Search

This paper undertakes a revisit of the sunk cost fallacy, which refers to the tendency of people to persist investing resources into something, even if it is destined to have no good outcome. We emphasize that the utilities associated with different alternatives are not static for decision makers, which is exactly opposite to the traditional perspective. This paper argues that the utility of an option may change due to the choice of another option, suggesting that decisions considered irrational by the traditional analytical method, i.e., sunk cost fallacy, may be rational. We propose a novel analytical method for decision making with sunk cost when considering the utility change and validate the effectiveness of this method through mathematical modeling and computational experiments. This paper mathematically describes such decision-making problems, analyzing the impact of changes in the utilities across different alternatives on decision making with a real-world example. Furthermore, we develop a two-stage stochastic optimization model for such decision-making problems and employ the sample average approximation (SAA) method to solve them. The results from computational experiments indicate that some decisions traditionally considered irrational are, in fact, rational when the utility of an option changes as a result of choosing another option. This paper, therefore, highlights the significance of incorporating utility changes into the decision-making process and stands as a valuable addition to the literature, offering a refreshed and effective decision-making method for improved decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this position paper, we shall undertake a critical scrutiny of the decision analysis (DA) paradigm on the basis of experience we gained from working on the bullwhip effect. We had some success with sorting out the complexities of the bullwhip by using fuzzy numbers in the bullwhip models, and we found out that this points the way to a more viable approach to sort out complex decision problems. As a positive criticism of the DA paradigm we have collected the insights we have gained in an agenda for soft decision analysis (SDA), which we hasten to add is not complete but—hopefully—an opening for focused research and continuing development. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper explores a decision analysis on product integration of family security services and residential fire insurance in the London and Taiwan markets by using the proposed mathematical models for counting sustainable value. This paper shows the five main different results between London and Taiwan markets with ten different parameters of the family security market, to find out the optimal number of family security integrated services for each security company in London. The improvement of the risk aversion effect based on risk and financial management will enhance the market share of the private security industries in the London and Taiwan markets. The results of this research can serve as a reference for the decision-making of private security industries on product integration under sustainable value consideration. The research findings highlight the potential benefits for both the private security industry and the insurance industry in their design and negotiation for product integration to improve both of business operation and achieve corporate social responsibility goals to match the sustainability in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we consider multi-criteria decision-making problems of selecting the best decision alternative in which the preferences of the decision maker are given in the form of quasi-orders. If the decision maker's preferences are modeled by a family of complete quasi-orders (in particular, by a parametric family of additive value functions) then a common approach to solving such problems is based on the notion of potential optimality. In this paper, we consider the case in which the decision maker's preferences are modeled by a family of incomplete quasi-orders. We suggest a new approach to selecting decision alternatives by introducing the notion of potential nondominated alternatives. Such alternatives can be regarded as candidates for the best alternative. We investigate properties of the sets of potential nondominated alternatives and, for the case of a parametric family of partial quasi-orders, we develop a method of their identification. Our development is illustrated by numerical examples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a decision-support methodology to support the development and assessment of military asset and resource strategies. The methodology is built around a system dynamics model that allows users to examine the performance of a strategy over time. The novelty of the model lies in its flexibility and ability to address questions about asset planning from both holistic and lifecycle viewpoints. From the user perspective, the decision-support methodology is structured around three phases: (1) Design an asset management strategy, (2) Evaluate strategy using system dynamics simulation model, and (3) Generate performance indicators and analyse results. The methodology is developed and used in a real case study to support the modernisation of the Australian Defence Force. This paper demonstrates that system dynamics offers useful methods to study the dynamics of supply-demand, and support the development of systemic asset and resource management strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We consider a dynamic duopoly game where firms choose both the timing and size of their investments. The existing real options literature predominantly consists of contributions where firms have a single option to invest. This paper relaxes this assumption by giving Firm A multiple options to undertake further investments with the purpose to expand whereas Firm B only holds the option to enter the market. In this asymmetric setting we get the surprising result that, in equilibrium, Firm B invests first. If Firm A invests first, Firm A and Firm B keep on being involved in preemption games for subsequent investments until Firm B enters the market, which leads to inefficiently early investments of Firm A. When Firm B invests first, then only one preemption game is played, which leads to Firm A being free to choose its unrestricted optimal investment moments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the review process for the paper "Architecting Portfolios of Systems" in this issue one of the reviewers suggested that part of the reviewer‐author dialog be published because it clarified some issues beyond the paper itself and illustrated some different perspectives. This paper elaborates three major topics: The categorization of different types of collections of systems, the concept of requisite modeling in how we choose to model systems under development across a spectrum of rigor, and how to judge the success of research in systems engineering processes and methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]