Date post: | 18-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | rhoda-black |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Decision Management in Product Development
Dr. David UllmanPresident
Robust Decisions, Inc.www.robustdecisions.com
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
“Concern for decision support is in its pre-infancy and that the commercial world is just beginning to realize the importance of decision support in business and product development” Wayne Collier, analyst for D.H. Brown and Associates
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
What do these processes have in common?
• Acquisition planning• Portfolio management• Product development• Proposal evaluation• Strategic planning
• Homeland security • Bad actor identification• Target identification
• Courses of Action (COA) decisions• Analysis of Alternatives• Business strategy development
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
They all require choosing a course of action and committing resources based
• Incomplete• Uncertain• Evolving
from stakeholders or agents who:• Know part of the information• Are distributed in time and location• Represent many different viewpoints, areas
of expertise, and organizational functions
on information that is:
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
The Value of Information
DECISION
Judgment
KNOWLEDGEBehavior
MODELS
Relationships
DATA
Increasing value
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Historical View
Product
Product development and business processes are the evolution of
information punctuated by decisions.
1970s 1980-90s2000s
Process
Decision
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
The goal is to make decisions with:
• Confidence• Stakeholder buy-in • Measured expectations• Risk awareness• Efficient processes• Reports, documentation, and reuse
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Decision management isa process that ensures
stakeholders’ perspectives and their uncertain knowledge and information
are effectively used in determiningwhat to do next to make the
best possible decisions with measured satisfaction and risk
Meeting this goal requires decision management
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
• Projects are late or over budget • “Final” decisions are later revisited • Poor stakeholder buy-in• Decisions made by edict or the most forceful• Expertise is underutilized• Low confidence in decisions • Decisions are not justified, recorded, reused
Symptoms of poor decision management
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Many decision support systems (dss) really only
evaluate
QFD, other requirements
development, and concept
generation tools
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Accord TM – single window application that supports Decision Management
Incorporates• Uncertain Info.• Incomplete Info.• Evolving Info.• Distributed teams• Info. fusion• Stakeholder
viewpoints• Graphical
interface
Useful results• Satisfaction• Risk• What to do
next
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Underlying model• Utility Theory augmented by Bayesian Model• Manages uncertain information from multiple
stakeholders• Fuses distributed team information:
• Satisfaction from multiple viewpoints • The value of information (risk and what to do
next)• Patented algorithms• Easily imbedded in existing information
management systems
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
W1 W2 W3
K
C
K
C
Sum
BeliefBelief Belief
Weighted Values
Individual Satisfaction
Criterion 1 Criterion 2
Best Estimate, Pessimistic, and Optimistic
Criterion 3
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Belief Map for qualitative evaluation
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Knowledge or certainty
Cri
teri
on
Sa
tis
fac
tio
n
Belief
.6
.7.8
.9
.5
.4
.3
.2.1
.5
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Expand/ Contract
Scale
Delighted
Most Likely
Lower Limit
Upper Limit
Disgusted
For qualitative evaluation
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Results (partial display)
Satisfaction (expectation)for each alternative from various
viewpoints
Downside risk displayed as a potential reduction
in expectation
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Case study, HP InkJet
BACKGROUND• An interdepartmental team, developing the next
generation color inkjet printer cartridge
GOAL• Produce the best quality print and graphics,
quickly and inexpensively
TASKS • Design the ink delivery system• Select the inks• Revisit the process as the delivery system
matures
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Case study, HP InkJet (cont.)
CHALLENGES• 15 people on the team, a variety of departments
• The best ink must be selected early in the process- a poor decision might result in additional project cycles, or in unacceptable product performance
• System design requires optimization of numerous interacting and evolving properties of the ink and delivery components
• The nature, meaning, and relative importance of these interactions is not well understood or represented
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Case study, HP InkJet (cont.)
PREVIOUS DECISION MAKING METHOD • A series of meetings among the different
representative groups • Sometimes are unstructured, and sometimes not
NEW APPROACH• Robust Decisions’ training and companion
software, Accord, were introduced to the group • Training is based on the book “12 Steps to
Robust Decisions”• Accord is uniquely suited to teams managing
uncertain, incomplete, and conflicting information
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Case study, HP InkJet (cont.)
RESULTS • Potential elimination of an ink testing iteration later in the
project. Time savings: as much as five months • An estimated 30-50% increase in decision confidenceTEAMS ALSO REPORTED
• Increased participant accountability, and process buy-in • Awareness of important issues and areas of disagreement• Consensus, with more certainty and rapidity• Decisions based on shared knowledge, rather than decisions
made by a few experts• Better team visualization of individual and group thought
processes• Improved alternative and criteria development
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Customer results
• Decreased time to market through lower risk of design cycle repetition
• Increased probability of market success
through:
• Increased decision confidence
• Managed risk and uncertainty
• Identified areas for risk mitigation
• Facilitated team consensus
• Increased team accountability
• Captured decisions for reuse
• Large organizations behaving like small teams
Copyright Robust Decisions Inc. 2003
Dr. David UllmanPresident
Robust Decisions, Inc.Corvallis Oregon
541.758.5088www.robustdecisions.com
Contact
A free license is available to educational institutions in trade for use feedback.