Draft:DAWM Methodology Workshop

• Comment: Please ensure a neutral point of view is adhered to. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:25, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: See WP:COI. Greenman (talk) 08:43, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

---

Integrated Deliverable Approach Workshop Methodology with Idea Evaluation

Workshops are a recognised method for developing strategies. The workshops are frequently employed as part of scenario planning or future growth strategies. Their objectives include providing insights into future scenarios, encouraging strategic planning, promoting growth opportunities, enhancing team collaboration, improving skills, sharing research findings and addressing conflicts.

The Deliverable Approach Workshop Methodology (DAWM) is a structured framework for organising business processes. It is designed to guide teams through complex situations by promoting collaboration—reaching for a shared vision. In any dynamic business environment.

Workshop Overview?

DAWM Workshops are collaborative meetings involving technical staff, stakeholders, and management, concentrating on tasks related to business growth, project management, planning, requirement specification, and user experience design. The facilitator role is crucial in the DAWM, as they guide communication and collaboration among participants, thereby enhancing the overall productivity and effectiveness of the workshop.

Three cycles from DAWM Methodology

Success of Facilitated Workshops

The DAWM workshop methodology consists of three distinct cycles, each playing a unique role in business strategy.

1. "What it is?": Addressing current circumstances.

2. "What it might be?": Exploring potential future scenarios.

3. "Strategy": Focussing on the overall corporate approach and risk management.

DAWM Workshops

The Deliverable Approach Workshop Methodology (DAWM) is a structured format for workshops that integrates both qualitative and quantitative methods, typically accommodates up to twelve participants, including one facilitator and an assistant.

The DAWM workshop utilises the BRIDGE and CRUX approaches to support verbal presentation with a one-page handout and a forum for questions. The facilitator is required to allocate time for participants to share their thoughts and suggestions, prompt passive attendees, and disseminate key points to colleagues. Following the workshop, the facilitator instructs the group to document additional input in a survey report and utilises the box-to-box methodology for analysis.

Workshop Crux Analysis Approach

The Crux methodology utilised a structured framework to ensure that the most critical issues are central to strategic decision-making. A systematic approach to identifying, prioritising, and addressing challenges is essential for navigating the complexities of modern business environments. Involved the relevant stakeholders and methodically breaking down and prioritising challenges by importance, the business can develop more effective strategies that align with their core values and long-term goals. The implementation of the Crux methodology is analysed in seven steps:

1. Identifying Challenges: Gathering input from stakeholders to list challenges.

2. Decomposing Challenges: Breaking down challenges into manageable components.

3. Clustering Related Challenges: Group related challenges to identify common themes.

4. Filtering Challenges: Eliminating less critical issues.

5. Prioritising Challenges: Sequencing challenges based on importance and urgency.

6. Rating the Importance of Challenges: Assessing the potential impact of each challenge.

7. Identifying Crux Challenges: Focussing on significant, difficult-to-solve challenges.

CRUX Results for Deliverables

The CRUX analytical approach enables companies to transform various challenges into a prioritised list of actionable items. Focussing on the most critical issues—those representing significant threats or opportunities—organisations can better align their strategic initiatives. This approach to the methodology ensures that immediate concerns are promptly addressed while also supporting long-term strategic objectives.

Crux Matrix analyses

Evaluation Key

MCDA Processing

Increase business priority evaluation to manage resources efficiently and make timely decisions. The Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) is employed for assessing product creativity, despite potential challenges related to time and subjectivity. Contextualisation aids in concept selection during creative workshops through Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), assisting decision-makers in finding optimal compromises where no single perfect solution exists.

The evaluation process involves defining the context, assessing ideas, processing with MCDA, and debating outcomes, addressing various contextual aspects and criteria such as originality and feasibility. Successful ideas must meet criteria such as:

1. Applicability.
2. Value.
3. Feasibility.
4. Innovation.

which decision-makers or industry experts select or customize.

The various approaches to weight elicitation ensure balanced evaluations. These approaches include individual assessment, expertise-based criteria assessment, and consensus evaluation.

The comprehensively facilitate idea assessment through individual, aggregated, or consensus-based evaluations, culminating in prioritised action on urgent challenges and organised clustering of issues.

The MCDA processing assists the decision-making based on multiple criteria, consider a collection$A=\{a_{1}\ldots a_{m}\}$ of m alternatives that need to be ranked and a set $F=\{f_{1}\ldots f_{n}\}$of n criteria to be optimised. The outcome of the multi-criteria decision problem can be represented as a decision matrix $(m\times n)$ where each element indicates the assessment or value of the alternative ai according to the criterion $f_{j}$. The approach is succinctly described as follows:

Each criterion is used to evaluate alternatives by comparing them pairwise. The preference is expressed as a numerical value on a scale from 0 to 1, where 0 denotes no preference or indifference and 1 indicates a strong preference.

The decision-maker determines the generalised criterion, which quantifies the difference in performance or preference. $f_{j}$ represents a generalised preference function $P_{j}(d)$ where: $d=\{f_{j}(a_{i})-f_{j}(a_{k})\}$

• A weighting vector quantifies the relative significance of each condition:

$W=\{W_{1}\ldots W_{2}\}$

• For all of the alternatives, the preference relation π is as follows:

$\pi ={\begin{cases}&\mathrm {A} \times \mathrm {A} \rightarrow [0,1]\\\pi (a_{i},a_{k})&\textstyle \sum _{j=1}^{n}W_{j}P_{j}[f_{j}(a_{i})-f_{j}(a_{k})]\displaystyle \end{cases}}$

• To calculate the uni-criterion flows, analyse the valued outranking graph and determine the flow leaving each node α, as described by:

$\phi ^{+}(a_{i})={\tfrac {1}{n}}\textstyle \sum _{i=({\mathit {\neq \mathrm {K} }})}^{n}\displaystyle \pi (a_{i},a_{k})$

• And the flow that is coming in is:

$\phi ^{-}(a_{i})={\tfrac {1}{n}}\textstyle \sum _{i=({\mathit {\neq \mathrm {K} }})}^{n}\displaystyle \pi (a_{i},a_{k})$

• Calculation of business flow:

$\phi (a_{i})=\phi ^{+}(a_{i})-\phi ^{-}(a_{i})$

Integrating MCDA with DAWM

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) approach aims to recommend outcomes that closely align with the expectations of the decision-maker. These results are derived through deductive reasoning and mathematical computations using a template matrix intended for consultation purposes.

Ultimate responsibility for deciding which ideas and activities to pursue lies with the individual tasked with making the decision. The outcomes serve as a foundation for integrated discussions within the Deliverable Approach Workshop Methodology (DAWM) among decision-makers, specialists, and stakeholders during the implementation phase. Facilitated a balanced integration of intellectual processes and instinctual decision-making, taking into account validated considerations of business risks and competitors.

A study of the risk matrix for a startup shows that the company's risk management department can adjust the ratings in the matrix to ensure they align with the organisation's overall structure and strategic objectives. This adaptability provides a tailored approach to risk management, addressing the specific needs and priorities of the startup.

Risk analyeses

Rating	Probability	Impact scale
0.2	Low	No real impact
0.4	Medium	Smal to medium reduction cost or time
0.6	Medium-High	Medium to large reduction the cost or time
0.8	High	Unacceptable over budget or behind schedule <20%
1	Fact	Unacceptable over budget or behind schedule ≥20%

• Insert risk impact weight in the MCDA:

$R(a_{i})=\phi (a_{i})*r$

• Performed the DAWM:
  1. The Deliverable Approach Workshop Methodology (DAWM) has been finalized by incorporating competitor analyses using a matrix approach that ranges from low to high, or 0% to 100%.
  2. In this context, the alternative with the highest score is preferred, irrespective of minor differences between alternatives.
  3. Rankings were determined by sequentially evaluating ideas proposed by each participant group and calculating averages to ascertain net flows.
  4. Subsequently, rankings were established by computing combined scores based on specified preferences and weights, resulting in overall flows.
  5. Business growth is associated with risk reduction and the avoidance of less critical areas of growth.