Criteria versus Objective

Criteria versus Objective

Decision models have three major components; goal, objectives, and alternatives. Some people use "criteria" instead of "objective." There is no "right" or "wrong" term, just different interpretations. When you look at the literature on AHP you find both, for example this good wiki descriptionuses "criterion" and it is hard to find the word objective anywhere. Others only use Objective. The more models we build the more we understand why using "objective" results in better models.

Read More

Horizontal project scoring

Horizontal project scoring

Horizontal project scoring versus vertical prioritization (the zero-sum game). Traditional "project scoring" systems we see look like this... a list of projects in a spreadsheet scored against some sort of measurement criteria. Sometimes the criteria is weighted by importance. Each row (project) is scored against the weighted criteria. The rows are totaled and each project gets a score. Some have called this "horizontal scoring."

Read More

Pairwise ranking of objectives versus simple weighting

Pairwise ranking of objectives versus simple weighting

Traditional "project scoring" systems we see look like this... a list of projects in a spreadsheet scored against some sort of measurement criteria. Sometimes the criteria is weighted by importance. The "weighting of criteria" approach does provide some degree of influence over the project scoring results, but it fails to capture the proportional relationships between criteria or what we like to call "Objectives."

Read More

decisionAccelerator 4.18 Released

General

  • New streamlined ribbon interface

  • Speed improvements

Objectives

  • Pair-wise names now displayed rather than bars

  • Inconsistencies now permanently displayed and visible by a red (most inconsistent) or orange (second most inconsistent) border around the judgement (cell)

    • Note: all current dA models will need to be upgraded to see the inconsistencies

  • Bug fixed where an error would be caused if the pair-wise cell was < -9 or >9. This could caused if the pair-wise was automatically calculated from a force rank.

Alternatives

  • Hiding unused columns now includes columns starting with the word “Column”

Constraints

  • Formatting of the budget on the cost-benefit chart fixed

  • Iterations number displayed when generating a cost-benefit chart now correct

decisionAccelerator 4.17 Released

Alternatives

  • Problem fixed where the bars were shown incorrectly when "Low was set to good”

  • Bars in the ranking table are now split so negative values are represented by a red bar to the left of the zero position and positive values by a blue bar to the right of the zero position. To make it easier to read, the table now has vertical lines marking the boundary of each cell.

Alt ranking with neg numbers.JPG


Cost-Benefit

  • Chart now as a separate file rather than integrated into the dA model. This allows multiple Cost-Benefit charts to be created and, if needed, merged into a single file if different scenarios are being developed.

  • The chart now scales to the number of budget increments/alternatives

  • An “information” screen is now displayed reporting the progress of the creating the cost-benefit chart. This will be particularly useful for charts that take a significant time to create, reassuring the user that it is working.

    • For charts that take a significant amount of time to create, try reducing the number of budget increments

decisionAccelerator 4.16 Released

Ratings

  • Improved interface for defining a Values, Values ($) and a Linear scale

Alternatives

  • Bars in the ranking table are now split so negative values are represented by a red bar and positive values by a blue bar. To make it easier to read, the table now has vertical lines marking the boundary of each score.

  • Problem fixed where the bars were shown incorrectly when "Low was set to good”

Cost-Benefit

  • Chart now as a separate file rather than integrated into the dA model. This allows multiple Cost-Benefit charts to be created and, if needed, merged into a single file if different scenarios are being developed.

  • The chart now scales to the number of budget increments/alternatives

  • An “information” screen is now displayed reporting the progress of the creating the cost-benefit chart. This will be particularly useful for charts that take a significant time to create, reassuring the user that it is working.

    • For charts that take a significant amount of time to create, try reducing the number of budget increments

decisionAccelerator 4.15 Released

General

  • Framework sheet updated (and moved to after CostBenefit chart)

  • Risks, PPA and Business Cases moved to separate sheets and Grouping removed

  • Dependency constraints removed

  • Excel tabs now visible when on a regular Excel worksheet - also better handling of other Excel files that are open

Objectives

  • Red “best fit” arrow now just a line to avoid display problems with different screen resolutions

Alternatives

  • Bug fixed where the blue bars were not updated when an alternative was excluded

  • % Rating fixed

  • Slow performance fixed when saving a Custom rating

  • Custom form now dynamically changes size based on the length of the custom name

  • Custom name now highlighted on the form

Elements of a Good Decision Model

Elements of a Good Decision Model

Goal: The final purpose or aim; the end toward which effort is directed. Objectives: Something that ones efforts or actions are intended to attain or accomplish. Alternatives: Allowing or necessitating a choice between two or more things. A good decision model has a clear goal (i.e. to delimit the problem), measurable objectives, and alternative choices with some way to quantify the "best ones."

Read More