V.А. Malyshev¹, Yu.V. Nikitenko²

¹²Military Educational-Research Centre of Air Force «Air Force Academy named after professor N.E. Zhukovsky and Y.A. Gagarin» (Voronezh, Russia)

When implementing the management process, any decision-maker is faced with the task of evaluating his/her ability to make a decision in specific conditions. And for the decision-maker, there is a need to assess the quality of decision-making. The simplest indicator of it is the probability of making the right decision. Management psychology suggests using certain signs of a correct decision. The main ones are the following: validity, timeliness, consistency, concreteness. When making a decision, such characteristics as reliability and completeness are most often singled out as the most important. If the first characterizes the correspondence of the content of information to reality, then the second is the correspondence of the used means of obtaining information to a certain standard. The probability of a correct decision can be assessed according to certain criteria: validity (quality of information, analysis of options, indicators); timeliness (planned, urgent, intermediate, late); consistency (consistency, lack of double interpretation); concreteness (regulations, a combination of rigidity with flexibility).

Малышев В.А., Никитенко Ю.В. Оценка вероятности принятия правильного решения в системах управления // Информационно-измерительные и управляющие системы. 2022. Т. 20. № 1‑2. С. 74−82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18127/j20700814-202201-07

1. Akoff R. Iskusstvo resheniya problem: per. s angl. M.: Mir. 1982. 224 s. (in Russian)
2. Greshilov A.A. Kak prinyat nailuchshee reshenie v realnykh usloviyakh. M.: Radio i svyaz. 1991. 320 s. (in Russian)
3. Larichev O.I. Nauka i iskusstvo prinyatiya reshenii. M.: Nauka. 1979. 200 s. (in Russian)
4. Madera A.G. Metod opredeleniya veroyatnostei prognoziruemykh sobytii pri prinyatii reshenii. Iskusstvennyi intellekt i prinyatie reshenii. 2016. № 2. S. 38−45. (in Russian)
5. Smirnov E.A. Razrabotka upravlencheskikh reshenii. M.: YuNITI. 2002. 271 s. (in Russian)
6. Karpov A.V. Psikhologiya prinyatiya upravlencheskikh reshenii. M.: Yuristie. 1998. 440 s. (in Russian)
7. Sovershenstvovanie protsessa prinyatiya upravlencheskikh reshenii. Kriterii prinyatiya reshenii. URL = https://vuzlit.ru/ 2175988/kriterii_prinyatiya_resheniy (data obrashcheniya 14.06.2021). (in Russian)
8. Karabanov A.P. Vliyanie vremennoi lokalizatsii sobytiya na otsenku ego veroyatnosti kak faktor prinyatiya reshenii. Vestnik YarGU. Ser. Gumanitarnye nauki. 2017. № 3(41). S. 103−106. (in Russian)
9. Kikot V.Ya., Gryadovoi D.I. Otsenochnye tekhnologii prinyatiya reshenii. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2009. № 11. S. 13−16. (in Russian)
10. Poleshchuk O.M., Poyarkov N.G., Tumor S.V. Prinyatie reshenii na osnove baiesovskogo podkhoda i Z-chisel. Lesnoi vestnik. Forestry Bulletin. 2019. T. 23. № 4. S. 112−116. (in Russian)
11. Melnichenko T.V. Otsenka posledstvii prinyatiya reshenii pri strategicheskom planirovanii regionalnogo razvitiya. Nauchno-obrazovatelnyi potentsial molodezhi v reshenii aktualnykh problem XXI veka. 2015. № 3. S. 145−146. (in Russian)
12. Telegina M.V., Yannikov I.M., Kuznetsov N.P. Otsenka sistemy podderzhki prinyatiya reshenii v usloviyakh riska chrezvychainykh situatsii. Ekologiya promyshlennogo proizvodstva. 2019. № 3(107). S. 47−50. (in Russian)
13. Betsch T., Glockner A. Intuition in judgment and decision making: Extensive thinking without effort. Psychological Inquiry. 2010. V. 21(4). P. 279−294.