During a recent board meeting of GHJ, Inc., the directors had a heated argument about adopting a decision support system to assist with filtering out irrelevant information from relevant information. Jack argued that the system would be too expensive and their current income level could not justify the expense. Jorge argued that the system would free up time wasted on sorting spam, junk mail, and irrelevant mail such as bank notices from statements and therefore improve profits. Carol argued that the current email system already did these things and if bank notices were not wanted, that could be addressed at the bank’s site and did not require investing in additional software. Henry said the system could do these things and more: it could be used to run "what if" scenarios. He said it could compile relevant data on competitors pricing or the costs of proposed projects and use data collected on targeted subjects to vary the "what if" scenarios with other variables. Which of the following was not a benefit of using the decision support system discussed by the board of directors?

In Decision support system, Decision makers would heavily rely on data provided by technologies in order to make the final decision (like the scenario above).

This system tend to make the decision making process become simpler and efficient, but it does not reduce the risk that decision makers have to take since there are too many factors that can influence the outcome of the decision.

For example, in separating relevant and irrelevant information, sometimes emotions could be the most determinant factors that must be prioritized to separate the two. This type of emotion , wouldn't be able to be factored by data compiled by technologies alone.