[Sample B: Approval/Signature Sheet] - George Mason University

Keeney and Winterfeldt point out that ―not always it is necessary or useful to
construct a ‗state – of – the art‘ value model, completely justified on theoretical
grounds.‖ 101 They claim that
Approximations may do well both in modeling and assessment. The choice of
value models and assessment procedures is a function of the characteristic of the
decision being faced, the characteristics of the decision maker or makers, the time
available for the process, and the skills of the analyst that is facilitating the
process. 102
The methodology used to construct the hierarchy followed all the steps to ensure
that the objectives generated were fundamental objectives and not means objectives, thus
the additive utility function was considered to be a reasonable assumption.
This approach made possible the use a simpler method to assess the independence
conditions. The process was done by verifying the independence assumptions among the
attributes stemming from each fundamental objective.
X
Figure 25. A Hierarchy of Objectives for a Hypothetical Problem. 103
101
Winterfeldt and Keeney, ―Practical Value Models,‖ 233.
102
Ibid.
103
Keeney and Raiffa, Decisions with Multiple Objectives, 332.
Y 1
Y 2
57
X 1
X 2
X 3
X 4
X 5