Transcript Expert Choice 2000 The Decision Making Process

The Decision Making Process with
EC2000-Keypad and Internet Versions
Expert Choice 2000
The Decision Making Process
Expert Choice is a group meta decision support software product
based on the world’s most successful decision-making
methodology, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), developed by
Dr. Thomas Saaty. It adapts to your decision-making style for you
and your team to: 1. Facilitate identification of your objectives, 2.
Facilitate identification of a full range alternative solutions, 3.
Evaluate key trade-offs among your objectives and alternatives
and 4. Enable you and your team to walk away with a decision that
is fully understood and supported by your team.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
2
Expert Choice 2000
Common Applications
•Strategic Planning
•Information Technology Selection Decisions
•Information Technology Portfolio Management
•Budget Allocation
•Human Resource Management
•Trade Studies
•Marketing Decisions
•Vendor/Source Selection
•Site Selection
•Project/Risk Management
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
3
Expert Choice 2000
Slide Show Overview
This slide show has been designed to show you the major
features of Expert Choice 2000. We show this in order to help
you understand the power and versatility of Expert Choice.
The sample model shown here is information technology
portfolio management.
To learn more about these capabilities try the Quick Start
Guide and/or Tutorials that are the Expert Choice CD. The
same information is available with our trial version of the
software.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
4
First define your goal or decision
problem
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
5
Then build your decision model or problem.
Structuring is a freestyle, interactive technique for building a decision
model. The Clusterview, seen above, is where decision makers brainstorm
and cluster decision objectives. Alternatively, you can add alternatives
and/or define pros and cons that point to objectives.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
6
Next view the hierarchy of decision objectives.
The hierarchy is
automatically
built from the
ClusterView and is
shown in the
TreeView. It
displays decision
objectives that will
be used for
prioritization and
evaluation of
alternatives.
Information documents capture definitions
and qualitative documentation and can
house files from MS Excel, MS Word and
other applications.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
7
Make paired comparisons of the objectives.
There are three
modes of
pairwise
comparisons
available to
prioritize
objectives and
alternatives.
The graphical
mode is shown
here.
Decision-makers
populate a judgment
matrix with ratios
derived from each
graphic comparison.
Once comparisons
are made EC2000
calculates priorities
for your objectives.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
8
Results of Group/Team Verbal Paired Comparisons.
In a group session, decision-makers can enter judgments using radio frequency
keypads or remotely via the internet. In this example, Betty and Sean said that
ROI is more important. Mike, Jon and Jimmy said that Improving Customer
Satisfaction is more important. The geometric average is used as the groups
overall judgment.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
9
Priorities Graph of Paired Comparisons
The Priorities
Graph, shows the
priorities derived
from the pairwise
comparisons
relative to the
importance to each
objective. These
priorities are a
corporate
perception of what
is important.
The inconsistency ratio measures how consistent the group was in judgments
concerning the relative importance of the objectives. If inconsistency is greater than
.10, the judgments should be reviewed for accuracy.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
10
Note taking capability is available in any of our versions.
Here Betty is entering information that
can be seen by other decision-makers
over the Internet.
With EC2000’s Internet capability decision-makers can enter judgments and
qualitative descriptions to completely document the decision from remote sites
around the world.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
11
The Data Grid
The weights of
the objectives
are shown in a
spreadsheet
format in the
Data Grid.
The Data Grid is used to evaluate alternatives using data where available and verbal ratings
intensities where data does not exist. EC2000 synthesizes the priorities of the objectives,
data and ratings to determine the overall priorities of the alternatives.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
12
Data Grid Formulas
•
•
•
•
Ratings
Step Function
Increasing or Decreasing Utility Curve
Direct Entry of Priorities
These formulas are used to convert raw data of the
alternatives to priorities. This was shown on the previous
slide. The priorities are represented by the bars while the
data is represented by numbers and Ratings by words.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
13
The utility curve
function is used to
convert raw data to
prioritized
information. The
curve can be linear,
convex or concave.
Increasing Curve
Decreasing Curve
Raw data is interpreted for its
value to the organization. The xaxis shows the range of data for a
given decision objective. The y–axis
shows the utility decision-makers
get from the data metrics on each
alternative choice.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
14
A Ratings Scale
When you do not
have data for an
objective, EC2000
guides you to build a
customized ratings
scale.
This slide shows the
derived priorities
that are based on
decision-makers
paired comparisons.
This process assures
numerically accurate
representations of
each rating intensity
Other types of ratings scales such as 1-10 are inaccurate since 2 can be interpreted as
twice as good as 1 and a 3 is only 50% better than a 2, and so on.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
15
Group/Team Window Illustration
Using the Individual Ratings Assessment window, stakeholders enter a ratings intensity for
each alternative with respect to each objective. Stakeholders can be anonymous; here we
show the decision-makers as the group can discuss how each participant arrived at their
rating for this alternative.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
16
After making judgments about the
relative importance of objectives, subobjectives and alternatives, EC’s
powerful sensitivity graphs enable you
to test the sensitivity of the decision to
changes in priorities by changing the
weights of your objectives to instantly
see the impact on your alternatives.
The component view of the Dynamic
Sensitivity graph is seen here.
By dragging the objective’s priorities
back and forth in the left column, the
priorities of the alternatives will change
in the right column. If a decision-maker
thinks an objective might be more or
less important than originally indicated,
the decision-maker can drag that
objective's bar to the right or left to
increase or decrease the objective’s
priority and see the impact on
alternatives.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
17
Sensitivity graphs help you see the
relative importance for a set of
alternatives and why the choices
scored the way they did against
each objective.
The performance graph shows the
weights of the objectives as the vertical
bars using the left axis. The relative
scores of the alternatives as the colored
lines are read using the right axis.
The head-to-head graph shows a oneto-one comparison of any pair of
alternatives you select. Here the
Financial Management System is
better at supporting Strategic goals,
but the HRIS system is better
everywhere else leading it to a higher
overall score.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
18
Optimization and Expert Choice
• For resource allocation
• Using Excel
The following slide briefly shows this
process. For more information, see the
book, Decision by Objectives, found on our
home page.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
19
Alternative
HRIS System
Financial Management System
Secure Document System
Electronic Bid Set
Electronic Commerce ASP
Application Software
Decision Support Software
Help Desk Software
Technical Data Imaging
Contractor Management System
Expert
Choice
Score
Costs
Funded Funded Cost
Funded Benefit
0.514
330
1
330
0.514
0.364
256
1
256
0.364
0.356
178
1
178
0.356
0.287
440
0
0
0
0.339
225
0
0
0
0.235
150
1
150
0.235
0.608
189
1
189
0.608
0.505
175
1
175
0.505
0.204
130
1
130
0.204
0.281
155
1
155
0.281
Spent
1500
3.067
Budget
1600
EC2000 benefit priorities from the Data Grid export directly into its Excel optimization add-on tool to help
organizations with investment portfolio management. Above is a simple fund or not fund model where the
projects with the highest overall benefit for their costs will be fully funded. More complex budget
constraints can easily be included.
Total
Portfolio
Benefit
Score
Overall Benefit of the Portfolio- This number is an aggregate benefit
4
3
2
1
0
0
500
1000
1500
Overall Cost of the Portfolio (in thousands)
2000
The highest overall portfolio benefit is for the budget of $1.5 Million. The additional budget spent
would yield decreasing marginal returns on investment.
Copyright Expert Choice Inc.
Pittsburgh, PA
20