1 / 19

JFC Naples OA September 2004 Suzanne Harrison

ISMOR 21 – Session B Interacting with an ever changing Decision-Maker (With a current example from KFOR). JFC Naples OA September 2004 Suzanne Harrison. Framework. Introduction Issues to consider when providing support to ever-changing decision-maker Continuity Project phases Assumptions

isaura
Download Presentation

JFC Naples OA September 2004 Suzanne Harrison

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ISMOR 21 – Session BInteracting with an ever changing Decision-Maker(With a current example from KFOR) JFC Naples OA September 2004 Suzanne Harrison

  2. Framework • Introduction • Issues to consider when providing support to ever-changing decision-maker • Continuity • Project phases • Assumptions • Tools and techniques • Deliverables • Final Comments

  3. Introduction • Operational HQs • Ever-changing decision-maker (4 - 6 mths) • Short-term OA support (provided in a single rotation) • Single customer • Re-use of tools at a later stage in operation • Long-term OA support • Multiple customers • Evolving situation

  4. Current KFOR MOP Process Measure 1 Measure 2 Task 1 . . . . Task 2 Measure m Line of Operation . . . . Task n Initially assessed by military staff on 4-6 month tour

  5. Aiding Continuity within the HQ • Inconsistencies due to: • Assumptions • Approaches / views • OA provides continuity by: • Developing tools and techniques • Structuring processes E.g. based on statistical techniques E.g. assumptions on direction of positive trend

  6. Manageable Phases • Fear of level of work required • Staff rotation – “own” a phase • KFOR MOP process developed in phases • Analysis of trends • Identification of threshold ranges • Development of weighting system • Earlier phases may require review

  7. Assumptions • Steep learning curves • Expose analytical assumptions at appropriate level • Ensure analysis is well-documented for other analysts

  8. Weighting System Tool

  9. KFOR MOP Weightings Assumptions Weighted Measures for KMT2 11% 31% 11% 21% 26% • Underlying assumptions: “Strongly Agree = 3 times as important” “Agree = 2 times as important” Assumptions visible to staff

  10. Tools and Techniques • Key characteristics • Transparent • Auditable • Adaptable • Repeatable

  11. Tools and Techniques: Transparent • Assists with steep learning curve • Limit use of “black box” models • Enhances ability to audit analysis

  12. Tools and Techniques: Auditable Input Data Assumptions Briefing / Deliverable

  13. Example of KFOR MOP Assessment Results ?

  14. KFOR MOP Audit Process Measures define the task? Review entire process No Yes Thresholds represent end state? Review Threshold Ranges No Identified by Staff Yes Weightings represent mission requirements? Review Weighting System No Yes Explanation of analysis results

  15. Tools and Techniques: Adaptable and Repeatable • Adapt due to changes: • Required by new staff • In situation / mission • Repeat analysis • Based on changes • Sensitivity analysis to assess effect of change

  16. KFOR MOP Process: Adaptable and Repeatable Lines of Operation Success Criteria Tasks Sub Criteria Measures

  17. Deliverables • Clearly understandable • Self-explanatory • Stand-alone

  18. Final Comments • Good OA practices • Customer relations are key factor Practices NOT comprehensible = Ineffective OA Support

  19. ?

More Related