DSS effectiveness in marketing resource allocation decisions: Reality vs. perception

Gary L. Lilien, Arvind Rangaswamy, Gerrit H. Van Bruggen, Katrin Starke

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

70 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We study the process by which model-based decision support systems (DSSs) influence managerial decision making in the context of marketing budgeting and resource allocation. We focus on identifying whether and how DSSs influence the decision process (e.g., cognitive effort deployed, discussion quality, and decision alternatives considered) and, as a result, how these DSSs influence decision outcomes (e.g., profit and satisfaction both with the decision process and the outcome). We study two specific marketing resource allocation decisions in a laboratory context: sales effort allocation and customer targeting. We find that decision makers who use high-quality, model-based DSSs make objectively better decisions than do decision makers who only have access to a generic decision tool (Microsoft Excel). However, their subjective evaluations (perceptions) of both their decisions and the processes that lead to those decisions do not necessarily improve as a result of DSS use. And expert judges, serving as surrogates for top management, have a difficult time assessing the objective quality of those decisions. Our results suggest that what managers get from a high-quality DSS may be substantially better than what they see. To increase the inclination for managerial adoption and use of DSS, we must get users to "see" the benefits of using a DSS. Our results also suggest two ways to bridge the perception-reality gap: (1) improve the perceived value of the decision process by designing DSSs both to encourage discussion (e.g., by providing explanation and support for alternative recommendations) as well as to reduce the perceived complexity of the problem so that managers invest more cognitive effort in exploring additional options and (2) provide feedback on the likely market/business outcomes of various decision options.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)216-235
Number of pages20
JournalInformation Systems Research
Volume15
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2004

Fingerprint

Decision support systems
Resource allocation
Marketing
marketing
resources
Managers
Marketing resources
Budget control
Profitability
Sales
Decision making
decision maker
Feedback
manager

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Management Information Systems
  • Information Systems
  • Computer Networks and Communications
  • Information Systems and Management
  • Library and Information Sciences

Cite this

@article{064e525dc53542ff9a6c9bd22849494e,
title = "DSS effectiveness in marketing resource allocation decisions: Reality vs. perception",
abstract = "We study the process by which model-based decision support systems (DSSs) influence managerial decision making in the context of marketing budgeting and resource allocation. We focus on identifying whether and how DSSs influence the decision process (e.g., cognitive effort deployed, discussion quality, and decision alternatives considered) and, as a result, how these DSSs influence decision outcomes (e.g., profit and satisfaction both with the decision process and the outcome). We study two specific marketing resource allocation decisions in a laboratory context: sales effort allocation and customer targeting. We find that decision makers who use high-quality, model-based DSSs make objectively better decisions than do decision makers who only have access to a generic decision tool (Microsoft Excel). However, their subjective evaluations (perceptions) of both their decisions and the processes that lead to those decisions do not necessarily improve as a result of DSS use. And expert judges, serving as surrogates for top management, have a difficult time assessing the objective quality of those decisions. Our results suggest that what managers get from a high-quality DSS may be substantially better than what they see. To increase the inclination for managerial adoption and use of DSS, we must get users to {"}see{"} the benefits of using a DSS. Our results also suggest two ways to bridge the perception-reality gap: (1) improve the perceived value of the decision process by designing DSSs both to encourage discussion (e.g., by providing explanation and support for alternative recommendations) as well as to reduce the perceived complexity of the problem so that managers invest more cognitive effort in exploring additional options and (2) provide feedback on the likely market/business outcomes of various decision options.",
author = "Lilien, {Gary L.} and Arvind Rangaswamy and {Van Bruggen}, {Gerrit H.} and Katrin Starke",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1287/isre.1040.0026",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "216--235",
journal = "Information Systems Research",
issn = "1047-7047",
publisher = "INFORMS Inst.for Operations Res.and the Management Sciences",
number = "3",

}

DSS effectiveness in marketing resource allocation decisions : Reality vs. perception. / Lilien, Gary L.; Rangaswamy, Arvind; Van Bruggen, Gerrit H.; Starke, Katrin.

In: Information Systems Research, Vol. 15, No. 3, 09.2004, p. 216-235.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - DSS effectiveness in marketing resource allocation decisions

T2 - Reality vs. perception

AU - Lilien, Gary L.

AU - Rangaswamy, Arvind

AU - Van Bruggen, Gerrit H.

AU - Starke, Katrin

PY - 2004/9

Y1 - 2004/9

N2 - We study the process by which model-based decision support systems (DSSs) influence managerial decision making in the context of marketing budgeting and resource allocation. We focus on identifying whether and how DSSs influence the decision process (e.g., cognitive effort deployed, discussion quality, and decision alternatives considered) and, as a result, how these DSSs influence decision outcomes (e.g., profit and satisfaction both with the decision process and the outcome). We study two specific marketing resource allocation decisions in a laboratory context: sales effort allocation and customer targeting. We find that decision makers who use high-quality, model-based DSSs make objectively better decisions than do decision makers who only have access to a generic decision tool (Microsoft Excel). However, their subjective evaluations (perceptions) of both their decisions and the processes that lead to those decisions do not necessarily improve as a result of DSS use. And expert judges, serving as surrogates for top management, have a difficult time assessing the objective quality of those decisions. Our results suggest that what managers get from a high-quality DSS may be substantially better than what they see. To increase the inclination for managerial adoption and use of DSS, we must get users to "see" the benefits of using a DSS. Our results also suggest two ways to bridge the perception-reality gap: (1) improve the perceived value of the decision process by designing DSSs both to encourage discussion (e.g., by providing explanation and support for alternative recommendations) as well as to reduce the perceived complexity of the problem so that managers invest more cognitive effort in exploring additional options and (2) provide feedback on the likely market/business outcomes of various decision options.

AB - We study the process by which model-based decision support systems (DSSs) influence managerial decision making in the context of marketing budgeting and resource allocation. We focus on identifying whether and how DSSs influence the decision process (e.g., cognitive effort deployed, discussion quality, and decision alternatives considered) and, as a result, how these DSSs influence decision outcomes (e.g., profit and satisfaction both with the decision process and the outcome). We study two specific marketing resource allocation decisions in a laboratory context: sales effort allocation and customer targeting. We find that decision makers who use high-quality, model-based DSSs make objectively better decisions than do decision makers who only have access to a generic decision tool (Microsoft Excel). However, their subjective evaluations (perceptions) of both their decisions and the processes that lead to those decisions do not necessarily improve as a result of DSS use. And expert judges, serving as surrogates for top management, have a difficult time assessing the objective quality of those decisions. Our results suggest that what managers get from a high-quality DSS may be substantially better than what they see. To increase the inclination for managerial adoption and use of DSS, we must get users to "see" the benefits of using a DSS. Our results also suggest two ways to bridge the perception-reality gap: (1) improve the perceived value of the decision process by designing DSSs both to encourage discussion (e.g., by providing explanation and support for alternative recommendations) as well as to reduce the perceived complexity of the problem so that managers invest more cognitive effort in exploring additional options and (2) provide feedback on the likely market/business outcomes of various decision options.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=9144266376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=9144266376&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1287/isre.1040.0026

DO - 10.1287/isre.1040.0026

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:9144266376

VL - 15

SP - 216

EP - 235

JO - Information Systems Research

JF - Information Systems Research

SN - 1047-7047

IS - 3

ER -