Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 21
  • Cited by
    This chapter has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Oliveira, Mónica D. Lopes, Diana F. and Bana e Costa, Carlos A. 2018. Improving occupational health and safety risk evaluation through decision analysis. International Transactions in Operational Research, Vol. 25, Issue. 1, p. 375.

    Bennett, Nathan J. and Satterfield, Terre 2018. Environmental governance: A practical framework to guide design, evaluation, and analysis. Conservation Letters, Vol. 11, Issue. 6, p. e12600.

    Bolam, Friederike C. Grainger, Matthew J. Mengersen, Kerrie L. Stewart, Gavin B. Sutherland, William J. Runge, Michael C. and McGowan, Philip J. K. 2018. Using the Value of Information to improve conservation decision making. Biological Reviews,

    Donais, Francis Marleau Abi-Zeid, Irène and Lavoie, Roxane 2017. Group Decision and Negotiation. A Socio-Technical Perspective. Vol. 293, Issue. , p. 175.

    Robinson, K. F. and Fuller, A. K. 2017. Environmental Modeling with Stakeholders. p. 83.

    Pietro, Giovanna Di Ligterink, Frank Porck, Henk and de Bruin, Gerrit 2016. Chemical air filtration in archives and libraries reconsidered. Studies in Conservation, Vol. 61, Issue. 5, p. 245.

    Hamilton, Michelle C. Lambert, James H. and Valverde, L. James 2015. Climate and Related Uncertainties Influencing Research and Development Priorities. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part A: Civil Engineering, Vol. 1, Issue. 2, p. 04015005.

    Carriger, John F Jordan, Stephen J Kurtz, Janis C and Benson, William H 2015. Identifying evaluation considerations for the recovery and restoration from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill: An initial appraisal of stakeholder concerns and values. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, Vol. 11, Issue. 3, p. 502.

    Bana e Costa, Carlos A. Lourenço, João Carlos Oliveira, Mónica Duarte and Bana e Costa, João C. 2014. A Socio-technical Approach for Group Decision Support in Public Strategic Planning: The Pernambuco PPA Case. Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 23, Issue. 1, p. 5.

    Neumann, Stephan and Volkamer, Melanie 2014. Design, Development, and Use of Secure Electronic Voting Systems. p. 76.

    Joao, Isabel M. and Quadrado, Jose C. 2014. The role of teaching decision analysis for sustainability in engineering schools. p. 755.

    Keeney, Ralph L. 2013. Identifying, prioritizing, and using multiple objectives. EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Vol. 1, Issue. 1-2, p. 45.

    Carriger, John F. Fisher, William S. Stockton, Thomas B. and Sturm, Paul E. 2013. Advancing the Guánica Bay (Puerto Rico) Watershed Management Plan. Coastal Management, Vol. 41, Issue. 1, p. 19.

    Mitchell, Michael S. Gude, Justin A. Anderson, Neil J. Ramsey, Jennifer M. Thompson, Michael J. Sullivan, Mark G. Edwards, Victoria L. Gower, Claire N. Cochrane, Jean Fitts Irwin, Elise R. and Walshe, Terry 2013. Using structured decision making to manage disease risk for Montana wildlife. Wildlife Society Bulletin, Vol. 37, Issue. 1, p. 107.

    2012. Structured Decision Making. p. 69.

    Ehrich, Andrew Baratz and Haymaker, John Riker 2012. Multiattribute interaction design: An integrated conceptual design process for modeling interactions and maximizing value. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 26, Issue. 01, p. 85.

    2012. Structured Decision Making. p. 21.

    Keeney, Ralph L. 2012. Value-Focused Brainstorming. Decision Analysis, Vol. 9, Issue. 4, p. 303.

    2012. Structured Decision Making. p. 93.

    Keeney, Ralph L. and von Winterfeldt, Detlof 2011. A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland Security Decisions. Risk Analysis, Vol. 31, Issue. 9, p. 1470.

    ×
  • Print publication year: 2007
  • Online publication date: June 2012

7 - Developing Objectives and Attributes

Summary

ABSTRACT. The fundamental objectives of any decision problem should define why the decision maker is interested in that decision. However, listing a complete set of the fundamental objectives for a decision is not a simple task. It requires creativity, time, some hard thinking, and the recognition that it is important. This chapter offers many suggestions to help do the task well and provides criteria to appraise the quality of the resulting set of fundamental objectives. For an analysis of the alternatives in terms of these objectives, an attribute to measure the achievement of each objective is required. Good attributes are essential for an insightful analysis. This chapter also includes many suggestions to help identify or construct useful attributes as well as criteria to appraise the quality of the resulting attributes. Collectively, the fundamental objectives and corresponding attributes provide the basis for any objective function and for any discussion of the pros and cons of the alternatives.

Introduction

For any decision situation, there is a specific time when it is first recognized. Before that time, there is no conscious awareness of the decision. These decision situations can be categorized depending on how they were elevated to consciousness. Some were caused by an external event, referred to as a trigger that makes it clear that a decision will have to be made. Triggers are caused by circumstances or by people other than the decision maker, the person who needs to make a choice sometime in the future.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Advances in Decision Analysis
  • Online ISBN: 9780511611308
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611308
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
REFERENCES
Fiske, A., and Tetlock, P. (1996). Taboo trade-offs: reactions to transactions that transgress spheres of justice. Political Psychology, 18, 255–297.
Gold, M., Siegel, J., Russell, L., and Weinstein, M. (2000). Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gregory, R., and Failing, L. (2002). Using decision analysis to encourage sound deliberation: Water use planning in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 21(3), 492–499.
Hazen, G. (2004). Multiattribute structure for QALYs. Decision Analysis, 1, 205–216.
Keeney, R. L. (1992). Value Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Keeney, R. L., and Gregory, R. S. (2005). Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Operations Research, 53, 1–11.
Keeney, R. L., and McDaniels, T. (1999). Identifying and structuring values to guide integrated resource planning at BC Gas. Operations Research, 47, 651–662.
Keeney, R. L., and Winterfeldt, D. (1994). Managing nuclear waste from powerplants. Risk Analysis, 14, 107–130.
Merkhofer, M. W., and Keeney, R. L. (1987). A multiattribute utility analysis of alternative sites for the disposal of nuclear waste. Risk Analysis, 7, 173–194.
Peters, T. J., and Waterman, R. H. Jr. (1982). In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper & Row.
Pliskin, J. S., Shepard, D. S., and Weinstein, M. C. (1980). Utility functions for life years and health status. Operations Research, 28, 206–224.
Seelye, G. Q., and Tierney, J. (2003). EPA Drops Age-Based Cost Studies. New York Times, Late Edition, Section A, May 3, p. 34.