 |
Reflections of Decision Support Pioneers
George P. Huber
|
George Huber responded by email to six questions from Dan Power, DSSResources.com editor, about his
past involvement with computerized decision support systems and his current perspective
on the issues that need to be addressed.
Q1:
How did you get interested in computerized decision support?
Huber's Response:
My experiences in the army and at Procter and Gamble prompted me to select as my Ph.D.
(Industrial Engineering, Purdue, 1965) dissertation topic the design of a multi-component
computerized decision support system, specifically an elaborate manpower planning system to
be used in a large organization. One component was a computer-based person-position matching
system, what would later be called a DSS. A key feature of this system was the development of the
utility values to enter into the cells of the person-position matching matrix, one utility from
the person’s perspective and another from the employing unit’s perspective. My approach to developing
these values was rather advanced relative to the state of multi-attribute utility theory at the
time, and when I tried to get it published in Management Science it was rejected with the
assertion that “you can’t quantify human judgment”!
However, Charley Holt and I did publish a piece on the matching algorithm in Management
Science in 1969, and in 1974 I published a tutorial on the quantification of utilities and
subjective probabilities in Decision Sciences and also a review and evaluation of the development
and use of utility measures in actual decision systems in Management Science.
Q2:
What do you consider your major contribution to helping support decision makers using computers? Why?
Huber's Response: I have to say
that my direct contribution to the support of actual decision makers was very small, perhaps even
non-existent. I did work for 15 months as a full time consultant at Gerry Wagner’s Execucom Corporation
where I contributed to the development and evaluation of a prototype Group Decision Support System.
Subsequently, with Sirkka Jarvenpaa, I consulted on the development and evaluation of a prototype GDSS
at Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC) (see Jarvenpaa et al, MISQ 1988). I did
publish several pieces on the need for, and methods for, integrating human judgments in GDSS in the
Transactions of the early DSS Conferences and in other practitioner-read proceedings as well. My
1984 MISQ article, “Issues in the Design of Group Decision Support Systems,” was my signature piece
in this area and has been cited well over 150 times.
I may have made some modest indirect contributions to DSS design in different ways. For example,
in multiple articles I described how DSS, and other applications of IT, could or would influence
information processing, decision making, and organization design (MISQ 1981, Management Science 1982,
1984, and Academy of Management Review 1990) in the future. That these articles have, in aggregate,
been cited over 500 times in the research literature, suggests that faculty have drawn on them. Through
the teaching and consulting of these faculty, the articles may have influenced future IS and
DSS designs.
Another way I might have indirectly influenced the DSS field was by calling for a halt in
research dealing with the use of the DSS user’s cognitive style as a consideration in the design
of his or her personal DSS. I was prompted to do this because one year, while recruiting IS faculty
at the University of Wisconsin, I saw that more than half of the applicants indicated that this
use of the cognitive style concept was one of their main interests. I doubted that this idea was
deserving of the research resources and journal page space it was absorbing. By examining the
literature, I arrived at six reasons why work in this area was a poor use of DSS researcher
resources and published my reasoning in Management Science (1983). The thrust of this article
was counter to the momentum in the field and sparked a good deal of controversy. It was subsequently
the subject of sessions at three national meetings and has been cited about 150 times. A perusal
of the literature indicates hardly any work in the area following publication of the article
(of course this absence might be due to factors other than the article).
Years later I learned the names of the Associate Editor and one of the reviewers who were involved
in Management Science’s review of the article. That both of these researchers were willing to
recommend publication, even though the article criticized their published work in the area, is
a nice testimonial to their professionalism and to the integrity of the review process.
A third way I may have contributed to the field was in my service capacities. In the
mid-1980s, I served for three years as Management Science’s Departmental Editor for Decision
Support Systems and for two years as Departmental Editor for Information Systems and Decision
Support Systems. This was a time when the IS/DSS field was more than a little suspect in
the eyes of academics in “more proven” fields. To counter this negative view, I attempted
to approve publication of only very high quality works in this – the highest stature – journal
of the era. I also served on The Institute of Management Science’s Council during the years
that the Council initiated Information Systems Research and Organization Science. Finally, I served
on the Review Panels of NSF’s Program in Decision, Risk, and Management Science and its Program
in Information, Robotics, and Intelligent Systems during the years when these programs allocated
large amounts to DSS research – especially to the important work led by Gerry DeSanctis at
the University of Minnesota.
Q3:
What were your motivations for working in this area?
Huber's Response: My early
empirical studies were in the field of behavioral decision theory. Partly through this and partly
through my dissertation work, I became curious about the role that computers could and would have
on decision making and decision makers, particularly in organizations. I worked intensively in the
IS and DSS areas throughout the 1980s. My 1990 AMR article, “A Theory of the Effects of Advanced
Information Technologies on Organizational Design, Intelligence, and Decision Making,” highly cited
but already outdated, was my signature piece in this field. Since then I’ve focused my research
and writing in the areas of organization cognition and design and top management decision making.
Q4:
Who were your important collaborators and what was their contribution?
Huber's Response: I had about two dozen collaborators while I was
doing my decision making research in the late 1960s and in the 1970s and during my more recent
research in organizational cognition and top management decision making. In most cases these
collaborators were my students and were frequently the lead authors of the articles. But the 1980s
were creative years for me, and I was so immersed in what I was thinking and writing that I didn’t
feel up to the task of incorporating anyone else’s thinking. It may be that a similar phenomenon
explains why many fields where creativity is an important component don’t seem to allow for much
collaboration – poetry, serious literature, visual arts, small science, music, painting. “Big Science”
is, of course, a major exception.
Q5:
What are your major conclusions from your experiences with computerized decision support?
Huber's Response: My experiences
with computerized decision support didn’t cause me to reach any major conclusions, except to concur
with the common belief that DSS greatly increased decision quality and timeliness. We must keep
in mind that my experience with computerized decision support did not extend beyond the late 1980s.
During the subsequent 15 years I studied, as a scholar rather than as an empiricist, the
development of technologies more generally, and especially the effects of technological developments
on business organizations, careers, and labor markets. This effort led me to a good many non-intuitive,
but I believe quite valid, conclusions about the natures of future technologies, firms, and careers
(see The Necessary Nature of Future Firms: Attributes of Survivors in a Changing World. Sage
Publications, 2004).
Q6:
What are the issues associated with decision support that we still need to address?
Huber's Response: Because I’ve
moved on to other research areas and topics, I really don’t feel qualified to answer this question. I
must defer to those who are currently active in the DSS field.
About George P. Huber
George P. Huber holds the Charles and Elizabeth
Prothro Regents Chair in Business Administration at the University of Texas at Austin. His
current research deals with managerial and organizational cognition. Dr. Huber is a Fellow
of the Academy of Management and of the Decision Sciences Institute and is a charter member
of the Academy of Management Journals Hall of Fame. His pioneering article, The Nature and
Design of Post-Industrial Organizations, was awarded First Prize in an International Prize
Competition sponsored by The Institute of Management Sciences in 1983. His co-authored article,
Fit, Equifinality, and Organizational Effectiveness was selected as the Best Article of the Year
in the Academy of Management Journal for 1993. In 1993, his co-edited book, Organizational Change
and Redesign: Ideas and Insights for Improving Performance, was published by Oxford University
Press, and in 1995 his co-edited book, Longitudinal Field Research Methods: Studying Processes
of Organizational Change, was published by Sage Publications. Sage Publications published his
most recent book, The Necessary Nature of Future Firms: Attributes of Survivors in a Changing
World, in 2004. Dr. Huber received his BSME and MSIE degrees from the University of Missouri
and his Ph.D. from Purdue University. He has held full time positions with the Emerson
Electric Manufacturing Company, the Procter and Gamble Manufacturing Company, the U.S.
Department of Labor, and Execucom Systems Corporation, and has served as a consultant
to many corporations and public agencies. Professor Huber has held full time faculty
appointments at the Universities of Wisconsin, California, and Texas, and he has served
as Associate Dean for Research in the Graduate Schools of Business at the University of
Wisconsin and the University of Texas.
DSS References
Holt, Charles and George P. Huber. 1969. A Computer Aided Approach to Employment Service Placement and Counseling. Management Science 15, 573-594.
Huber, George P. 1982. Decision Support Systems: Their Present Nature and Future Applications, in Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Inquiry, G.R. Ungson and D.N. Braunstein, eds. Boston, MA: Kent Publishing Co.
Huber, George P. 1983. Cognitive Style as a Basis for MIS and DSS Designs: Much Ado About Nothing? Management Science 29, 567-577.
Huber, George P. 1984. Issues in the Design of Group Decision Support Systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly 8, 195-204.
Huber, George P. 1985. Decision Support Systems: Perspectives and Research Needs, in IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-15.
CitationGeorge P. Huber Reflections, DSSResources.COM, 11/02/2007.
George Huber's responses were received October 22, 2007.
|