Gaps in strategic problem‐solving methods: A systematic literature review

Strategic problem‐solving enables organizations to pursue opportunities and address emerging threats proactively. However, traditional problem‐solving methods often rely on business processes and organizational procedures, which may not be available at the strategic level. This article investigates...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of multi-criteria decision analysis 2024-01, Vol.31 (1-2), p.n/a
Main Authors: Manso, Daniel F., Parnell, Gregory S., Pohl, Ed, Belderrain, Mischel Carmen N.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
decision analysis
Literature reviews
multi‐criteria decision analysis
Problem solving
problem structuring methods
strategic decision‐making
strategic root cause analysis
SWOT analysis
Systematic review
Theory of constraints
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Strategic problem‐solving enables organizations to pursue opportunities and address emerging threats proactively. However, traditional problem‐solving methods often rely on business processes and organizational procedures, which may not be available at the strategic level. This article investigates potential gaps in strategic problem‐solving methods through a Systematic Literature Review. The study analyses the existing literature on the potential of current problem‐solving methods to identify and resolve root causes of strategic problems when formal business processes and procedures are unavailable. A rigorous literature search process guided by focused research questions examines Problem Structuring Methods, Lean Thinking, Six Sigma, Theory of Constraints, Balanced Scorecard, SWOT Analysis, and other techniques. The synthesis of findings reveals limitations in strategic root cause analysis. In addition, the study introduces a supplementary decision‐making frame of reference to aid the selection of appropriate methods across problem‐solving, decision‐making, and solution implementation stages. This framework addresses the common challenges decision‐makers face in navigating organizational complexity and choosing suitable approaches, as well as visually maps methods to stages based on Content, Organizational, and Analytical complexity dimensions. The framework builds on the study's findings that using a single methodology may be insufficient for a complete decision process. The proposed decision‐making framework also offers valuable guidance for integrating diverse methods aligned to decision situations.
ISSN:1057-9214
1099-1360
DOI:10.1002/mcda.1828