1974
DOI: 10.1016/0305-0483(74)90047-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multi-goal optimization in managerial science

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

1976
1976
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…12 Flow diagram for the iterative NLGP algorithm with a modified Hooke and Jeeves pattern search 79. NUMERICAL EXAMPLEThe ABC Company produces two similar products A and B.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…12 Flow diagram for the iterative NLGP algorithm with a modified Hooke and Jeeves pattern search 79. NUMERICAL EXAMPLEThe ABC Company produces two similar products A and B.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The values in parentheses identify the accepted projects that generated the points. Table 1 we see that (1,4) and (1,4,5) involve smaller expected returns than (2,4) but also smaller variances (and hence smaller risks), while (2,4,5) offers a larger expected return but also a larger risk. Therefore (2,4) is undominated and hence efficient.…”
Section: An Illustration Of the Markowitz Approachmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…However, a single criterion, such as maximizing the return on investment or minimizing the risk of losing a sizable fraction of the original investment, is not appropriate for a significant number of real-world decision makers for whom two or more criteria, e.g., a judicious combination of return on investment and risk, are important. It has been argued [1] that it is usually not possible to obtain an explicit utility function for the decision maker and, consequently, that it is usually not possible to apply conventional (optimizing) mathematical programming techniques to find the most preferred outcome.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this context, as Baum and Carlson (1974) point out, the preferred decision has to be learned. The process of valuation was very much a 'hands-on' approach involving a series of meetings with both Treasury and the establishment board.…”
Section: Stage Two: Determination Of Valuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clearly, there was a learning process especially since neither the establishment board nor Treasury were particularly familiar with the business of GCS. In this context, as Baum and Carlson (1974) point out, the preferred decision has to be learned. As well as determining an asset value, this process has the added advantage of ensuring that both groups quickly become familiar with the business and with the financial implications of various future strategies.…”
Section: Stage Two: Determination Of Valuementioning
confidence: 99%