Get PDF Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications book. Happy reading Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications Pocket Guide.
Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications. Editor: Hall Chapman . Publication: ยท Book. Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications.
Table of contents

  • Decision support system - Wikipedia.
  • Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications;
  • Evolution: From Molecules to Ecosystems.
  • Computer-aided decision making. | Treesearch!
  • Passar bra ihop!
  • CSTB: Computer Science and Telecommunications Board?

View All. Return form will be sent to your email Id:. Academic Texts. Networking Books. Compare Products. You have reached the maximum number of selection. You can select only upto 4 items to compare. View Order. Free Installation.

Hover to zoom. Sold Out! Be the first to review. We will let you know when in stock. Thank you for your interest You will be notified when this product will be in stock. I agree to the. Terms and Conditions. How It Works? IMEI Number. Exchange Discount Summary Exchange Discount -Rs. Final Price Rs. Apply Exchange. Other Specifications. The images represent actual product though color of the image and product may slightly differ.

Was this information helpful to you? Yes No.

chapter and author info

Thank You for submitting your response. Customer Product Selfies. Seller Details View Store. New Seller. Expand your business to millions of customers Sell this item on Snapdeal. In effect, the system makes the decision in completely standard situations, while the underwriter decides whether the situation is standard and, if not, what adjustments are required. As a result, the underwriters can concentrate on the substance of their jobs rather than the related clerical chores.

These seven systems represent a wide range of approaches in supporting decisions. The first one helps production foremen by simply providing rapid access to historical information such as who worked on what lot, and when the work was done. But the foremen must decide what should be done once they have the information. At the other extreme, the system supporting the underwriters virtually makes the decision in some cases.

Decision Support System

Between the two extremes, analysis systems and model-oriented systems help people organize information and also facilitate and formalize the evaluation of proposed decisions. Although managers in most large companies have used budgeting or planning systems similar to the source-and-application-of-funds model I mentioned, the spectrum of possibilities for other kinds of decision support systems is surprisingly wide.

Obviously, some of these systems are of no particular use in many settings. Still, their variety suggests that most companies should have a number of genuine opportunities for applying the concept of computerbased support for decision making. What do decision support systems do that actually helps their users? What is their real impact? In my survey, answers to these questions proved elusive in many cases since the users valued the systems for reasons that were completely different from initial ideas of what the systems were to accomplish.

In fact, a wide range of purposes exists for these systems.

How Effective Managers Use Information Systems

While many decision support systems share the goals of standard EDP systems, they go further and address other managerial concerns such as improving interpersonal communication, facilitating problem solving, fostering individual learning, and increasing organizational control. Such systems can affect interpersonal communication in two ways: by providing individuals with tools for persuasion and by providing organizations with a vocabulary and a discipline which facilitates negotiations across subunit boundaries. Standard texts on systems analysis totally overlook the personal use of decision support systems as tools of persuasion.

At one point, it occurred to the plant manager that he could use this model to investigate whether marketing was setting goals that resulted in poor plant utilization and made him appear inefficient. Although the merger was not approved, management thought that the system helped it put up a good fight. If you the budget cutter would like me to change these assumptions, I would be glad to generate a new budget.

Telecommunication:8- Computer Aided Decision Support In Telecommunications(Dfl 364=Euro 165.18)

What level of shortfall do you suggest? A cynic might contend that the people in these situations were taking advantage of or abusing the systems. My point is that much of the benefit of many of the decision support systems in my sample was of this sort. Decision support systems also help managers negotiate across organizational units by standardizing the mechanics of the process and by providing a common conceptual basis for decision making. During my survey, managers frequently commented that consistent definitions and formats are important aids to communication, especially between people in different organizational units such as divisions or departments.

In a number of instances, the development of these definitions and formats was a lengthy and sometimes arduous task that was accomplished gradually over the course of several years, but which was also considered one of the main contributions of the systems. For example, one of the purposes of some of the model-oriented systems in my sample was to estimate beforehand the overall result of decisions various people were considering separately, by filtering these decisions through a single model.

In these cases, the system became an implicit arbiter between differing goals of various departments. As a result, issues were clarified and the negotiation process expedited.

Computer Aided Decision Support in Telecommunications

The production foremen I mentioned earlier noted the same kind of facilitation. Monetary savings are obviously a very important and worthwhile rationale for developing computer systems, but it should be clear at this point that the EDP-style assumption that systems should always be justified in these terms does not suffice in the area of decision support systems. Equally obvious, there is a definite danger in developing a system simply because someone thinks it makes sense, especially if that someone is not the direct user of the system.

In fact, the systems I cited as my first, second, and fifth examples began this way and encountered resistance until they were repositioned as something that users would want in order to become more effective. This sort of overoptimism was present in the history of almost every unsuccessful system in the sample.

The message is clear: try to take advantage of the creativity of technical experts, but be sure that it is channeled toward real problems. The challenge, of course, is how to accomplish both of these goals.

Recommended for you

There are a number of ways, which I shall now discuss. Despite the common wisdom that the needs of users must be considered in developing systems and that users should participate actively in implementing them, the users did not initiate 31 of the 56 systems I studied and did not participate actively in the development of 38 of the The results, illustrated in Exhibit II, are not surprising. Intended users neither initiated nor played an active role in implementing 11 of the 15 systems that suffered significant implementation problems.

But it would be wrong to infer from these findings that systems should be avoided totally, if intended users neither initiate them nor play an active role in their implementation. For one thing, 14 of the 25 systems I studied in which this was the pattern were ultimately successful.

More important, many of the genuinely innovative systems in my sample, including 5 of the 7 that I described earlier, exhibited this pattern.