Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

SAS-087 TG-034 on Code of Best Practice for Judgement-based OA Background information for ISMOR 2010 Syndicate Session Diederik Wijnmalen Strategic Choices.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "SAS-087 TG-034 on Code of Best Practice for Judgement-based OA Background information for ISMOR 2010 Syndicate Session Diederik Wijnmalen Strategic Choices."— Presentation transcript:

1 SAS-087 TG-034 on Code of Best Practice for Judgement-based OA Background information for ISMOR 2010 Syndicate Session Diederik Wijnmalen Strategic Choices Dept.; TNO Defence, Security and Safety Organisation for Applied Research, The Netherlands

2 2 About ‘Soft’ Operational Analysis Soft OA = methodology that is ‘not hard’, i.e. not seeking to abstract mathematically expressed relationships between (physical) variables using quantitative data with the aim of e.g. quantifying (best) resource allocation Soft OA = methodology that uses judgement and interpretive information, i.e. rather aimed at understanding (complex) problem situations, expert prediction of system behaviour, designing courses of action, coping with time pressure & lack of data & intangibles / uncertainties / unknowns / conflicts of interest / risk / interdependencies, etc.  appropriate framework for predominantly subjective, qualitative, participatory situations  promising use due to changing nature of problems faced by (Defence) policy and decision makers at both strategic and operational level  note: even hard OA has soft elements (e.g. modelling & interpretation issues)  But: Soft OA still met with reluctance to apply / accept in some OA quarters despite successful applications

3 3 Why reluctance towards the use of Soft OR? Analysts are trained in ‘hard’ disciplines (Military) clients are familiar with ‘hard’ techniques, not ‘soft’ Difficulties with ambition and commitment: (false) feeling of ‘hard conclusions needed’  expectations (exact numbers, clear answers) clash with actual results (insight, common ground, ‘ways forward’) deep involvement required and, therefore, early commitment  threatening because there is no escape from the results Problems with acceptance of judgement-based results: by participants (different groups), by non-participating stakeholders, by scrutineers A lot of traditional literature about Soft OA tend to be oriented towards: scientific paradigm describing the method and how it differs from other methods how does it work (step-wise procedure) rather than practicalities and benefits from client perspective Philosophical disputes whether Soft OR truly is OR Questions about scientific rigour and quality control measures

4 44 Terms of Reference (1) Considering that: nature of Defence planning and decision making has changed  calls for multi-methodology approach predominantly based on judgement ‘hard’&‘soft’, ‘objective’&‘subjective’, ‘quantitative’&‘qualitative are unhelpful distinctions  regard Soft OA as a ‘methodology of judgement’ judgement-based OA has proven to add value, but validation/credibility still issue  need to ensure value maximisation and improve acceptance large body of literature already exists on methods & usage  need clarity and focus write a CoBP on JB OA  Tasking of SAS-TG: write a CoBP on JB OA

5 55 Terms of Reference (2) CoBP Objectives create understanding of what JB OA can/cannot achieve increase credibility and acceptance of JB OA with client’s perspective & needs for OA as starting point incl. expectations regarding validity focus on Defence decision making at large (operational & LT strategic planning) set pragmatic rules of the road for analysts when conducting JB OA without describing specific methods/techniques promote a MM approach dictated by needs of issues addressed offer guidance as to identifying decision situations & directions to explore Products client-oriented brochure: what (not) to expect, why & when useful analyst-oriented document: how to add (maximised) value for the client

6 66 TG’s Organisation Chair/Lead: NLD Participants:ACT, CAN, DEU, FRA, GBR, NLD, SWE, AUS Time frame: Dissemination:Lecture Series Reflection/Review:conference sessions, selected acad. individuals

7 7 1 st Meeting April 2010, Paris-Neuilly (RTA) brainstorm on issues to be addressed in CoBP design of programme of work & schedule design of discussion workshops at ISMOR & OR52

8 8 ISMOR Syndicate Session (1) 12 Propositions covering range of issues in coping with clients, judgements, results, validation + some additional clarifying notes client-/analyst-oriented syndicate organisation each syndicate will address 6 propositions each syndicate has 1 sibling syndicate working in parallel on same propositions  we welcome your critical comments, views, additions, rephrasing  please record them!  TG members present will be ‘reluctant’ to offer further guidance

9 9 ISMOR Syndicate Session (2) Questions when addressing a proposition:  Do you agree with this proposition? Why, or why not?  Should this proposition be rephrased? If yes, how?  How can this proposition be fleshed out by giving examples, suggesting criteria and additional aspects, providing conditions for validity, etc..  If the syndicate has reached an agreement on a (possibly adjusted) proposition, should this proposition be part of a CoBP for JB OA?


Download ppt "SAS-087 TG-034 on Code of Best Practice for Judgement-based OA Background information for ISMOR 2010 Syndicate Session Diederik Wijnmalen Strategic Choices."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google