It may be interesting to note that Augustine himself was strongly opposed to this sort of exercise.
I think tossing scoring charts back and forth is a waste unless reasons for the scores are included. Otherwise we're just arguing over nonsense numbers. Additionally, putting in a weighted category called "Additional Factors" without describing them is pretty much an open invitation to skew results.
[T]here are more rigourous and logical ways to use judgement to rank options. I've never used them but, as an Operational Researcher, I am aware of their existance and their widespread use in 'Soft OR'.
Could you perhaps outline these techniques or provide some references?
The "QFD" technique is tricky to learn but is really good at choosing among alternatives like this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_function_deployment
Quote from: sbt on 10/11/2009 10:56 pm[T]here are more rigourous and logical ways to use judgement to rank options. I've never used them but, as an Operational Researcher, I am aware of their existance and their widespread use in 'Soft OR'.Could you perhaps outline these techniques or provide some references?
Some interesting techniques to help you reach a reasonable consensus when estimates are subjective:
I expect the people making the decision will apply binary weights to each rating:Politically acceptable: 1Politically unacceptable: 0
It's straining credulity to believe that the only politically acceptable action in 2005 was to sponsor the Ares I/V rockets.