Analytical  Procedure  in  Decision-­‐Making  

Operations   Instruments  

A.  What  is  the  situation/problem?    

1.  Data  -­‐>  Guess  -­‐>  Judgment  of  Fact  2.  What  institutions  are  involved?  

1.  Sources  of  Evidence  2.  Notion  of  schemes  of  recurrence  3.  Formulation  of  diagnosis  

B.  Why  is  it  a  significant  problem?    

1.  Identifying  parties  affected  2.  Identifying  claims,  Preferred  outcomes  &  obligations  3.  Judgment  of  value  

1.  Forms  of  bias  2.  Ends  and  purposes  3.  Formulation  of  purpose  

C.  What  can  be  done?    

1.  Identifying  options  2.  Consequences  of  each  option?  3.  Reliability  of  theories?  Real  possibilities?  4.  Judgment  of  fact  

1.  Playing  Devil’s  Advocate  2.  Predictions  &  theories  3.  Precedents  &  checklist  of  fallacies  4.  Formulation  of  means  

D.  What  should  be  done  and  why?    

1.  Which  option  preferred  &  why?  2.  How  are  goods  ranked?  3.  Deciding/choosing  

1.  Principle  of  equality  2.  Comparative  principle  3.  Formulation  of  policy  

E.  Implementing  the  decision    

1.  Monitoring  outcomes  2.  Making  adjustments  

1.  Appraisal  2.  Policy  revisions  

 

Format  for  the  Presentations  

A.  Sketch  of  the  policy  proposal  

  I.  What  is  the  situation/problem?  

    a.  What  is  your  diagnosis  of  the  situation?       b.  What  schemes  of  recurrence  are  involved?       c.  What  evidence  is  there  that  a  problem  exists?  

  II.  Why  is  it  a  significant  problem?  

    a.  What  parties  or  institutions  are  affected?       b.  What  are  their  interests,  preferred  outcomes  and  obligations?       c.  What  is  the  purpose  or  end  of  your  proposal?  

  III.  What  can  be  done?  

    a.  What  options  or  means  could  achieve  the  purpose?       b.  What  consequences  do  you  predict  for  each  of  them?       c.  What  theories  are  you  relying  on  for  these  predictions?       d.  How  reliable  are  these  theories?  

  IV.  What  should  be  done?  

    a.  What  option  do  you  recommend?       b.  Why  do  you  choose  it?       c.  Formulate  your  reasons  as  a  comparative  principle  

B.  Defense  of  competent  performance  

1. How  well  did  I  check  for  competing  obligations  amid  schemes  of  recurrence?  2. How  well  did  I  check  for  bias,  for  oversights  of  excluded  parties,  for  

unexpected  consequences?  3. How  well  did  I  try  to  imagine  creative  alternatives  to  the  more  commonly  

recognized  options?  4. What  questions  did  I  ask  about  the  reliability  of  the  theories?  5. Why  do  I  think  the  ranking  of  goods  “behind”  my  choice  is  best?  6. Finally:  ask  the  audience  whether  they  agree  with  the  proposal