviors within the groups, as well as their impact on the CRP outcomes.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis was launched in 1992, and from the outset has aimed to be the repository of choice for papers covering all aspects of MCDA/MCDM. The journal provides an international forum for the presentation and discussion of all aspects of research, application and evaluation of multi-criteria decision analysis, and publishes material from a variety of disciplines and all schools of thought. Papers addressing mathematical, theoretical, and behavioural aspects are welcome, as are case studies, applications and evaluation of techniques and methodologies.