Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Looking Back on Decision Making Under Conditions of Conflict

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

  • 58 Accesses

Abstract

The combined field of group decision and negotiation (GDN) often tackles decision situations involving genuine disagreement – conflicting aims and objectives over specific issues. Decision situations, or problems, that can occur under conditions of conflict can be classified as single participant-multiple criteria, multiple participant-single criterion, or multiple participant-multiple criteria. Here, participants are individuals or groups with common interests, and criteria refer to aims and objectives. A real-world business application is utilized to illustrate the characteristics, similarities, and differences of these three types of decision problems. Formal approaches to the modeling and analysis of all three are reviewed, and meaningful connections and relationships among problems and the methodologies that can address them are clearly explained. A flexible decision support system is one that can be applied to a range of specific situations within a type of decision problem, in order to assist researchers and practitioners who want to better understand and resolve actual decision problems under conditions of conflict. Available flexible decision support systems for this purpose are listed and briefly described, and important issues for future research are suggested. This chapter furnishes a platform that links many chapters of this handbook.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bennett PG, Tait A, MacDonagh K (1994) INTERACT: developing software for interactive decisions. Group Decis Negot 3(3):351–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bristow M, Fang L, Hipel KW (2014) From values to ordinal preferences for strategic governance. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 44(10):1364–1383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant JW (2016) Acting strategically using drama theory. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang L, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM (1993) Interactive decision making: the graph model for conflict resolution. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang L, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Peng J (2003a) A decision support system for interactive decision making, part 1: model formulation. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C 33(1):42–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang L, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Peng J (2003b) A decision support system for interactive decision making, part 2: analysis and output interpretation. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part C 33(1):56–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM (1993) Application of preference trees. In: Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics. Le Touquet, 17–20 Oct, pp 132–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1979) Solving complex conflicts. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9(12):805–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1984) Conflict analysis: models and resolutions. North-Holland, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1988) Decision support systems for conflict analysis. In: Singh MG, Salassa D, Hindi KS (eds) Proceedings of the IMACS/IFOR first international colloquium on managerial decision support systems and knowledge-based systems, Manchester, 23–25 Nov 1987. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 13–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser NM, Hipel KW (1989) Decision making using conflict analysis. OR/MS Today 16(5):22–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Ge B, Hipel KW, Fang L, Yang K, Chen Y (2014) An interactive portfolio decision analysis approach for system-of-systems architecting using the graph model for conflict resolution. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 44(10):1328–1346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hipel KW (ed) (1992) Multiple objective decision making in water resources. Set of refereed papers published as AWRA Monograph Series No. 18 by the American Water Resources Association and also published in the February issue of Water Resources Bulletin, vol 28, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  • Hipel KW, Fang L (2005) Multiple participant decision making in societal and technological systems. Systems and human science, for safety, security, and dependability: selected papers of the 1st international symposium SSR2003, Osaka, Nov 2003. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 3–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Hipel KW, Radford KJ, Fang L (1993) Multiple participant-multiple criteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 23(4):1184–1189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Fang L, Peng J (1997) The decision support system GMCR in environmental conflict management. Appl Math Comput 83(2–3):117–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Hipel KW, Fang L, Kilgour DM (2020) The graph model for conflict resolution: reflections on three decades of development. Group Decis Negot 29(1):11–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1971) Paradoxes of rationality: theory of metagames and political behaviour. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1990) Soft game theory. Inf Decis Technol 16(3):215–227

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1994a) Drama theory and its relations to game theory. Part 1: dramatic resolution vs. rational solution. Group Decis Negot 3(2):187–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1994b) Drama theory and its relations to game theory. Part 2: formal model of the resolution process. Group Decis Negot 3(2):207–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard N (1999) Confrontation analysis: how to win operations other than war. CCRP publications. Pentagon, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Idea Sciences (2005) Confrontation manager user manual. Idea Sciences, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ke GY, Li KW, Hipel KW (2012a) An integrated multiple criteria preference ranking approach to the Canadian west coast port congestion problem. Expert Syst Appl 39(10):9181–9190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ke GY, Fu B, De M, Hipel KW (2012b) A hierarchical multiple criteria model for eliciting relative preferences in conflict situations. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 21(1):56–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL (1992) Value-focused thinking: a path to creative decision making. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decision analysis with multiple conflicting objectives. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour DM, Hipel KW, Fang L (1987) The graph model for conflicts. Automatica 23(1):41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour DM, Fang L, Hipel KW (1995) GMCR in negotiations. Negot J 11(2):151–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour DM, Chen Y, Hipel KW (2010) Multiple criteria approaches to group decision and negotiation. In: Ehrgott M, Figueira JR, Greco S (eds) Trends in multiple criteria decision analysis. Springer, New York, pp 317–338

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsara RA, Petersons O, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM (2015) Advanced decision support system for the graph model for conflict resolution. J Decis Syst 24, 2, 117–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsara RA, Kilgour DM, Hipel KW (2018) Communication features in a DSS for conflict resolution based on the graph model. Int J Inf Decis Sci 10(1):39–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma J, Hipel KW, De M, Cai J (2008) Transboundary water policies: assessment, comparison and enhancement. Water Resour Manag 22:1069–1087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon KR (1973) An overview of multi-objective decision making. In: Cochrane RL, Zelany M (eds) Multiple criteria decision making. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, pp 18–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Morais DC, de Almeida AT (2012) Group decision making on water resources based on analysis of individual rankings. Omega Int J Manag Sci 40:42–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obeidi A, Hipel KW (2005) Strategic and dilemma analyses of a water export conflict. INFOR 43(3):247–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Radford KJ (1989) Individual and small group decisions. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Radford KJ, Hipel KW, Fang L (1994) Decision making under conditions of conflict. Group Decis Negot 3(2):169–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy B (1985) Methodologie Multicritere d’Aide a la Decision. Economica, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sage AP (1991) Decision support systems engineering. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva MM, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Costa APCS (2017a) Urban planning in Recife, Brazil: evidence from a conflict analysis of the New Recife Project. J Urban Plann Dev 143(3):05017007-1–05017007-11

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva MM, Kilgour DM, Hipel KW, Costa APCS (2017b) Probabilistic composition of preferences in the graph model with application to the New Recife Project. J Leg Aff Disput Resolut Eng Constr 9(3):05017004-1–05017004-13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva MM, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Costa APCS (2019) Strategic analysis of a regulatory conflict using Dempster-Shafer theory and AHP for preference elicitation. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 28(4):415–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talukder B, Blay-Palmer A, Hipel KW, vanLoom GW (2017) Elimination method of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDM): a simple methodological approach for assessing agricultural sustainability. Sustainability 9:287. (17 pages)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urtiga MM, Morais DC, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM (2017) Group decision methodology to support watershed committees in choosing among combinations of alternatives. Group Decis Negot 26(4):729–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1953) Theory of games and economic behavior, 3rd edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Weistroffer HR, Li Y (2016) Multiple criteria decision analysis software. In: Greco S, Ehrgott M, Figueira JR (eds) Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. Springer, New York, pp 1301–1341

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Xu H, Hipel KW, Kilgour DM, Fang L (2018) Conflict resolution using the graph model: strategic interactions in competition and cooperation. Springer, Cham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Young M (2017) Dilemma explorer. Available at https://www.decisionworkshops.com/dilemma-explorer/4581290653. Accessed 31 July 2020

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Liping Fang

  2. Department of Systems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    Keith W. Hipel

Authors
  1. Liping Fang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keith W. Hipel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liping Fang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wilfrid Laurier University Dept. Mathematics, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    D. Marc Kilgour

  2. University of Strathclyde Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK

    Colin Eden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Fang, L., Hipel, K.W. (2021). Looking Back on Decision Making Under Conditions of Conflict. In: Kilgour, D.M., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_31-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_31-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation