L Robin Keller Jay Simon University of California Irvine USA President INFORMS INFORMSorg Defense Resources Management Institute USA 11TH International Workshop on Operations ID: 545625
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "TEACHING MULTI-OBJECTIVE MULTI-STAKEHOLD..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
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