Abstract
Team performance in networked decision making environments has been studied from many different perspectives. However, there are still many unanswered problems when it comes to understanding and quantifying the impact of individual differences of team players, their interpersonal relationships, team connectivity and complex interactions between these factors. In this paper, we present an agent framework that allows the manipulation of all these factors in a principled way. The agents in this framework can be connected through any network structure and can have different characteristics modeled in two dimensions of willingness and competence, which mirror beliefs for each other. Both nodes and links in the network can have differing capacity, modeled by agents’ ability to accomplish tasks and their trust for each other. The trust can change as a function of network activity, leading to dynamic scenarios. The framework is implemented as an open source simulation package and is fully extensible. With the help of an information sharing scenario, we conduct a sensitivity analysis and demonstrate the impact of all components of the framework on various network outcomes. In particular, we illustrate that the model provides the ability to study many different trade-offs in team performance and interaction between different parameters.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Notes
TANDEM is available as an open source package (github.com/rpitrust/agentsimulation) and is fully extensible to complex decision making scenarios.
References
Adalı S (2013) Modeling trust context in networks. Springer Briefs. Springer, New York
Alberts DS, Huber RK, Moffat J (2010) NATO NEC C2 maturity model. DoD command and control research program
Bell S (2007) Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: a meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol 92(3):595615
Bolstad CA, Endsley MR (2003) Tools for supporting team SA and collaboration in army operations. Collaborative technology alliances conferences: advanced decision archiecture conference
Chan K, Adalı S (2012) An agent based model for trust and information sharing in networked systems. 2012 IEEE international multi-disciplinary conf on cognitive methods in situation awareness and decision support
Chan K, Ivanic N (2010) Connections between communications and social networks using ELICIT. In: Proceedings of 15th international command and control research and technology symposium, Santa Monica, CA
Chan K, Cho JH, Adalı S (2013) A trust-based framework for information sharing behavior in command and control environments. 22nd conference on behavior representation in modeling and simulation (BRiMS)
Cho J, Swami A, Chen IR (2011) A survey on trust management for mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Commun Surveys and Tutor 13(4):562–583
Dekker T (2006) Centralization vs. self-synchronization: an agent-based investigation. In: Proceedings of 11th international command and control research and technology symposium
Edge AG, Remus W (1984) The impact of hierarchical and egalitarian organization structure on group decision making and attitudes. Dev Bus Simul Exp Learn 11:35–39
Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 37(1):32–64
Fiske ST, Cuddy AJ, Glick P (2007) Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence. Trends Cogn Sci 11(2):77–83
Jacobides MG (2007) The inherent limits of organizational structure and the unfulfilled role of hierarchy: lessons from a near-war. Organ Sci 18(3):455–477
Katz N, Lazer D, Arrow H, Contractor N (2004) Network theory and small groups. Small Group Res 35:307–332
Levin DZ, Cross R (2002) The strength of weak ties you can trust: the mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer. Acad Manag J 50(11):1477–1490
Leweling TA, Nissen ME (2007) Hypothesis testing of edge organizations: laboratory experimentation using the elicit multiplayer intelligence game. In: Proceedings of 12th international command and control research and technology symposium
Marksand MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccaro SJ (2001) A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Acad Manag Rev 26(3):356–376
Mayer R, Davis J, Schoorman F (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manag Rev 20:709–734
Mesmer-Magnus JR, DeChurch LA (2009) Information sharing and team performance: a meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol 94(2):535–546
Morgan R (2008) Company intelligence support teams. Armor Mag
United States Office of the Director of National Intelligence (2008) United States Intelligence Community Information Sharing Strategy Online: www.fas.org/irp/dni/iss
Stevens M, Campion M (1994) The knowledge, skill, and ability requirements for teamwork: Implications for human resource management. J Manag 20:503–530
Stinchcombe A (1965) Social structure and environment. In: March JG (ed) The handbook of organizations. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 142–193
Suri S, Watts DJ (2011) Cooperation and contagion in web-based, networked public goods experiments. PLoS ONE 6(3). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0016836
Thunholm P, Chong NE, Cheah M, Tan K, Chua N, Chua CL (2009) Exploring alternative edge versus hierarchy C2 organizations using the elicit platform with configurable chat system. Int Command Control (C2) J 3(2)
Uzzi B (1996) The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: the network effect. Am Sociol Rev 61:674–698
Uzzi B (2008) A social network’s changing statistical properties and the quality of human innovation. J Phys A 41:224023
Wout V, Sanfey A (2008) Friend or foe: the effect of implicit trustworthiness judgments in social decision-making. Cognition 108(3):796–803
Acknowledgments
Research was sponsored by the Army Research Laboratory and was accomplished under Cooperative Agreement Number W911NF-09-2-0053. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Laboratory or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation here on. This research was also partially supported by the Department of Defense (DoD) through the office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD (R&E)). The views and opinions of the author(s) do not reflect those of the DoD nor ASD (R&E).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Adalı, S., Chan, K. & Cho, JH. TANDEM: a trust-based agent framework for networked decision making. Comput Math Organ Theory 21, 461–490 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-015-9193-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-015-9193-x