Decision support systems Research: Current State, Problems, and Future Directions

Sean Eom* * Department of Accounting & MIS Southeast Missouri State University 1 University Plaza Cape Girardeau, MO, USAe-mail: sbeom@semo.edu

ABSTRACT

this research provides the answers to the several key questions posed by Keen and Kuhn. Kuhn believes that in order for any scientific communities to transit from the pre- to post paradigm period, we need to know who we are as the members of scientific community and what we share between the member of the DSS area and what academics and practitioners in DSS share. Keen addressed three main needs of MIS research to be a coherent field. They are clarification of reference disciplines, defining the dependent variables, and building a cumulative tradition. This research aims to answer those five questions. We suggest that DSS researchers need to look at possible changes of research directions from empirical research emphasis to broaden its scope to take a new approach: the design science paradigm.

I. Introduction

Kuhn believes that in order for any scientific communities to transit from the pre- to post paradigm period, the following two questions must be answered.

Who are the members of a Scientific Community? What Do Its Members Share?

Keen addressed three main needs of MIS research to be a coherent field.

What are the reference disciplines? What are the dependent variables? Are we building a cumulative research

tradition?

2. THE RESEARCH MODELOrganizational Goals

Improving Effectiveness of the DM'sProblem-Solving Process

DSS Theory

Design

Implementation

Psychology

Systems Science

AI

Cognitive Science

Communication Science

Organization Science

Computer Science

Management Science

Multicriteria DecisionMaking

Contributing Disciplines

Marketing DSS

POM DSS

Financial DSS

DSS Applications

Evaluation

Current Sate of the DSS area

2.1 Who Are The Members Of A Scientific Community?

2.2 What Do Its Members Share?

Current Sate of the DSS area

2.1 Who Are The Members Of A Scientific Community?

2.2 What Do Its Members Share?

2.2.1 What Do Academics and Practitioners Share?

FINDINGS: Structural Differences between Theory and Practice – a big picture

the foundations of DSS Group DSS routing DSS emergency/disaster management DSS management science/operations

research multiple criteria decision making

(MCDM)

What is being used in implemented system building?

First, several DSS research subspecialties identified in the previous studies did not appear in this study including: design, model management, user interface, implementation, evaluation.

This result tells DSS researchers that the current accumulated knowledge in these areas are not robust enough to be used in the process of designing, implementing, and evaluating decision support systems, which is the backbone of the DSS research framework by Keen and Scott Morton

What is being used in implemented system building?

Second, of the numerous contributing disciplines identified in the earlier study of Eom (2002), only management science (MS)/operations research (OR) is the contributing discipline that has played a vital role in developing implemented decision support systems.

This study reveals that MS/OR contributions come from the areas of multiple criteria decision making, linear programming, and network algorithms (PERT/CPM).

Interactions between Theory and Practice

“while the trend of drawing on reference discipline theories continues, the IS discipline seem to be extending and applying these theories to the specific nature of IS phenomena rather than becoming tied down by the frames of borrowed theories (p. 559)”

The impact of theory on Practice

The bibliographic database in the DSS area we created has an average 31 references per citing article. Based on this number, the expected number of references from the implemented 240 DSS articles is 7440. Of these references, only one reference (Rao & Jarvenpaa, 1991) is cited by an implemented DSS (Quaddus et al., 1992).

we conclude that DSS theories taken from the list compiled by Lee and others (2004) have played little roles in the design and development of implemented DSS.

4.3.2 The impact of practice on theory development

Of the 44 DSS theories in the literature, we found that only one article (Steiger, 1998) referenced 2 implemented DSS. A framework for model analysis is proposed by Steiger (1998) based on Perkin’s theory of understanding (Perkins, 1986). Steiger’s framework is developed to help the decision makers enhance their understanding of the ill-structured decision environment represented by the model.

2.3 What Are the Reference Disciplines for Decision Support Systems?

Cognitive psychology Social psychology Computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) Management science Multiple criteria decision making Organizational communication Managerial communication Information processing psychology Cognitive science

2.4 What are the dependent variables?

3. PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES: WHERE SHOULD THE DSS COMMUNITY GO FROM HERE?

Empirical Studies in Trouble? Altering the Prevailing Paradigm:

The Design Science Paradigm defining the cores of DSS as a science

of meta-artifacts will be a promising approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The prerequisites for moving toward the second stage of empirical study for generalizations appear to have been met. They are the definition of the dependent variables and clarification of the reference disciplines.

Nevertheless, the DSS community failed to produce "universally recognized scientific achievements that for a time provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners."

CONCLUSIONS

DSS practice and theory must maintain symbiotical relationships. In doing so, we propose the future DSS research should be redirected to define the cores of DSS as a science of meta-artifacts.