TEACHING MULTI-OBJECTIVE MULTI-STAKEHOLDER DECISION MODELIN - PowerPoint Presentation

Presentation on theme: "TEACHING MULTI-OBJECTIVE MULTI-STAKEHOLDER DECISION MODELIN"— Presentation transcript

Slide1

TEACHING MULTI-OBJECTIVE MULTI-STAKEHOLDER DECISION MODELING WITH CASES L. Robin Keller*, Jay Simon*** University of California, Irvine, USA President, INFORMS (INFORMS.org)** Defense Resources Management Institute, USA 

11TH International Workshop on Operations Research OR & Human Welfare: Health, Environment, and Education Havana, Cuba, March 10-13, 2015

1Slide2

2Decision Analyst Ralph Keeney advises us to practice Value-Focused Thinking

Thinking about what we value as expressed in our objectivesKeeney, R. L. 1992. Value-Focused Thinking—A Path to Creative Decision Making. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Hammond, J. S., R. L. Keeney, H. Raiffa

. 1999. Smart Choices: A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions. Harvard

Business School Press.Slide3

3Keeney’s Personal Objectives

Maximize my quality of life

Enjoy life

Be intellectually fulfilledEnhance

the lives of family and friendsContribute to societyKeeney (1992),

Value Focused ThinkingSlide4

MULTIPLE OBJECTIVE DECISIONS UNDER CERTAINTYModelObjectives hierarchies

of stakeholder(s)Additive “weight

& rate”

multiple objective

measurable value function

SoftwareUse

Excel with sliders

to input swing weights

Show

sensitivity analysis

in real time as bar graphs change

Experiential

Learning

Applicable to business, personal,

social/charity

projects

Apply in class, on homework, and in term project

Students able & willing to “take away” & use in future Much of this material is at http://faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/classes/. LR Keller, JSimon, Y Wang. "Multiple objective decision analysis involving multiple stakeholders," Ch. 7 in M. R. Oskoorouchi (ed.) Tutorials in Operations Research- Decision Technologies and Applications. INFORMS. (2009). [faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/files/2011/06/multiple-objective-decision-analysis-involving-multiple-stakeholders.pdf]

4Slide5

5MERGER DECISION

ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL MERGER OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH SOCIETY OF AMERICA (ORSA) AND THE INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES

(TIMS)

L. Robin Keller and Craig W. Kirkwood, “The Founding of INFORMS: A Decision Analysis Perspective”, Operations Research. 47(1), Jan.-Feb. 1999, 16-28.

[faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/files/2011/06/The-Founding-of-Informs-Decision-Analysis.pdf]Powerpoint: http

://faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/classes/Slide6

6ORSA/TIMS COOPERATION ALTERNATIVESSEP:

SEPARATION OF ORSA & TIMSSQ: STATUS QUO PARTNERSHIPSM: SEAMLESS MERGERM2: MERGE WITH ORSA/TIMS AS SUB-UNITSM3: MERGE WITH NO ORSA/TIMS SUB-UNITS;

SUB-UNITS ARE REPRESENTED ON BOARDSlide7

7ORSA/TIMS MERGER OBJECTIVESFIVE MAIN CATEGORIES

IMPROVE COST EFFICIENCYENHANCE QUALITY OF PRODUCTSESTABLISH STRONG EXTERNAL IMAGEMAINTAIN SCOPE/DIVERSITY OF FIELDIMPROVE OPERATIONS

Elicited stakeholders’ objectives & combined them into 1 hierarchySlide8

8ADD BRANCHES TO MAIN CATEGORIES

IMPROVE COST EFFICIENCYMAINTAIN

ALLOCATE WELL MAINTAIN

EFFICIENT

REVENUES AND EFFICIENTUSE OF FUNDS

EXPENSES USE OF

TIME

EXPLOIT BALANCE DUES REMOVE

ECONOMIES RATE & FEE- DOUBLED

OF SCALE FOR-SERVICE

DUES

Slide9

9VALUE RATING SCALE2: SEEN BY AVERAGE MEMBER

AS IMPROVED1: SEEN BY OFFICERS AS IMPROVED BUT NOT BY AVERAGE MEMBER0: NO CHANGE-1: SEEN BY

OFFICERS AS WORSE

-2: SEEN BY AVERAGE MEMBER AS WORSESlide10

10INTERPRETATION OF “MEASURABLE” VALUE RATINGS

STRENGTH OF PREFERENCES IS REFLECTED IN DIFFERENCES OF VALUESDEGREE OF IMPROVEMENTFROM 0 TO 1 IS THE SAME AS

FROM 1 TO 2Slide11

11JUDGED VALUE RATING SCORES

JUDGED VALUE RATING

ON ALTERNATIVES

OBJECTIVES

SEP

SQ

SM

M2

M3

1. IMPROVE COST EFFICIENCY

1.1 MAINTAIN EFFICIENT USE OF FUNDS

1.1.1

EXPLOIT

ECONOMIES OF SCALE

-2

0

1

-1

1

1.1.2 BALANCE DUES RATE AND

FEE-FOR-SERVICE

-2

0

1

-1

1

1.1.3 REMOVE DOUBLED DUES

-1

0

2

1

2Slide12

12WEIGHTS FOR OBJECTIVES

SUM OF WEIGHTS IS 1OO% FOR ALL LOWEST LEVEL OBJECTIVESOBJECTIVE’S WEIGHT DEPENDS ON RANGE ATTAINABLE ON OBJECTIVE

Use a SWING WEIGHT InterpretationAssume a weighted Additive Model

DECISION MAKER JUDGES WEIGHTS ON OBJECTIVESSlide13

13 Slide14

14COMPUTE WEIGHTED AVERAGE OF VALUE RATINGS

MULTIPLY OBJECTIVE’S WEIGHT TIMES VALUE RATING ON EACH OBJECTIVE

SUM UP OVER ALL OBJECTIVES

(Use SUMPRODUCT function in Excel)RECOMMENDED OPTION IS ONE WITH

HIGHEST OVERALL VALUESlide15

15Slide16

16RESULTS

OFFICERS PREFERRED MERGER3 ALTERNATIVE VOCAL OPPONENTS COMPROMISED ON SEAMLESS MERGER, AS

LONG AS NEW NAME included “OPERATIONS RESEARCH

” Slide17

17OUTCOME

MEMBERS VOTED TO MERGE IN SEAMLESS MERGER on JAN. 1ST, 1995

intoINSTITUTE

FOR OPERATIONS RESEARCH AND THE MANAGEMENT

SCIENCESSlide18

18Perspectives of Multiple Stakeholders can help…-identify mutually agreeable alternatives -foresee opposition to decisions

-design new & better alternatives -understand the evolution of past decisions from multiple perspectivesSlide19

19Multiple-Stakeholder Decision Making The StarKist Tuna Fishing Decision

Stakeholders

San Diego, CA USA

Tuna

Fishing Fleet

http

://

www.sandiegohistory.org/journal/81fall/images/piva.jpg

http

://www.earthisland.org/index.php/donate

/

Monika

I. Winn and L. Robin Keller, “

A Modeling Methodology for Multi-Objective Multi-Stakeholder Decisions: Implications for Research

”,

Journal of Management Inquiry.

10(2), June 2001, 166-181.

[

faculty.sites.uci.edu/

lrkeller

/files/2011/06/A-Modeling-Methodology-for.-Multiobjective-Multistakeholder-Decisions.-Implications-for-Research.pdf

]

Much of this material is at

http://faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/classes/Slide20

Problem: Purse seine nets from boats can catch dolphins along with tuna fishimage source http://www.crownprince.com/nets-tuna.htm20Slide21

21

DECISION ALTERNATIVES

Legal Quota

Maintain current practices and stay within legal limits

Limited MortalityStep up efforts to reduce the number of dolphins killed

Zero-MortalityNo fishing associated with setting nets on dolphinsSlide22

22

Decision Alternatives Rated for Fishing Fleet

+ favorable

0 neutral/balanced ? insufficient info.

- unfavorableSlide23

23

Decision Alternatives Rated for

Environmental Interest GroupsSlide24

24

StarKist’s “Crisis Mode” Objectives Hierarchy

StarKist’s (1991) Dolphin Safe Policy

"StarKist will not buy any tuna caught in association with

dolphins in the Eastern Tropical Pacific."Slide25

25Home Depot Case

Sell Land?

Feng, T., L. R. Keller, X. Zheng. 2008.

Modeling Multi-Objective Multi-Stakeholder

Decisions: A Case-Exercise Approach.

INFORMS Transactions on Education

8

(3)

103-114,

(

http

://ite.pubs.informs.org

/

,

http

://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/ited.1080.0012supplemental files: HomeDepotTeachingNote.pdf (for instructors), Excel file. Files also at http

://faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/classes

/Slide26

26Background

Home Depot proposed to open a

retail building supply store

in

San Juan Capistrano, California USA

The new store would be

on 15 acres

in a strip of industrial land.

Home

Depot

owned two

acres of this land

.

The

rest of the land was owned by the city, and would need to

be bought.Slide27

27Background

The city would get $9 Million if it sells Home Depot the 13 acres.

Many were concerned that a “big box store” would destroy its historical small town feeling.

Nearby residents also worry that a Home Depot would cause traffic jams, pollute the air, produce noise and block ocean breezes.Slide28

Home Depot Case

Alternatives

Build Home Depot

Don’t develop the land

Build a recreational vehicle park

Build specialty retail facilities

Stakeholders (assign 6 student groups)

City of San Juan Capistrano

Competing Local Small Businesses

Complementary Local Small Businesses

Home Depot

Nearby Residents

Other Area Residents

28Slide29

Case InstructionsAsk the groups to:

Brainstorm the objectives of the stakeholder. Create a hierarchy of objectives by grouping related objectives.Put the objectives in the spreadsheet.Rate the options’ performance on each objective on a scale from 0 to 10.Make their own judgment of the “raw swing weights” to put on the lowest level objectives.

Answer

questions and determine the best option based on the analysis.

Post completed spreadsheet file to

share. 29Slide30

Spreadsheet Structure for Each Stakeholder

Improve the City of San Juan Capistrano

30Slide31

Identify group’s objectives

Improve the City of San Juan Capistrano

Promote convenience of shopping

Promote convenience of shopping

31Slide32

32

Complementary Local Small Businesses-Representative Hierarchy of ObjectivesSlide33

33Home Depot in San Juan Capistrano?A Sample Spreadsheet

to Evaluate the Home Depot Case Excel file (HomeDepotCase.xls)Make sure to choose "enable the macros" when you open the spreadsheet. If you still have the problem of adjusting the sliders due to the security level after that, please go to the menu of "tools->macro->security", switch the security level from high to medium, save the file, then close the file and finally reopen the file and it should work. Slide34

34Moving Sliders on Weights Dynamically Changes GraphSlide35

35Moving Sliders on Weights Dynamically Changes GraphSlide36

Case DiscussionWhile comparing the results from different stakeholders, the instructor inputs the calculated overall values for each option from each group into a summary file to create bar charts showing results.

Sample results from all the six stakeholders

T

ake

a class vote among the options to predict the actual vote.

“This approach can help decision makers understand the perspectives of different stakeholders, and provide a way to design more acceptable alternatives.”

36Slide37

37 What do you think: Yes or No?

Sell Land?

(City voters voted on this issue in November 2002.)Slide38

38Example Home Depot Case Perspectives

Overall Values

Option 1

Build

Home

Depot

Option 2

Don't

develop

the land

Option 3

Build

RV

Park

Option 4

Build

specialty

retail

City of San Juan Capistrano

4.5

4.2

4.2

5.6

Competing Local Small Businesses

0.6

3.0

5.0

8.0

Complementary Local Small Businesses

10.0

5.0

5.7

3.5

Home Depot

9.4

1.0

1.0

1.0

Nearby Residents

1.0

5.2

1.4

4.2

Other Area Residents

6.2

3.8

0.8

3.6

Data from Executive Education session, February 2009. UC Irvine MerageSlide39

39Each Alternative from Different Stakeholders’ Viewpoints Slide40

40Each Stakeholder’s View of Different AlternativesSlide41

Appendix 1. Hospital capital budgetsDon Kleinmuntz, former INFORMS President (now at Univ. of Notre Dame)(http://mendoza.nd.edu/research-and-faculty/directory/don-kleinmuntz/) started Strata Decision Technology

(http://www.stratadecision.com/ ) to create Excel-based (or bigger database) software to aid hospital administrators in capital budgeting (choosing a set of expensive projects to fund), w/ an additive multiple

attribute measurable value function + linear programming (Excel Solver or LINDO for knapsack problem

) Their original capital budgeting software

was StrataCap , new product is (cloud-based) Strata Jazz  http://www.stratadecision.com/our-solutions/capital-and-equipment

Video, in 1 out of 5 US hospitals:  http://www.stratadecision.com/our-company/our-history

41Slide42

Weights on objectives(from Kleinmuntz)Identify most important objective(s)Score of 100Rate others objectives relative to 100

90, 80, 50, … Divide by total to get weights that add to 100%

100

100

60

75

100

80

65

60

42Slide43

Hospital Capital BudgetingObjectives Hierarchy (from Kleinmuntz)

43Max. Project Benefits

FinancialQuality

Improve patient outcomes

Enhance patient/family satisfactionEnhance

physician satisfactionEnhance

facility quality

Strategy

Increase

market share

Enhance

information integration

Promote

operating efficiency

Weights on objectives

(from Kleinmuntz)

Identify most important objective(s)

Score of 100Rate others objectives relative to 10090, 80, 50, …

Divide by total to get weights that add to

100%

100

100

80

65

60

100

60

65Slide44

Appendix 2. Planning for potassium iodide (KI) distribution for thyroid risk from radioactive iodine exposureEvaluate plans for distribution of potassium iodide (KI) to protect against thyroid cancer, when there will be radioactive iodine exposure as a result of an incident at a U.S. nuclear power plant. The types of KI distribution plans include the following:

• Predistribute to households, schools,hospitals, etc. —Via mail —Via voluntary pickup•

Stockpile at evacuation reception centers•

Do not predistributeT. Feng, L. R. Keller, “

A Multiple-Objective Decision Analysis for Terrorism Protection: Potassium Iodide Distribution in Nuclear Incidents”, Decision Analysis, (June 2006), 3 (2): 76-93.http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/deca.1060.0072(supplement has Excel file)

Much of this material is at http://faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/classes/Based on book:

http

://www.nap.edu/catalog/10868/distribution-and-administration-of-potassium-iodide-in-the-event-of-a-nuclear-incident

44Slide45

KI study Objectives Minimize Radioactive Iodine Risk To Thyroid Maximize KI Availability Optimize Ability To Take KI On Time Minimize Harm From Inappropriate KI AdministrationMinimize Harm From Other Aspects Of Incident

KI Procedures Don’t Impede Evacuation Avert Mortality/Morbidity From Radiation Or AccidentsMinimize Panic/Anxiety Due To KI ProceduresKI Procedures’ Resource Use Not Excessive

Simple KI Procedures Before/During Incident

Educate Public To Respond To Incidents

45Slide46

Appendix 3. BiologicalBiological clock multi-objective utility model with weights on objectives changing over time(maximizing family life quality, social life quality, career life quality) CAREER WOMEN MIGHT WANT TO HAVE CHILDREN ASAPLiveScience, Nov.

9, 2007 -- A new mathematical model developed by professor Ralph Keeney and doctoral student Dinah Vernik of Duke's Fuqua School ofBusiness could help women decide the optimal time in their lives to have kids…http://www.livescience.com/health/071109-women-children.html

Video of authors talking about paper:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZxXf1W6FxM

“Analysis of the Biological Clock Decision”, RL Keeney, D Vernik, http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.1070.0094

2007 , 4(3), 114 - 135 (supplement has the Excel file and a user guide)

46Slide47

Appendix 4. Multi-objective Prostate Cancer Treatment ChoiceJay Simon worked for a firm that had a prostate cancer decision analysis website to help potential patients make their treatment decision.Side effects reduce quality of life score multiplicatively

Survival from prostate cancer without impotence or incontinence = 90Survival from prostate cancer with incontinence = 90(80%) =72Survival from prostate cancer with impotence = 90(60%) = 54Survival from prostate cancer with impotence and incontinence = 90(80%)(60%) = 43.2

(new site, with more focus on info. :  http://www.prostatesmart.info/)

“

Decision Making with Prostate Cancer: A Multiple-Objective Model with Uncertainty”, Jay Simon, 2009 39(3), 218 - 227,

http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/inte.1080.0406

47Slide48

48Appendix 5. Andy Grove’s Prostate Cancer

In the fall of 1994, Andy Grove- the former CEO of Intel- was faced with a difficult problem to solve. Initially, he was presented with an abnormal screening PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) test that could represent the presence of cancer. His first reaction was to ask what to do with that information. At this point, he may or may not have had cancer. So, to better define if there was a required decision, he chose to gather further information. Some basic facts he obtained gave him a first understanding of the probabilities and outcomes he might face, finding that 200,000 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1994 and that 38,000 would be expected to die, making prostate cancer the second leading cause of cancer deaths in men.

Since his PSA result was just over the upper limit of normal, he elected to repeat the test in early 1995 in case his results were within the error margin of the test. The results suggested more strongly the presence of a tumor and he visualized a sugar-cube-sized tumor in his prostate. These tests results convinced him of the need to see the urologist for a biopsy to define if the test result was a true positive or a false positive

.

Slide49

49Andy Grove’s Prostate CancerThe biopsy results indicated his PSA result was a true positive. He did have prostate cancer. This led to the formulation of his decision problem.

What type of treatment should Mr. Grove pursue for treatment of his prostate cancer? There appeared to be four main decision alternatives. One option was to have the tumor and prostate gland surgically removed. This alternative can increase the survival rate and decrease the recurrence rate as well, however it will lead to a greater chance of being impotent after the surgery. Another alternative was to receive radiation treatments in the form of “seed” implantation to destroy the cancer cells. This option can increase the survival rate, but it also has serious side effects. A third alternative was cryosurgery, or freezing the tumor cells. Regarding this option, there was not enough information available to make an informed decision. The last option was to do nothing, taking the “wait and see” approach, which also carried much risk of losing his life if the cancer grew very quickly. Apparently, none of these alternatives was perfect. Furthermore, several other stakeholders were also very concerned with Andy Grove’s situation. Andy’s dilemma will be modeled as a multi-stakeholder decision problem.

Those

stakeholders are:

Andy Grove, Urologist, Oncologist,

Andy’s Family/Wife and Andy’s Company – Intel

This

case was written by L. Robin Keller and Tianjun Feng, of the UCI MSB, building upon the article by Andy Grove published in Fortune (1996), several case study reports by UCI HCEMBA students: L. Jeff

Koh

, Kenneth Rich,

Suehei

Lee, H.

Ena

Leo and others. See

TAKING ON PROSTATE CANCER

by Andy Grove with reporter associate Bethany McLean,

FORTUNE, May 13, 1996.Slide50

50Andy Grove’s Prostate CancerDivide into 5 groups.For your stakeholder group, rate each alternative on each objective.Determine weights on objectives.Compute the overall weighted score for each alternative.

Andy Grove Case Excel file at http://faculty.sites.uci.edu/lrkeller/classes/Slide51

 Added background info. on this talk Talk Abstract Many know about the use of decision analysis to decide among alternative investments (such as pharmacological research and development) using decision trees with chance nodes to compute expected monetary value of different alternatives. Such an analysis aims to maximize a single evaluation measure for a single decision maker. We demonstrate less widely known decision analysis techniques using spreadsheet models of the multiple objective perspectives of the decision stakeholders.

We show how to teach students to analyze real-life decision problems using case examples and discuss specific skills students are expected to learn, such as dynamic sensitivity analysis using sliders in Excel on objectives’ weights, and typical student questions and errors during case discussion. 51Slide52

 Talk Abstract, continuedTaught in business courses for both MBAs (including health care executive MBAs) and undergraduates.Sometimes, one objectives hierarchy is suitable for a set of stakeholders, and differences in opinions across stakeholders can be characterized by differences in the multiple objectives’ weights:-Merger of the Operations Research Society of America & The Institute of Management Sciences (INFORMS)

-Protection against radioactive iodine in nuclear incidents 52Slide53

 Talk Abstract, continuedIn other cases, an objectives hierarchy will be constructed for each stakeholder because their objectives are so different that construction of separate hierarchies better represents their divergent perspectives. -Tuna fish supplier source selection decision (StarKist, environmentalists, San Diego tuna fishing fleet) -Siting

of a new Home Depot building supply store -Prostate cancer treatment decision (former Intel CEO Andy Grove, his family, company, doctors) 53Slide54

54Keeney’s Professional Objectives

Maximize the contribution of professional activities to…

my quality of lifeMax.

enjoymentMax. learningProvide service

Enhance professional careerMax. economic gainBuild good professional relationships

Min. the time required Min. time required where I live

Min.

time required away from home

Keeney

(1992),

Value Focused ThinkingSlide55

55Objectives for Keeney’s son’s name1. Single spelling

2. Not a unisex name 3. Reasonable initials4. Understandable pronunciation 4.2. With last name 4.3. With middle and last name5. No obvious “unwanted” nickname6. Not unique7. Not extremely commonSlide56

56 8. Not religious9. Not named after anyone10. Has a nice rhythm 10.1. With last name 10.2 With middle and last names11. Nice-sounding in foreign languages

12. Appealing (i.e., you feel predisposed to talk to or meet the person)13. No “ee” sounds

Objectives for Keeney’s son’s nameSlide57

57 8. Not religious9. Not named after anyone10. Has a nice rhythm 10.1 With last name

10.2 With middle and last names11. Nice-sounding in foreign languages12. Appealing (i.e., you feel predisposed to talk to or meet the person)

13. No “ee” sounds

Keeney (1992),

Value Focused Thinking

Objectives for Keeney’s son’s name

The Winning Name is

GregorySlide58

MethodologyA Multi-objective Multi-stakeholder Decision Analysis Methodology

Identify Stakeholders

Identify Alternatives

Develop the

Objectives

Hierarchy

Develop

the

Weights

Rate Alternatives over Objectives

Is There a Dominant Alternative?

Compute Overall Values of Alternatives

Make

the

Recommendations

Yes

No

Conduct Dynamic Sensitivity Analysis Using Sliders in Excel

58Slide59

Teaching Notes: Skills Students Can LearnLearn to assign value ratings to how well each option satisfies each objective

Learn to creatively generate objectives and structure them into a hierarchy of objectivesLearn to use the swing weight approach to generate importance weights on objectives

59Slide60

Teaching Notes: Skills Students Can LearnLearn to do sensitivity analysis in decisions under certainty, using “sliders” created in the Excel software.

Learn to compare the overall values of options, using the sumproduct function in Excel.

Learn to compare and contrast results from different stakeholder groups.

60Slide61

Teaching Notes: Typical Student Questions & Errors

Students might not understand the difference between ratings and weights. The same weights assigned to different subobjectives are allowed.

Students might generate wrong or redundant subobjectives for one specific objective.

Students questioned whether they should start with the lowest or highest level subobjectives when computing swing weights.

61Slide62

Case Objectives and Pedagogical BenefitsEnrich the content of the typical undergraduate/masters level decision analysis or management science course

Focus on multi-objective multi-stakeholder decisionsLink creative problem structuring with analytical tool

Introduce the methodology to the students

In-class exercises and/or homeworkDecision

making tool to tackle real-life context-rich decision problemsApplied to corporate strategic decision making for a facility location problem

62Slide63

StakeholdersThe city of San Juan Capistrano

: interested in the potential revenue, but concerned with interests of multiple stakeholdersCompeting local small businesses: will be influenced by the arrival of Home Depot in terms of profit, etc.Complementary local small businesses: will definitely be affected in terms of profit, etc.

Home Depot

Nearby residents: concerned with the possible adverse impacts on their quality of life

Other area residents: will enjoy the convenience, but may suffer from the possible increased traffic flow63Slide64

641.

Improve cost efficiency of

TIMS/ORSA operations

2. Enhance the quality of ORSA

and TIMS products

3. Establish a strong & coherent

external image of field

4. Manage the scope and diversity

of the field

5. Maintain/improve effectiveness

of ORSA and TIMS operations

1.1

Maintain efficient use of funds

1.2

Allocate well revenues/expenses to

activities/entities

1.3 Maintain efficient use of time of volunteers

2.1 Provide high quality main and specialty

conferences

2.2 Provide high quality publications

2.3 Provide appropriate career services

2.4 Provide support for sub-units

2.5 Provide other member services

3.1 Increase visibility and clout of OR and MS

3.2 Foster professional identity

4.1 Maintain/improve membership composition

4.2 Create strong relationships with other societies

5.1 Maintain/improve quality of governance process

5.2 Maintain/improve quality of operation output

MAXIMIZE OVERALL

VALUESlide65

65

Decision Alternatives Rated with

StarKist’s

“Business-As-Usual” Objectives HierarchySlide66

66StarKist’s “Strategic Planning” Objectives Hierarchy