Earned Value Analysis and Pivot Tables
Manage Yourself – not Time!
Project Management for Innovation and High Risk
Writing Project Objectives
Writing Project Options
Writing Project Deliverables
Writing a Project Scope
Writing Project Constraints
Assessing Project Risk


Validating Data in Excel
The Purpose of Project Control
Diagnosing Project Problems
Asking the right questions of the team
Taking Corrective Action (Part 1)
Taking Corrective Action (Part 2)


Printing to Impress
Using a Deadline Symbol in Microsoft Project

Using Pivot Tables in Excel
The Power of a Project Management Database
Automatic Colour Changes on the Gantt Chart
Preparing and Entering Data
The Horizontal Screen Split
Scaling for Screen and Print
Improving Gantt Chart Appearance
Durations, Work and Resource Units
Assigning Part-Time Resources
Examining Costs
Costing Material-Type Resources
Tracking a Project - No.1
Tracking a Project - No.2
Grouping Tasks and Resources
Displaying Information in MS Project Tables
Reporting Cash flows
Using Outline Code Fields
Creating Filters
Creating Your Own Tables

Flexible Resource Costing
Project Server 2003


Tactical vs. Value Decision Making
Will Decision-makers learn from Project Managers?
How to Make Decisions
Formulating the Decision
Building a Decision Context
Elements of a Good Decision Process
Decision Options and Criteria
White Paper: Fending off the Lawyers
Overview of Decision-making tools & techniques

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elements of a Good Decision-Making Process

In this series of articles we are establishing a profile for what is required of a process for good corporate decision-making. While we are principally referring to collective decision-making at the executive or management level, the processes, methods and techniques are applicable for all personnel and at all levels of the corporate chain.

We regard the following as essential properties of a good decision-making process.

Consistent
Obviously, the process must be used consistently. But more than that, it should guarantee logical consistency. Decision making requires that we express preferences that do not allow situations where A is preferred to B, B is preferred to C and C is preferred to A. Being logically consistent is not a sufficient condition for excellence in decision-making but it certainly is a necessary one.

Appropriately Rigorous
Rigour is the exactness and care with which we analyse issues. The approach is selective because we ought to use our time and energy efficiently and this means using appropriate levels of care where it matters. Determining where it matters is part of the process. Different parts of the decision will have different levels of impact on the outcome. We need to understand these sensitivities ahead of time so that we can apportion our efforts intelligently.

Consultative
No individual can claim to carry the totality of information required to make good decisions in a complex environment. What is needed is balance and diversity of views that can only arise from collective experience. We therefore need to canvass a sufficiently wide range of opinion in order to control the subjectivity that would otherwise colour our decision. The depth of consultation should again be guided by the degree of impact the issue is likely to have on the decision outcome.

Documented
A good decision process ensures that collective experience becomes collective memory so that future deliberations can benefit from past ones. Therefore details, issues, debates, research, analysis and opinions must be recorded and filed in a way that facilitates later access.

Transparent
The process must be open and transparent, avoiding the potential for mis-interpretations by those whose opinions do not eventually prevail. The reasoning and evaluations that led to the conclusion should be clear, placing the integrity of the process beyond suspicion.

Justifiability
A good process should facilitate the justification and defence of the decision. It does this by being transparent, rigourous and consultative, allowing it to be scrutinized with impunity.


Objective
The process should enhance objectivity by making use of recognized standards and benchmarks wherever possible. This provides credibility and objectivity.

Scaleable
A scaleable process can be applied to a variety of decisions both large and small, simple and complex. The full force of the process can be spared for cases where to use it would be overkill. However, even in the context of small decisions, certain basic steps ought to be taken such as to define the objective, identify criteria, establish alternatives etc.

Utilised
There is no point having a carefully documented process that nobody bothers to use. It should be a living, breathing mechanism whose benefits are obvious and so becomes inseparable from the ordinary operation of the organization.


The Analytic Hierarchy Process
Methods like the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) exhibit may of these qualities. AHP was developed in the seventies by Professor Thomas Saaty in the United States. The process provides the means of identifying and analyzing decision criteria, options and attributes and quantifying their relative value. One of its strengths is that it can synthesise data arising from many information collecting instruments and methods. These can include

· Focus Groups Results
· Surveys
· Multiple Choice Questionnaires
· Decision Trees
· Decision Tables
· Expert Advice
· Pair-wise Comparisons

The results of these can always be processed in a way that informs the hierarchy that lies at the heart of the method. We shall discuss the AHP method in some detail in future articles.

 

Numerix Pty. Ltd. ABN 83 003 504 970 Telephone: 61 2 - 9279 0900 Fax: 61 2 - 9279 4141 email info@numerix.com.au