عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]چکیده [English]
The aim of this article is to prove the supremacy of Strategic Choice Approach (SCA) versus Hard priority methods like MADM[
It should be born in mind that SCA method has four steps to set priorities between strategies that are Designing, Shaping, Choosing and Comparing, respectively .Hence, this paper introduces a qualitative and almost newer method such as SCA even though it countenances other quantitative priority methods such as MEDM. In this article, the University of Science and Culture is the case study serving as an academic environment and its objectives and strategies have been prioritized.
Ultimately, results were satisfactory as far as prioritizing is concerned and it enabled us to define the consistency and chronological order among items using Multi Attribute Decision Making. In Conclusion, the strategies face with each other to be compared in terms of consistency, so any item which has the most consistency with the others, has the highest priority.
Beasley, J. E. (2002) OR notes Available at: http://mscmga.ms.ic. ac.uk/ieb/or/softor.Htflhl
Carter, Price (2001). Operations Research: a practical introductionCRC, Boca Raton, USA.
Checkland, Soft System Methodology in Action; 2000, New York, John Wiley and Sons.
Daellenbach, H. G. (2002). Flard OR, Soft OR, Problem Structuring Methods, Critical Systems Thinking: A Primer. Unpublished Paper, University of Canterbury, NZ.
Friend & Hickling (1987). Planning Under Pressure, SCA Methodology.
H. Siddiqui, N. (2006). Tripathi; Application of Soft Operations Research for Enhancing the SERVICESCAPE as a Facilitator"; Faculty-Operations Research & Decision Sciences Jaipuria Institute of Management,
Heyer, Rebecca (2004). Understanding Soft Operations Research, The Methods, their Applications, and its future in the defense setting. DSTO Information Science Laboratory. PO Box 1500. Australia.
Holt, J. & Pickburn, G. (2001). OA Techniques for the Future, DERAICDAJSEA /AIRJCR00014I.
Machol, R. E. (1980). Comment on Publish or perish. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 31: 1109-1110.
Munro, l. & Mingers, J. (2002). The use of multi methodology in practice. Results of a survey of practitioners. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53: 369-378.
Omerod, R. J. (2001). Viewpoint. The success and failure of methodologies, a comment on Connell (2001): evaluating soft OR. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 52: 1176-1179.
Pidd, M. (1999). A brief introduction to soft, operational research in Handling Strategic Problems available at: http: /www.orsoc.org. uk]about/teachingfStrategicProblema/m4.htm
Rosenhead, J. V. (1980). Planning under uncertainty 2: A methodology for robustness analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 31 (4): 331-341.
Sorensen, Using soft OR in a small company, the case of Kirby, European Journal of OR, 152, 2004, 555-570