Research Data and Artifacts for "From Data Fragmentation to Optimized Decision-Making: A Sociotechnical Approach to Judicial Assignment Planning"

This dataset contains research data associated with the study “From Data Fragmentation to Optimized Decision-Making: A Sociotechnical Approach to Judicial Assignment Planning”. The associated study investigates a sociotechnical approach to judicial workforce planning in a Brazilian Regional Labor Court. The proposed approach combines heterogeneous institutional data, organizational and regulatory rules, prescriptive optimization using CP-SAT, and human decision-making within a Decision Support System (DSS). Dataset context The dataset contains responses from a survey conducted with substitute judges belonging to the institution's technical reserve (reserva técnica), defined in the study as the group of substitute judges available to the Regional Court to cover temporary absences of titular judges. The target population consisted of 17 substitute judges, of whom 14 participated in the survey, corresponding to 82.4% of the target population in the case study. The survey was used as a complementary source of evidence for the sociotechnical characterization of the assignment-planning process and for identifying requirements relevant to the development of the DSS. The questionnaire investigated aspects including: predictability of judicial assignments; frequency of last-minute assignments; understanding of the criteria used for assignments; perceptions of fairness and transparency; impact of assignments on personal and family organization; satisfaction with the current assignment model; individual assignment preferences; workload balance; geographical and mobility considerations; desired advance notice for assignments; information considered relevant for assignment planning; and suggestions for improving the assignment process. The questionnaire combines categorical questions, multiple-choice questions, open-ended responses, and six questions measured using five-point linear scales. The scale anchors are included directly in the corresponding column headers of the public dataset to facilitate interpretation. Purpose and use in the associated study The survey is treated as an exploratory source of evidence embedded in the case study rather than as an inferential survey intended to support statistical generalization to other courts or populations. Quantitative responses were analyzed descriptively, while open-ended responses were used to identify recurring themes related to the needs and perceptions of the actors directly involved in the assignment process. The data support the identification and discussion of sociotechnical requirements such as predictability, individual preferences, workload balance, geographical proximity, transparency, and participation in the planning process. Anonymization and privacy Because the target population is small (17 individuals), the public version of the dataset was prepared using a conservative anonymization strategy designed to reduce the risk of direct and indirect re-identification. Before publication, the dataset was reviewed at the individual-response level. The following treatments were applied where necessary: direct personal identifiers were not included in the public dataset; names of individuals mentioned in open-ended responses were removed; administrative identifiers that could enable indirect identification, such as references to specific administrative proceedings, were removed; information concerning conditions affecting mobility was suppressed because, in a small population, such information could reveal health- or disability-related characteristics and increase the risk of re-identification; open-ended responses containing sensitive personal, health, disability-related, or highly distinctive contextual information were suppressed when necessary; highly specific narratives that could contribute to indirect identification were generalized while preserving their analytical meaning. Generalized text should not be interpreted or quoted as a verbatim statement from a participant. Such text is retained solely to preserve the analytical theme represented by the original response. The public dataset therefore differs from the original research dataset. The original responses containing potentially identifying or sensitive information are not included in this public release. These procedures reduce the risk of re-identification but cannot guarantee absolute anonymity, particularly given the small size of the studied population. The public dataset should therefore be used in accordance with appropriate research ethics and privacy practices. Workbook organization The Excel workbook contains: Página1 — anonymized survey responses suitable for research dissemination; README — information about the dataset, anonymization procedures, interpretation of the scales, and limitations; Auditoria_Anonimizacao — documentation of the fields that required suppression, removal, or generalization and the rationale for each treatment. Scope and limitations The dataset represents the perceptions of participants from a single organizational context and should not be interpreted as statistically representative of substitute judges in other Regional Labor Courts or the Brazilian Judiciary as a whole. The dataset is intended to support transparency and reproducibility of the associated case study. Additional research artifacts associated with the study may be incorporated into future versions of this Zenodo record as they become available.