Expert methods in the study of control systems. Expert analysis

Lecture questions

Prerequisites for peer review

History of peer reviews

Model formation

Heuristic modeling methods

4.1. Matrix Methods

4.2. Graph Methods

4.3. Hierarchy of factors

4.4. Model Properties

4.5. Model Quality Management

5. Setting up an expert survey

6. Methods for evaluating expert assessments

Prerequisites for peer review

In the theory and practice of modern management, the following categories of tasks can be distinguished: analysis, evaluation, forecasting, optimization, planning, choice, etc. The state of the exact sciences today allows us to perform a clear mathematical formulation for each of them and list the formal methods for solving them.

The use of mathematical models allows you to reproduce the real world (or at least part of it - a control object or a control system). However, the model in practice may not be as adequate as we would like and may not always reflect the full diversity of real life, the manifestations of which are much more complex than we think about it. The main reason for complexity is the limitedness of our knowledge about the world (the interpretation of complexity as the degree of our ignorance was proposed by I. Prigogine, who defined a complex system as a system whose behavior may be unexpected for us and for which we do not have an adequate model).

Complexity of real tasks appears in the following.

Variety of factors. Any modeling involves the identification of a finite set of objects (elements of the system), their properties and factors acting in the problem. At the same time, it is not known how many factors we missed.

quality nature. Often the factors and properties of an object cannot be measured and quantified.

Random character. Fuzzy sets and unaccounted factors in the model are the sources of the random nature of almost all real analyzed processes. The random component is present everywhere.

Fuzziness of criteria. The lack of information and the uncertainty of the model give rise to another problem - the blurring of the goal. If ideas about the goal are fuzzy, there is a problem to formulate clear criteria, especially if the expected result is estimated approximately, and the task to be solved is associated with risk.

High price. These difficulties can be overcome, but this requires a lot of labor, attracting highly qualified specialists, investing significant funds and a long time.

All of these points are not a problem for a person acting on the basis of his own informal knowledge, experience and intuition. Only a person is capable of solving vaguely formulated tasks, generating ideas, creating abstract images, anticipating unaccounted for events, acting in conditions of incomplete and unreliable information.

History of peer reviews

The word "expert" is of Latin origin and means "experienced", "knowledgeable". Scientific methods of expert assessments were developed in the second half of the 20th century.

The first steps - 1930 - a group of American psychologists developed methods for peer review of the study of the influence of an expert's interest on the nature of judgments about future socio-political events.

In the postwar period, the impetus for the development of expert methods was the numerous works related to the system analysis of complex problems (the Delphi method). The first practical application of this method to solving the problems of evaluating weapons systems of the US Department of Defense was made by the RAND Corporation in 1947. The ideas of this analysis were used in 1952 in the development of the B-58 supersonic bomber, strategic missile systems and air defense systems.

In the civil area, the tasks of expert analysis were:

development of policy in the field of use of water resources;

research into supersonic transport aviation;

study of the development of the atomic merchant fleet;

analysis of the strategy for the construction of nuclear power plants in Europe.

A significant contribution to the theory of expert assessments was made by M. Kendall, who published in 1955 a monograph on the application of the rank correlation method for the analysis of expert assessments.

In the mid-1960s, peer-reviewed methods for solving complex problems such as resource allocation emerged. The most famous among them are PATTERN and QUEST.

Main classes of modern problems, in the solution of which expert estimates are used.

examination credibility tree goal

Expert methods of analysis in the study of socio-economic and political systems occupy a special place in the display and evaluation of social processes.

In general, two groups of expert assessments can be distinguished: individual and collective:

Individual expert methods used in forecasting in relatively narrow areas of science and practice. They are based on the use of expert opinions independent of each other. The information that the customer receives from the expert is unique and focused on the problem of a local nature.

1. Method of garlands and associations.

The scope of this method can be a complex problem situation, poorly studied, in relation to which there is no prevailing opinion. The method can only be implemented under the condition; big preliminary work, which consists in a deep study of the properties of analogues of the object under study, the expediency of their involvement, the formation of the psychological attitude of experts, etc.

2. The method of paired comparisons.

Based on a simple comparison, by an expert alternatives, from which he must choose the most preferable. The method allows taking into account the equivalence or fundamental incomparability of the presented alternatives, and therefore they are excluded from the analysis. In the course of such a comparison, the expert not only selects best options, but also formulates criteria that allow such a choice to be made, emphasizing the properties and characteristics of the selected alternative.

3. Method of preference vectors.

When used, the expert is presented with the entire set of evaluated alternative options and is asked to indicate for each of them how many alternative options he is ahead of. The information obtained can be represented as a vector, one of whose components is the number of alternatives that are superior to the first, the second component is the number of alternatives that are superior to the second, and so on. This method can also be used in collective expertise, presenting a collective view of the ratio of the alternatives under consideration.

4. Method of focal objects.

The distinguishing feature of this method is that it completely excludes quantitative approach and is aimed mainly at focusing the researcher's attention on the so-called focal object, which serves as the basis for comparison with the objects that make up the field of directed random search.

5. Individual expert survey.

It is possible in the form of an interview or in the form of an analysis of expert assessments.

The interview method means a conversation between the customer and the expert, during which the customer, in accordance with the developed program, poses questions to the expert, the answers to which are significant for achieving the program goals. The analysis of expert assessments involves the individual filling in by the expert (experts) of the form developed by the customer, based on the results of which a comprehensive analysis of the problem situation is carried out and possible ways in her decision. The expert submits his considerations in the form of a separate document, compiled on the basis of a thorough examination of the object.

6. Midpoint method.

Used in large quantities alternative solutions. For this, two alternative solutions are formulated, one of which is the least preferable, the second is the most. After that, the expert is asked to choose the third alternative, the assessment of which is located between the values of the first and second alternatives. The procedure is completed when the relative preference of all the alternatives involved in the examination is determined.

7. Churchman-Akoff method.

In accordance with this method, all alternative options are ranked by preference, and the expert assigns quantitative estimates to each of them. The advantage of this method is that experts allow adjustments during the discussion of alternative options. If one option is more preferable than the other, then their values are summed up.

8. Method of lotteries.

According to the method, the available alternatives are distributed in descending order of preference.

Collective expert assessments are used when predicting objects and processes that are interdisciplinary in nature.

Collective methods are the most effective in terms of achieving maximum objectivity of peer review, since they involve the use of a wide and representative circle of specialists. In general, the methods of organizing the collective generation of ideas can be divided into several types.

1. Brainstorming.

The main objective " brainstorming» is to stimulate the creative process of generating ideas, which is possible in the conditions of collective discussion. The method allows in an uncertain situation to develop maximum amount possible solutions, focusing the attention of the participants on the problem under discussion. characteristic feature This method is a procedure for separating the stage of generating ideas from the stage of their evaluation. The main advantage of the brainstorming method is the focus on finding non-standard solutions that can be realized with the most open and free mode of discussing the problem. Such a mode of discussion allows not only to identify possible directions in solving urgent problems, but also to form a group of people with high creative abilities, which is extremely important for any type of organization.

2. Methodology of the courts.

The essence of the technique lies in such an organization of the discussion of the problem situation in the group, when one side develops independent proposals, and the other gives critiques to all these proposals. The use of this technique reproduces a court scenario in which there is a contest between the prosecution and the defense. The purpose of the methodology is to identify the most reasoned and optimal solution obtained during a thorough examination.

A characteristic feature of the methodology of the courts is its role-playing, which allows the participants in the discussion to fully express themselves in the organizational process, realizing in it not only their own place, but also the place of other services and job functions.

3. Black box method.

The main advantage of the "black box" method is to minimize the possible influence of stakeholders on the adoption of inefficient decisions. The method aims at the allocation of a special analytical center, which draws a conclusion exclusively on the developments of independent experts who evaluate the prospects for making decisions on a specific list of problems.

4. Method of heuristic forecasting.

The use of this method involves the involvement of highly specialized experts, who, on the basis of previously developed questionnaires and tables, should develop a general model of the object under study. Thus, the method of heuristic forecasting is a method of obtaining and specialized processing of predictive estimates of an object through a systematic survey of highly qualified specialists (experts) in a narrow field of science, technology or production. Forecast expert assessments reflect the individual judgment of a specialist regarding the prospects for the development of his field and are based on mobilization professional experience and intuition.

5. Synectic method.

One of the advantages of the synectic method is the ability to achieve consolidation between different levels management involved in the peer review process. The application of the method is appropriate due to the fact that during the adoption of expert assessments, the discussion of problems takes place between representatives of the same level, which allows them to speak frankly and balancedly.

At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the opinion of not only representatives of the highest levels of government, who can often have very general idea about the object of assessment, but also ordinary performers, whose knowledge about the object is very valuable and practically significant.

The synectic method is significant in the practice of Japanese enterprises, where the factor of personnel involvement in decision-making is given great importance. Thanks to the consolidation of interests between expert levels, not only social stability is achieved, but unique way understanding and solving current problems.

6. Method of diaries.

A characteristic feature of this method is its impersonality and ultimate objectivity. The implementation of the method is possible only in the presence of documentary sources, according to which the act of examination is carried out exclusively. Most often, the method is used in a management structure with a strictly regulated system. job descriptions. The object of expert evaluation is, as a rule, a shift log, instructive documents, on the basis of which recommendations are developed to improve the activities of enterprises.

7. Delphi Method

It is the most popular of the expert methods, and its popularity is directly related to the heuristic capabilities of the method itself, which allow solving complex complex problems.

The essence of the method lies in the consistent questioning of the opinions of experts on the problem of interest to the organizers of the examination.

The method involves a series of interviews with experts who do not have the opportunity to enter into direct contact with each other and receive information about the conclusions of others only from their written reports. The purpose of the method is to make an objective and accurate assessment of existing alternatives in order to make optimal and socially acceptable decisions.

Expert assessment is the name of a whole system of diagnostic methods that are extremely widely used in management, economic analysis, psychology, marketing and other fields. These methods allow characterizing, classifying, assigning a certain rank or rating to events and concepts that cannot be quantified.

When is an expert opinion needed?

In the course of any study at any of its stages, method B can be applied. management activities it might come in handy:

At the stage of defining the goals and objectives of the research process.
During the construction or testing of a hypothesis.
To clarify a problem. To interpret ongoing processes and events.
To justify the adequacy of the tools used.
To generate recommendations, as well as to implement many other goals.

Conducting an expert assessment is justified in cases where it is impossible to make a decision based on accurate calculations (for compiling a psychological portrait, performance characteristics, assessing economic uncertainty and risks).

Most often, the use of such estimates becomes important in the situation of choosing one or more options from the proposed set:

Launch of mass production of one of the developed product variants.
Selection of astronauts from numerous applicants.
scientific work to be funded.
Selection of the enterprise that will receive the environmental credit.
Definition investment project for financial investment.

Who are experts and how do they work?

As the name of the method implies, peer review involves the involvement of one or more specialist experts who are competent to make assessments of individuals, as well as the processing of their opinions. Selection of experts is carried out taking into account the adequacy of their judgments and experience in this field.

Expert evaluation can be expressed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Expert research data is needed by executives, managers and executives as a basis for decision-making.

The development of an expert assessment is most often carried out by creating a working group that organizes the activities of an expert (or several experts). If you have to involve more than one person, they are combined into an expert commission.

How many experts will be needed?

Depending on the specifics of the task and the capabilities of the enterprise, one or more experts may be invited to conduct an expert assessment. In this case, the expert assessment is called individual or collective.

An assessment becomes individual, by which the teacher characterizes the depth of the student's knowledge. This type also includes a diagnosis made by one doctor. However, if there are disputes or difficult situations(serious illness, raising the question of expulsion of a student), resort to a collective solution of the issue. Symposiums of physicians and the organization of a commission of teachers are needed here.

The same algorithm operates in the army: most often the decision is made by the commander alone, but if necessary, they convene a military council.

Sequence of the assessment procedure

The sequence of formation of an up-to-date and objective expert assessment consists of the following steps:

conduct to be investigated.
Selection of experts for the procedure.
The study existing methods, which will be used to measure expert assessments.
Conducting the evaluation process.
Consolidation and analysis of information obtained during the assessment.

In this case, it may be necessary to perform verification of the input data on which the expert assessment will be based. In some cases, the working group has to change the composition of the expert group or resort to re-measuring the same questions (in order to later compare the obtained assessment with objective data from other sources).

Assessment progress: characteristics of the stages

Of great importance for the successful implementation of the procedure is the competent solution of organizational issues:

Cost planning for the event (payment for the services of experts and specialists in the analysis of the data received, the cost of renting a room, buying stationery).
Training necessary materials(compilation and printing of forms, provision of inventory).
Selection and briefing of the moderator of the event.

In the process of work, experts should be guided by the allocated regulations, since additional time for making a decision does not affect its accuracy.

When all specialists have answered, an assessment is carried out expert opinion. This takes into account the degree of agreement of all opinions. If there is no unequivocal agreement, the working group should find out the reason for the disagreement, fix the formation of several groups of opinions and the lack of agreement as a result of peer review. Then the research error is estimated and the model is built based on the data that were obtained. This is necessary in order to subsequently be able to conduct an analytical examination.

Methods used to conduct an individual peer review: what is an interview

Among the most effective and frequently used methods are:

analytical way.
Screenwriting method.
Interview.

In accordance with the interview methodology, the forecaster talks with the expert, asking him questions. The subject of conversation is the prospects for the development of an object or phenomenon, about which in question. The questionnaire program is developed in advance.

The effectiveness and quality of an expert assessment directly depend on whether the expert can provide an opinion in a limited time.

Conducting an examination by the analytical method

When choosing an analytical method to carry out an assessment, the specialist expert must prepare for a thorough implementation. independent work. He will have to analyze trends, assess the state and possible ways of development of the object in relation to which forecasting is applied.

The system of expert assessments provides for the study of all information about the object that is available to the expert. The result is formatted as

Main advantage analytical method it becomes that a specialist can show all his individual abilities.

True, this method is not suitable for the analysis of large and complex systems, since the expert may lack knowledge from related areas.

Performing due diligence by writing scripts

Strictly speaking, this method should not be classified only in the category of individual assessment methods, since it is successfully applied to work in a group.

To use this method, the expert should determine the logic of the studied processes and phenomena with respect to time and different combinations conditions. Then he will be able to establish the expected sequence of events (their development, the transition from the situation at the moment to the predicted state). The scenario reflects all stages of solving the problem, and also provides for the occurrence of possible obstacles.

Collective expertise: the method of "brainstorming"

To assess complex, large-scale, multi-level systems, one cannot do without the involvement of several expert experts.

They can complete the assigned task using one of the following methods:

Collective generation of ideas ("brainstorming").
Method "635".
Delphi method.
Commission assessment.

Thanks to collective efforts and a special organization, experts can effectively carry out the most complex procedures, such as expert risk assessment for an investment project or forecasting the activity of various systems.

Brainstorming allows you to fully reveal the creative data of experts. At the first stage, specialists actively generate ideas, then apply destructuring (subject to criticism, destroy them), put forward counterideas and develop a consistent point of view.

The main condition is the absence of criticism at the beginning and the expression of all spontaneously arising ideas.

The specifics of the "635" method

This method got its name because of the technique that experts use when using it: each of the six experts writes down three spontaneous ideas on a piece of paper over a period of five minutes.

What is special about the Delphi method

The purpose of developing this method of peer review was the need for a more rigorous and reasonable procedure that could give an objective and most useful result.

It is used by experts invited to scientific and technical institutes, investment and insurance companies, as well as in a number of other cases.

The essence of the method is that they conduct multi-round individual surveys (often with the help of questionnaires). Then a computer analysis of expert assessments is performed to form a collective opinion. At the same time, arguments are identified and summarized to protect each judgment.

On the next step the obtained results are transferred to the experts for adjustments. Their disagreement with the collective judgment must be justified in writing. As a result of repeated return of the assessment for adjustment, the working group achieves a narrowing of the range and the development of a consistent judgment regarding the prospects for the development of the object under study.

What is good about the method:

The experts participating in the assessment do not know each other and do not communicate. Thus, their interaction is excluded.
The results of previous rounds are also of interest and value to the working group.
It is possible to get statistical characteristic group opinion.

Despite the relatively high cost and duration, this method becomes the best way predetermining the development of long-term problematic situations.

Quite often, the assessment is carried out by a specially organized commission (the method of commissions), which, for " round table» consider all aspects of the problem and make a consensus decision. The disadvantage is the influence of the participants on each other and the distortion of the results. An example is the expert teachers and doctors.

Other Methods

The most common methods for performing an examination were listed above, but others are also used in the practice of industrial, scientific and research organizations.

Depending on the specifics of the situation that needs to be predicted, as well as on the resources and capabilities of the enterprise, the following can be applied:

Business game. It allows you to model required amount situations to study the features of the control system or other processes.
"Court" - a mock trial in which some experts defend solutions, others try to refute them.
Report method - after the analysis, the expert expresses his opinion in the form of an analytical note or report. This is relevant when it is necessary to carry out relatively simple work (for example, an expert assessment of a car for insurance, taxation or damages).

As a result, it can be noted that the existence a large number methods and methods of conducting an expert assessment allows the head of the enterprise and the working group to choose the most effective option to solve a specific problem.

Expert methods are used in solving prognostic, analytical and design problems associated with non-formalizability and lack of certainty in ideas about organizational and economic objects.

The essence of this method: the experts conduct an intuitive-logical analysis of the problem with a qualitative assessment of the judgment and formal processing of the results.

Peculiarities of the method of expert evaluations: the need for a scientifically based organization of expertise, the use of quantitative methods to evaluate the qualitative judgments of experts.

The expert method can be used in determining the forecasts for the development of objects; when defining goals and objectives, alternative distribution of resources; when making decisions under conditions of uncertainty and risk.

The 1st stage of using this method is the formation of a group of experts. Properties that a specialist needs to include him in an expert group:

- competence (degree of qualification in a certain field of knowledge);

- creativity (the ability to solve creative problems);

– analyticity and breadth of thinking;

- constructiveness (the ability to form specific proposals);

– self-criticism of the expert;

relation to expertise.

For the formation of expert groups, testing, documentation and other methods can be used.

The testing method consists in the fact that on the basis of the developed tests, possible candidates are examined, and a group is formed based on the results of the answers.

The documentary method is the selection of experts according to their objective characteristics, which are contained in their personal documents (work experience, position, academic degree, number of publications, etc.).

Method of appointment - determination by the head of the group of experts from among the employees. The main drawback of the method: the opinion of employees can be consistent, but erroneous, expressing the official position of the organization on this issue (“school effect”). The results of the examination in this case are of interest mainly for internal use only.

The 2nd stage of application of the expert method is the examination.

This stage begins with the choice of a method for interviewing experts. There are individual, group and Delphi methods.

With an individual method, assessments are obtained from each expert through questionnaires or interviews, independent of the opinions of others. Then, after their generalization and processing, the overall, resulting assessment is determined. It is rational to use individual expertise when it is necessary to develop a point forecast of the state of an object, when ranking a set of objects, and in other cases when the most important qualities of an expert are his competence and constructiveness.

The group method provides for obtaining a summary assessment or a general decision from all experts at once through a joint discussion. Its use is expedient when searching for non-traditional solutions, when assessing the characteristics of little-studied objects, i.e., when it is necessary to obtain a creative solution. Group survey can be carried out through discussions, meetings, conferences, brainstorming.

The Delphi method synthesizes a number of positive features of individual and group expertise. Experts independently express their opinion in writing. The most important component of the method is carefully designed survey programs carried out in several rounds, and the regulation of questions at each subsequent round. At the end of each round, the group of organizers of the examination analyzes the answers received, summarizes them and prepares a bulletin based on the results of the round, with the text of which all experts get acquainted. At the same time, the information in the help is anonymous. During the second survey, experts receive questions that clarify the initial answers and formulated conclusions, taking into account the results of the previous round. In the third round, the experts are informed on which points there is a common opinion, the experts who expressed a different opinion from the others are asked to substantiate it. The fourth, most often the last, round repeats the procedure of the third. Thus, the area of divergence of opinion narrows and develops common decision.

The advantage of the Delphic method is that it reduces or completely eliminates such psychological factors as ostentatious conviction, unwillingness to refuse to publicly express one's opinion, and the influence of authority.

The 3rd stage of expert methods is the processing of the survey results.

To ensure the possibility of formal processing of the results of the examination, a numerical system is needed that describes the properties of objects and the relationship between them using quantitative parameters (various scales of names (classifications), orders, intervals, ratios, differences).

The naming scale is used to describe the belonging of an object to certain classes. Order scale - to measure the ordering of objects according to one or a number of features (rank scale). Interval scale - to display the magnitude of differences between the properties of objects. Relationship scale - to reflect the relationship of the properties of objects, for example, their weight. Scale of differences - if necessary, to determine how much one object is superior to another in one or more features.

The choice of the scale is determined by the tasks of the examination, the characteristics of the object, and the capabilities of the group.

When processing the results of the examination, the choice of the measurement method is important. The most common methods are: ranking, pairwise comparison, direct evaluation, sequential comparison.

The regulation must meet the following requirements: provide sufficient variety of wording; unity of the structure of the formulation (for example, the formulation should consistently answer the questions: what is needed? over what (with what)? for what?). The resulting formulations should fully reflect their most important content, i.e., have a significant capacity; wording should be done in such a way as to exclude discrepancies.

The problems of improving expert technologies are associated with the development of the following areas: the formation of an expert commission, the organization and conduct of examinations based on the use modern methods, the use of multi-criteria assessments in the interpretation of the results.

Expert Methods are used in solving prognostic, analytical and design problems associated with non-formalizability and lack of certainty in ideas about organizational and economic objects. The essence of this method: the experts conduct an intuitive-logical analysis of the problem with a qualitative assessment of the judgment and formal processing of the results. Features of the method of expert assessments: the need for a scientifically based organization of expertise, application quantitative methods to assess the qualitative judgments of experts.

expert method can be used in determining the forecasts for the development of objects; when defining goals and objectives, alternative distribution of resources; when making decisions under conditions of uncertainty and risk.

1st stage use of this method - the formation of a group of experts. Properties that a specialist needs to be included in an expert group.

Competence (degree of qualification in a certain field of knowledge);

Creativity (ability to solve creative problems);

Analytical and breadth of thinking; constructiveness (the ability to form specific proposals);

Self-criticism of an expert; relation to expertise.

To form expert groups, testing, documentation and other methods can be used.

Test method consists in the fact that on the basis of the developed tests, possible candidates are examined, and a group is formed based on the results of the answers.

Documentation method- selection of experts according to their objective characteristics, which are contained in their personal documents (work experience, position, academic degree, number of publications, etc.).

Appointment method- determination by the head of the group of experts from among the employees. The main drawback of the method: the opinion of employees can be consistent, but erroneous, expressing the official position of the organization on this issue (“school effect”). The results of the examination in this case are of interest mainly for internal use only.

2nd stage application of the expert method - examination. This stage begins with the choice of a method for interviewing experts. There are individual, group and Delphic methods.

At individual way from each expert through questionnaires or interviews receive estimates that do not depend on the opinions of others. Then, after their generalization and processing, the overall, resulting assessment is determined. It is rational to use individual expertise when it is necessary to develop a point forecast of the state of an object, when ranking a set of objects, and in other cases when the most important qualities of an expert are his competence and constructiveness.

Group the method provides for obtaining a summary assessment or a general decision from all experts at once through a joint discussion. Its use is expedient when searching for non-traditional solutions, when assessing the characteristics of poorly studied objects, i.e. if you need a creative solution. Group survey can be carried out through discussions, meetings, conferences, brainstorming.

Delphi method synthesizes a series positive traits individual and group examinations. Experts independently express their opinion in writing. The most important component of the method is carefully designed survey programs carried out in several rounds, and the regulation of questions at each subsequent round. At the end of each round, the group of organizers of the examination analyzes the answers received, summarizes them and prepares a bulletin based on the results of the round, with the text of which all experts get acquainted. At the same time, the information in the help is anonymous. During the second survey, experts receive questions that clarify the initial answers and formulated conclusions, taking into account the results of the previous round. In the third round, the experts are informed on which points there is a common opinion, the experts who expressed a different opinion from the others are asked to substantiate it. The fourth, most often the last, round repeats the procedure of the third. Thus, the area of divergence of opinion narrows and a common solution is developed. The advantage of the Delphic method is that it reduces or completely eliminates such psychological factors as ostentatious conviction, unwillingness to refuse to publicly express one's opinion, and the influence of authority.

3 th stage expert methods - processing the results of the survey. To ensure the possibility of formal processing of the results of the examination, a numerical system is needed that describes the properties of objects and the relationship between them using quantitative parameters (various scales of names (classifications), orders, intervals, ratios, differences).

The choice of the scale is determined by the tasks of the examination, the characteristics of the object, and the capabilities of the group.

When processing the results of the examination, it is important to choose measurement method. The most common methods are: ranking, pairwise comparison, direct evaluation, sequential comparison.

The regulation must meet the following requirements: provide sufficient variety of wording; the unity of the structure of the formulation (for example, the formulation should consistently answer the questions: what is needed? over what (with what)? for what?) The resulting formulations should fully reflect their most important content, i.e. have a significant capacity; wording should be done in such a way as to exclude discrepancies.

The problems of improving expert technologies are related to the development of the following areas: the formation of an expert commission, the organization and conduct of examinations based on the use of modern methods, the use of multi-criteria assessments in interpreting the results.

25. HEURISTIC METHODS

Heuristic methods are based on logic, intuition and experience of decision makers (DM). These methods allow you to "catch" and use these processes in the development of alternatives. Depending on the approach used, heuristic methods are divided into formal heuristic and informal heuristic.

The basis of formal heuristic methods is the formalization of decision techniques challenging tasks human by modeling his thought processes. They include the method of evolutionary modeling, labyrinth methods, etc.

Evolutionary modeling assumes the presence of initial experience in the process of adopting SD. This experiential, informational material is needed to run the evolutionary model. Based on the existing experience, several solutions are being developed that allow one to approach the elimination of the problem and achieve the goal of the solution from different positions. Each option is examined based on predetermined criteria. In test mode, the initial reference solution(the "parent") is changed randomly, resulting in the production of a "child" (the generated idea). If the "descendant" is worse than the "parent", it is discarded, and a new "descendant" is born through the next mutation. If the "child" is better, then the "parent" is discarded, and the "child" takes its place, and the procedure is repeated again. The main advantage of this method is the ability to use computer science, which allows you to search quite quickly. However, it is impossible to get an outstanding, non-standard, creative solution.

Labyrinth methods are based on a step-by-step search followed by an assessment of the possible continuation of the path to eliminate the problem. If the direction is "dead-end", a return to the starting point occurs, and the process is repeated again until a path of further movement is found.

Conceptual modeling is based on the collection of initial information in the analysis of the situation and the construction of a structural model that allows you to isolate the most important elements relations. The main medium for achieving the goal is a structuring method based on the principle of decomposition (separation).

The basis of informal heuristic methods is the management of human intellectual activity. The need for such management is due to the peculiarities of his thinking (informality, the ability to generalize, to orientate in an uncertain situation, a tendency to scatter and lose information). To enhance the first three properties and neutralize the last two, psycho-intellectual generation of ideas is used.

The process of solving complex problems using the generation of ideas is carried out in the form of a focused, controlled conversation-discussion of two direct participants: the leader and the decisive one. The leader puts before decisive questions on which the decider must express his judgments. A discussion ensues around these judgments. Opponents and experts can be assigned to help the facilitator. The task of the opponents is to criticize the judgments of the decider and involve him in the discussion. The task of the experts is to help the facilitator evaluate the judgments and outline the consequences of further discussion. Several possible schemes for organizing idea generation sessions:

By the number of masters: polycontrol (several masters), monocontrol (one master), auto-generation (no master);

By the number of decisive ones: unilateral schemes (one decisive), multilateral schemes (many decisive ones);

By type of contact: with direct contact (in the same room), with indirect contact (through technical means).

Conditions for ensuring the purposefulness of idea generation:

It is necessary to ensure psychological comfort (creating the convenience of the workplace, high spirits and a sense of relaxedness of the decisive one);

Provide structuring of the process of finding a solution (develop a psychoheuristic program containing a list of issues under discussion, objectives of the discussion and recommendations);

Create information and technical support systems.

As a result of generation, a set of data should be obtained that make up the main information array or a field of possible solutions.

Based on the concept of psycho-intellectual generation of ideas whole line method of psychological activation. The choice of generation method is made depending on the nature of the task. When dealing with urgent issues best practices may be direct brainstorming or business games. In inventive creativity - varieties brainstorming and synectic methods. In the tasks of prognostics - questionnaire methods, morphological analysis, etc.

The method of nominal group technique is built on the principle of restrictions interpersonal communications, so all the members of the group who met to develop a solution, on initial stage express their proposals in writing independently, independently of others. Then each participant reports the essence of his project, the presented options are considered by the members of the group (without discussion and criticism), and only after that each member of the group, independently of the others, presents in writing the ranking of the considered ideas. The proposals with the highest score are taken as the basis for the decision. The peculiarity of this method and its advantage - despite joint work group members, there is no restriction of individual thinking.

The staggering attack technique can be applied to detect flaws, erroneous conclusions and conclusions in a study that is at the stage of completion. The meeting is attended by up to 50 people who are familiarized in advance with the working paper that is the subject of discussion. All participants speak in turn. The task of each speaker is to discover the possible more work shortcomings. The merits of the work and ways to eliminate shortcomings are not mentioned. The time of one performance is 1-3 minutes, it is forbidden to repeat the shortcomings noted by other participants. Sometimes it is advisable to hold a discussion in two circles, providing an opportunity for repeated speeches to those who wish to clarify their comments.

Rip attack is an active means of negative analysis. Therefore, the authors of the document under discussion should not be present at the discussion. The organization of a spacing attack is similar to a direct brain attack.

Synectic methods are based on the brainstorming method conducted by a special group of specialists who are distinguished by their flexibility of thinking and broad outlook. Such groups, accumulating techniques and experience, achieve positive results when finding new technical solutions.

Synectics- this is a method of forecasting by analogy, transferring conclusions regarding some signs from one subject to another. At the first stage, the leader sets the task, answers the questions of the group members. In the second stage, each of the participants offers their ideas, trying to look at problems from different points of view, thus overcoming "psychological inertia". The leader chooses one of them and forms its essence (key representations). On the third _, participants search for analogies to the key representation using known facts from other fields of knowledge. At the fourth stage, the leader tries to apply some of the analogies and ideas offered by the group members to the task at hand. Further, an expert assessment of the chosen direction is carried out, and if the conclusion is positive, the work continues until a decision is made.

Morphological methods when developing alternatives, this is an approach to establishing typical logical connections and interdependencies. Most often, this group of methods is used to identify possible options for technical, economic, organizational solutions.

under construction morphological table. The whole process of developing solution options in the table is presented in the area of three fields. The first field - information serves to designate all operations of collecting, pre-processing, storing and transmitting information. The analytical field represents operations related to the analysis of information and the choice of alternatives. In the target - conclusions, targets, restrictions and requirements for the solution are formed. All operations occurring in the process of development and decision-making are traced.

In practice, none of the methods is applied in isolation from others, obtaining effective solution possible only through their appropriate combination.