Modeling and Analyzing a Complex Real-World Conflict Using the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Faculty of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Conflict among stakeholders may be a barrier to the progress of projects and a major cause for significant waste in capital. This research explores modeling and analysis of a conflict among the stakeholders of a high-technology corporation. The interaction among the stakeholders is modeled as a game. In this research, we employ a system’s engineering approach for modeling and analysis of this intra-organizational conflict, using Graph Model for Conflict Resolution (GMCR+). It is an advanced methodology driven from conflict analysis, which has routes in non-cooperative game theory with a non-quantitative approach. This article focuses on a conflict among three parties. The socially optimal solution happens when one player, who has the technical knowledge, finds another investor. Using sensitivity analysis, we find an alternative, more favorable solution to reach a new agreement in setting up two plants (instead of seven) in Tehran and Kermanshah, launching the project with the remaining capital. We demonstrate that taking the case to court does not result in a favorable outcome for the players.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Article Title [فارسی]

مدلسازی و تحلیل یک مناقشه پیچیده دنیای واقعی با استفاده از مدل گراف برای رفع مخاصمهمدلسازی و تحلیل یک مناقشه پیچیده دنیای واقعی با استفاده از مدل گراف برای حل مناقشات

Authors [فارسی]

  • منیژه کمیلی
  • مجید شیخ محمدی
دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد دانشکده مهندسی صنایع و سیستمها، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
Abstract [فارسی]

مناقشه بین سهام داران ممکن است مانعی برای پیشرفت پروژه ها و یا عامل مهمی برای اتلاف سرمایه باشد. این تحقیق درصدد مدلسازی و تحلیل مناقشه ی بین سهامداران یک شرکت با فناوری بالا به نام دانش بافت البرزمی باشد. تعامل بین ذینفعان به عنوان یک بازی مدل سازی شده است. در این تحقیق، ما از رویکرد مهندسی سیستمها، با استفاده از مدل گراف برای حل مناقشات (+GMCR)، برای مدل‌سازی و تحلیل این اختلاف درون سازمانی استفاده می‌کنیم. این یک روش پیشرفته برگرفته از تحلیل تعارضات است که ریشه در نظریه بازی های غیرهمکارانه با رویکردی غیر کمی دارد. این مقاله به تحلیل مناقشه بین سه سهام دار اختصاص دارد. راه حل بهینه زمانی اتفاق می افتد که بازیکنی که دانش فنی دارد، سرمایه گذاردیگری پیدا کند. تحلیل حساسیت منجربه راه‌ حلی جایگزین و مطلوب‌تر برای دستیابی به توافق جدید در راه‌اندازی دو کارخانه (به‌جای هفت کارخانه) در تهران و کرمانشاه و راه‌اندازی پروژه با باقی مانده سرمایه شد. ما نشان می دهیم که ارسال پرونده به دادگاه نتیجه مطلوبی برای بازیکنان ندارد

Keywords [فارسی]

  • تحلیل مناقشه
  • شرکت
  • نظریه بازیها
  • مدل گراف برای تحلیل مناقشات
Ahmed, W., Tan, Q., & Ali, S. (2018, June). Strategic negotiation for resolving infrastructure development disputes in the belt and road initiative. In In Y. Chen, G. Kersten, R. Vetschera, & H. Xu (Eds.), International Conference on Group Decision and Negotiation (pp. 154-166). Springer, Cham.
Ali, S., Xu, H., Al-Amin, A. Q., & Ahmad, N. (2019). Energy sources choice and environmental sustainability disputes: An evolutional graph model approach. Quality & Quantity, 53(2), 561-581.
Barough, A. S., Shoubi, M. V., & Skardi, M. J. E. (2012). Application of game theory approach in solving the construction project conflicts. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences58, 1586-1593.
Bartholomew-Biggs, M. (2008). Nonlinear optimization with engineering applications (Vol. 19). Springer Science & Business Media.‏
Bashar, M. A., Kilgour, D. M., & Hipel, K. W. (2012). Fuzzy preferences in the graph model for conflict resolution. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 20(4), 760-770.‏
Bennett, P. G. (1980). Hypergames: Developing a model of conflict. Futures, 12(6), 489-507.‏
Brams, S. J. (1993). Theory of moves. American Scientist, 81(6), 562-570.‏
Cheon, Y., Jeong, S. B., & Kwak, K. T. (2018). Intra-organizational conflict and innovative performance in media industry: An exploratory simulation study Journal of Internet Computing and Services, 19(2), 89-98.‏
Daskalakis, C., Goldberg, P. W., & Papadimitriou, C. H. (2009). The complexity of computing a Nash equilibrium. SIAM Journal on Computing, 39(1), 195-259.‏
Dowlatabadi, N., Banihabib, M. E., Roozbahani, A., & Randhir, T. O. (2020). Enhanced GMCR model for resolving conflicts in a transboundary wetland. Science of the Total Environment744, 140816.
Eunson, B. (2012). Conflict management. John Wiley & Sons.‏
Fang, L., Hipel, K. W., & Kilgour, D. M. (1993). Interactive decision-making: The graph model for conflict resolution (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons.
Fang, L., Hipel, K. W., Kilgour, D. M., & Peng, X. (2003a). A decision support system for interactive decision-making-Part I: Model formulation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), 33(1), 42-55.
Fang, L., Hipel, K. W., Kilgour, D. M., & Peng, X. (2003 b). A decision support system for interactive decision-making-Part II: Analysis and output interpretation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), 33(1), 56-66.
Fraser, N. M., & Hipel, K. W. (1988). Conflict analysis as a negotiation support system. In B. Munier and M. Shakun (eds.), Compromise, Negotiation and Group Decision (pp. 225-243). Springer, Dordrecht.
Fraser, N.M., and K.W. Hipel. (1987). “Conflict Analysis as a Negotiation Support System.” In B. Munier and M. Shakun (eds.),Compromise, Negotiation and Group Decision. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Greco, S., Figueira, J., & Ehrgott, M. (2016). Multiple criteria decision analysis (Vol. 37). Springer.‏
He, S. (2019). Coalition analysis in basic hierarchical graph model for conflict resolution with application to climate change governance disputes. Group Decision and Negotiation, 28(5), 879-906.‏
He, S., Hipel, K. W., & Kilgour, D. M. (2017). Analyzing market competition between Airbus and Boeing using a duo hierarchical graph model for conflict resolution. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 26(6), 683-710.
Hipel, K. W., & Fang, L. (2020). The graph model for conflict resolution and decision support. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems51(1), 131-141.
Hipel, K. W., Kilgour, D. M., Fang, L., & Peng, X. J. (1997). The decision support system GMCR in environmental conflict management. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 83(2), 117-152.
Howard, N. (1971). Paradoxes of rationality: Theory of metagames and political behaviour. MIT press.‏
Howard, N. (1999). Confrontation analysis: How to win operations other than war. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense Washington DC Command and Control Research Program.
Kang, C. W., & Fang, F. Z. (2018). State of the art of bioimplants manufacturing: Part I. Advances in Manufacturing, 6(1), 20-40.‏
Ke, Y. (2008). Preference elicitation in the graph model for conflict resolution [unpublished Master’s thesis]. University of Waterloo.‏
Kilgour, D. M., Fang, L., & Hipel, K. W. (1996). Negotiation support using the decision support system GMCR. Group Decision and Negotiation, 5(4-6), 371-383.
Kilgour, D. M., & Hipel, K. W. (2005). The graph model for conflict resolution: Past, present, and future. Group Decision and Negotiation, 14(6), 441-460.
Kilgour, D. M., Hipel, K. W., & Fang, L. (1987). The graph model for conflicts. Automatica23(1), 41-55.
Kinsara, R. A., Petersons, O., Hipel, K. W., & Kilgour, D. M. (2015). Advanced decision support for the graph model for conflict resolution. Journal of Decision Systems, 24(2), 117-145.
Leoneti, A. B. (2016). Utility function for modeling group multi-criteria decision making problems as games. Operations Research Perspectives, 3, 21-26.‏
Li, K. W., Hipel, K. W., Kilgour, D. M., & Fang, L. (2004). Preference uncertainty in the graph model for conflict resolution. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 34(4), 507-520.‏
Li, K. W., Hipel, K. W., Kilgour, D. M., & Noakes, D. (2005). Integrating uncertain preferences into status quo analysis with applications to an environmental conflict. Group Decision and Negotiation, 14(6), 461-479.
Madani, K. (2010). Game theory and water resources. Journal of Hydrology, 381(3-4), 225-238.
Madani, K., & Hipel, K. W. (2011). Non-cooperative stability definitions for strategic analysis of generic water resources conflicts. Water Resources Management, 25(8), 1949-1977.
Matbouli, Y. T., Hipel, K. W., & Kilgour, D. M. (2014). Strategic analysis of the great Canadian hydroelectric power conflict. Energy Strategy Reviews, 4, 43-51.
McEachern, A. (2017). Game theory: A classical introduction, mathematical games, and the tournament. Synthesis Lectures on Games and Computational Intelligence, 1(1), 1-117.‏
Merna, A., & Smith, N. J. (1990). Project managers and the use of turnkey contracts. International Journal of Project Management8(3), 183-189.
Murty, K. G. (2009). Optimization for decision making. Springer.‏
Nassereddine, M., Ellakkis, M. A., Azar, A., & Nayeri, M. D. (2021). Developing a multi-methodology for conflict resolution: Case of Yemen’s humanitarian crisis. Group Decision and Negotiation, 30(2), 301-320.‏
Pamučar, D., Stević, Ž., & Sremac, S. (2018). A new model for determining weight coefficients of criteria in mcdm models: Full consistency method (fucom). Symmetry, 10(9), 393 .‏
Payganeh, S., Knight, M. A., & Haas, C. T. (2018). Analyzing Conflicts over Water Extraction from Great Lakes of North America through Game Theory Approaches. In Pipelines 2018: Utility Engineering, Surveying, and Multidisciplinary Topics (pp. 195-203). Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.‏
Philpot, S., Hipel, K., & Johnson, P. (2016). Strategic analysis of a water rights conflict in the south western United States. Journal of Environmental Management, 180, 247-256.‏
Purnaweni, H., Pratama, A. B., & Wulandari, C. (2019, August). Conflict among stakeholders in karst area management of Pati Regency. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 314, No. 1, p. 012082). IOP Publishing.
Putri, C. F., & Alamanda, D. T. (2015). Conflict resolution analysis using graph model for conflict resolution (GMCR) approach (a case study in conflict and cooperation agreement between IDT and IDMT). European Journal of Economics and Management, vol. 2, pp. 38-48, 2015.
Ross, D. (2019). Game theory. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University.  https://plato.Stanford.edu/entries/game-theory.
San Cristóbal, J. R. (2015). The use of game theory to solve conflicts in the project management and construction industry. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 3(2), 43-58.
Sheikhmohammady, M., Bitalebi, H., Moatti, A., & Hipel, K. W. (2013, October). Formal strategic analysis of the conflict over Syria. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (pp. 2442-2447). IEEE.
Sheikhmohammady, M., Hipel, K. W., Asilahijani, H., & Kilgour, D. M. (2009, October). Strategic analysis of the conflict over Iran's nuclear program. In 2009 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (pp. 1911-1916). IEEE.
The CEO of the Ministry of Industry, Mine and Trade (IMT),(2020, August 4). Inauguration of "Bioimplant" center in Kermanshah. https://www.iribnews.ir/fa/news/2783545
Turocy, T. L., & Stengel, B. V. (2002). Game theory. Encyclopedia of information systems. Academic Press, New York.
Useller, J. W. (1969). Cleanroom technology (Vol. 5074). Technology Utilization Division, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.‏
Wang, M., Hipel, K. W., & Fraser, N. M. (1988). Modeling misperceptions in games. Behavioral Science, 33(3), 207-223.‏
Xu, H., Hipel, K. W., Kilgour, D. M., & Fang, L. (2018). Conflict resolution using the graph model: Strategic interactions in competition and cooperation. Springer International Publishing.‏
Yu, J., & Pei, L. L. (2018). Investigation of a brownfield conflict considering the strength of preferences. International journal of environmental research and public health, 15(2), 393.
Zanjanian, H., Abdolabadi, H., Niksokhan, M. H., & Sarang, A. (2018). Influential third party on water right conflict: A game theory approach to achieve the desired equilibrium (case study: Ilam dam, Iran). Journal of Environmental Management214, 283-294.
Zhao, S., & Xu, H. (2019). A novel preference elicitation technique based on a graph model and its application to a brownfield redevelopment conflict in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(21), 4088.