Introductory Notes

The Decision Analysis and Resolution process area involves establishing guidelines to determine which issues should be subjected to a formal evaluation process and then applying formal evaluation processes to these issues.

A formal evaluation process is a structured approach to evaluating alternative solutions against established criteria to determine a recommended solution to address an issue. A formal evaluation process involves the following actions:

• Establishing the criteria for evaluating alternatives

• Identifying alternative solutions

• Selecting methods for evaluating alternatives

• Evaluating the alternative solutions using the established criteria and methods

• Selecting recommended solutions from the alternatives based on the evaluation criteria

Rather than using the phrase "alternative solutions to address issues" each time it is needed, we will use one of two shorter phrases: "alternative solutions" or "alternatives."

A formal evaluation process reduces the subjective nature of the decision and has a higher probability of selecting a solution that meets the multiple demands of the relevant stakeholders.

While the primary application of this process area is for selected technical concerns, formal evaluation processes can also be applied to many nontechnical issues, particularly when a project is being planned. Issues that have multiple alternative solutions and evaluation criteria lend themselves to a formal evaluation process.

Trade studies of equipment or software are typical examples of formal evaluation processes.

During planning, specific issues requiring a formal evaluation process are identified. Typical issues include selection among architectural or design alternatives, use of reusable or commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components, supplier selection, engineering support environments or associated tools, test environments, and logistics and production. A formal evaluation process can also be used to address a make-or-buy decision, the development of manufacturing processes, the selection of distribution locations, and other decisions.

Guidelines are created for deciding when to use formal evaluation processes to address unplanned issues. Guidelines often suggest using formal evaluation processes when issues are associated with medium to high risks or when issues affect the ability to achieve project objectives.

Formal evaluation processes can vary in formality, type of criteria, and methods employed. Less formal decisions can be analyzed in a few hours, use only a few criteria (e.g., effectiveness and cost to implement), and result in a one- or two-page report. More formal decisions may require separate plans, months of effort, meetings to develop and approve criteria, simulations, prototypes, piloting, and extensive documentation.

Both numeric and non-numeric criteria can be used in a formal evaluation process. Numeric criteria use weights to reflect the relative importance of the criteria. Non-numeric criteria use a more subjective ranking scale (e.g., high, medium, low). More formal decisions may require a full trade study.

A formal evaluation process identifies and evaluates alternative solutions. The eventual selection of a solution may involve iterative activities of identification and evaluation. Portions of identified alternatives may be combined, emerging technologies may change alternatives, and the business situation of vendors may change during the evaluation period.

A recommended alternative is accompanied by documentation of the selected methods, criteria, alternatives, and rationale for the recommendation. The documentation is distributed to the relevant stakeholders; it provides a record of the formal evaluation process and rationale that is useful to other projects that encounter a similar issue.

Table . Practice-to-Goal Relationship Table

Continuous Representation	Staged Representation
SG 1 Evaluate Alternatives	SG 1 Evaluate Alternatives
SP 1.1-1 Establish Guidelines for Decision Analysis	SP 1.1-1 Establish Guidelines for Decision Analysis
SP 1.2-1 Establish Evaluation Criteria	SP 1.2-1 Establish Evaluation Criteria
SP 1.3-1 Identify Alternative Solutions	SP 1.3-1 Identify Alternative Solutions
SP 1.4-1 Select Evaluation Methods	SP 1.4-1 Select Evaluation Methods
SP 1.5-1 Evaluate Alternatives	SP 1.5-1 Evaluate Alternatives
SP 1.6-1 Select Solutions	SP 1.6-1 Select Solutions
GG 1 Achieve Specific Goals
GP 1.1 Perform Base Practices
GG 2 Institutionalize a Managed Process	GG 3 Institutionalize a Defined Process
GP 2.1 Establish an Organizational Policy	GP 2.1 Establish an Organizational Policy
GP 2.2 Plan the Process	GP 2.2 Plan the Process
GP 2.3 Provide Resources	GP 2.3 Provide Resources
GP 2.4 Assign Responsibility	GP 2.4 Assign Responsibility
GP 2.5 Train People	GP 2.5 Train People
GP 2.6 Manage Configurations	GP 2.6 Manage Configurations
GP 2.7 Identify and Involve Relevant Stakeholders	GP 2.7 Identify and Involve Relevant Stakeholders
GP 2.8 Monitor and Control the Process	GP 2.8 Monitor and Control the Process
GP 2.9 Objectively Evaluate Adherence	GP 2.9 Objectively Evaluate Adherence
GP 2.10 Review Status with Higher Level Management	GP 2.10 Review Status with Higher Level Management
GG 3 Institutionalize a Defined Process
GP 3.1 Establish a Defined Process	GP 3.1 Establish a Defined Process
GP 3.2 Collect Improvement Information	GP 3.2 Collect Improvement Information
GG 4 Institutionalize a Quantitatively Managed Process
GP 4.1 Establish Quantitative Objectives for the Process
GP 4.2 Stabilize Subprocess Performance
GG 5 Institutionalize an Optimizing Process
GP 5.1 Ensure Continuous Process Improvement
GP 5.2 Correct Root Causes of Problems