1. PPA 691 – Policy Analysis The Policy Delphi

2. The Delphi Technique A judgmental forecasting procedure for obtaining, exchanging, and developing informed opinion about future events. The technique was designed to avoid several sources of distorted communication found in groups. –Domination of the group by one or several people; –Pressures to conform to peer group opinion; –Personality differences and interpersonal conflict; and –The difficulty of publicly opposing persons in positions of authority. A judgmental forecasting procedure for obtaining, exchanging, and developing informed opinion about future events. The technique was designed to avoid several sources of distorted communication found in groups. –Domination of the group by one or several people; –Pressures to conform to peer group opinion; –Personality differences and interpersonal conflict; and –The difficulty of publicly opposing persons in positions of authority.

3. The Delphi Technique Seven basic principles. –Selective anonymity. –Iteration (multiple rounds). –Controlled feedback (communication of aggregated judgments). –Informed multiple advocacy (criteria of interest and knowledgeableness). –Polarized statistical response (accentuation of disagreement and conflict). –Structured conflict (exploration of alternatives and consequences through disagreement). –Computer conferencing (e-mail and electronic surveys). Seven basic principles. –Selective anonymity. –Iteration (multiple rounds). –Controlled feedback (communication of aggregated judgments). –Informed multiple advocacy (criteria of interest and knowledgeableness). –Polarized statistical response (accentuation of disagreement and conflict). –Structured conflict (exploration of alternatives and consequences through disagreement). –Computer conferencing (e-mail and electronic surveys).

4. The Delphi Technique Steps. –Issue specification. –Selection of advocates. –Questionnaire design. –Analysis of first-round results. –Development of subsequent questionnaires. –Organization of group meetings. –Preparation of final report. Steps. –Issue specification. –Selection of advocates. –Questionnaire design. –Analysis of first-round results. –Development of subsequent questionnaires. –Organization of group meetings. –Preparation of final report.

5. Issue Specification Identify what specific issues should be addressed by informed advocates. –Issues. –Goals. –Options. –Forecasts. What proportion generated by group, what proportion by analyst? Identify what specific issues should be addressed by informed advocates. –Issues. –Goals. –Options. –Forecasts. What proportion generated by group, what proportion by analyst?

6. Selection of Advocates Identify stakeholders with conflicting problem conceptualizations. Use of snowball sampling. Sample size from 10 to 30, but could be hundreds. Identify stakeholders with conflicting problem conceptualizations. Use of snowball sampling. Sample size from 10 to 30, but could be hundreds.

7. Questionnaire Design Questionnaires depend on results of each round. First-round questionnaires can be open-ended or structured. Structured questionnaires usually contain statements covering all four main types of statements: issues, goals, options, forecasts. Different types of scales: importance, desirability, feasibility, reliability. Questionnaires depend on results of each round. First-round questionnaires can be open-ended or structured. Structured questionnaires usually contain statements covering all four main types of statements: issues, goals, options, forecasts. Different types of scales: importance, desirability, feasibility, reliability.

8. Analysis of First-round Results Use measures of both central tendency and dispersion to identify areas of conflict and consensus. Subsequent questionnaires should include important and highly disputed statements. Use measures of both central tendency and dispersion to identify areas of conflict and consensus. Subsequent questionnaires should include important and highly disputed statements.

9. Development of Subsequent Questionnaires The results of prior rounds are used as the basis for subsequent ones. Advocates should offer reasons, assumptions, and justifications for positions on statements with high conflict. Advocates may also reevaluate their positions based on summary material. The results of prior rounds are used as the basis for subsequent ones. Advocates should offer reasons, assumptions, and justifications for positions on statements with high conflict. Advocates may also reevaluate their positions based on summary material.

10. Organization of Group Meetings If all information and opinions have been obtained, advocates should be brought together for a face-to-face discussion of the reasons, assumptions, and arguments that underlie their various positions. This face-to-face meeting, drawing upon the anonymous debate should create an atmosphere of informed confidence. If all information and opinions have been obtained, advocates should be brought together for a face-to-face discussion of the reasons, assumptions, and arguments that underlie their various positions. This face-to-face meeting, drawing upon the anonymous debate should create an atmosphere of informed confidence.

11. Preparation of Final Report No guarantee of consensus. But much reason to hope that creative ideas about issues, goals, options, and consequence will be an important product. Final report should review issues and options (highlighting assumptions, conflicting arguments, and justifications). Passed on to policy makers. No guarantee of consensus. But much reason to hope that creative ideas about issues, goals, options, and consequence will be an important product. Final report should review issues and options (highlighting assumptions, conflicting arguments, and justifications). Passed on to policy makers.