Tony Gear

A unified approach to the acquisition of subjective data in R&D

Many quantitative models have been developed and tried in the R&D management environment. Although very successful in providing an insight framework, their actual everyday use appears to have been limited. Although there could be many reasons for this, one of the main ones is the general problem of data collection. The subjective nature of the topic makes this inherently difficult. A new approach to this problem is presented which is based on a method of prioritized hierarchies, backed up by a simple procedure of pairwise comparisons. A case study is presented of a group decision-making activity based in a research environment. Numerical results are given which show how the participants behaved in practice.

A Series of Experiments into the Use of Pairwise Comparison Techniques to Evaluate Criteria Weights

This paper describes a series of experiments to investigate the nature of responses to questions to elicit the relative importance of criteria in a multi-attribute evaluation. The experiments were designed to investigate the behaviour of decision makers under various questioning procedures. The subjects were students in knitwear design and in engeering at Trent Polytechnic. We feel that the pairwise comparison technique used in Saaty’s AHP is a powerful means of eliciting such judgments and the experiments were carried out within that framework.

Using a group support system to assess client needs

The paper describes the application of a group decision support system (GDSS) to the work of a panel of public sector workers assessing the needs of clients for various forms of social support and benefit. In particular, the paper focuses on the development of consistency of approach to judgement when the workers come from a variety of professional backgrounds. The application is concerned with the introduction within Norway of an approach to the production of judgemental information relating to clients, and for its subsequent utilisation in a national system. The framework, known as GERIX, is intended to ensure that assistance and support is provided on a fair and equitable basis across the nation. The approach is centred on a set of criteria designed to enable a comprehensive review of a client situation to be undertaken. Data for a client, utilising the criteria, are based on judgemental assessments by professionals. It is, therefore, critical for all involved in these assessments to understand and apply the model in a consistent way. Results strongly suggest that the approach to group process support enhances individual learning of professionals who are required to utilise the GERIX framework.

On-Line Group Decision Support

The paper describes an on-line system which enables each member of a decision-making group to communicate individual decisions and judgements during the course of discussion and be provided with immediate processed feedback information. Some early and very promising trials of the system concept are summarized, and directions for further development are outlined.

Development of an Approach to the Validation Of Client Assessment Models In Social Services Using a Group Process Support System

This article reports an application of a Group Process Support System to facilitate the validation of a client assessment model used in social services. Various models have been proposed to aid client assessment, but the key to their successful application in practice is the degree of consistency of judgement which results from their use. The article describes an investigation into this aspect of consistency of model application with three groups of care managers within a county council, and in particular discusses a group session process which addresses issues of model validity. This process facilitated the identification of a number of aspects of the model which needed attention in order to achieve a high degree of consistency in application.

Assessing Weights by Means of Pairwise Comparisons

The paper refers to the literature which identifies the ambiguous interpretation of criteria weights commonly used in the Analytic Hierarchy Process. A possible improvement is proposed and the results of a number of testing experiments are summarized.