2.1 values and criteria (t)

  • 1,078 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,078
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Values and criteria Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 1
  • 2. Best outcomes vs. fair chances? Individual choice vs. How much priority to collective good? disease prevention? Resource allocation decisions = value-based decisions Urgent vs. likelihood of success?Modest benefits for many vs.significant benefits for a few? Rule of rescue? Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 2
  • 3. How are values integrated inresource allocation decisions? Priority setting processes (such as PBMA which will be presented in this workshop) are based on formal comparisons of possible courses of action i.e. possible investments or disinvestments These comparisons involve the application of decision making or evaluation criteria It is in the selection of these criteria and of their weights that values are reflected Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 3
  • 4. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA)The comparison part of a priority settingprocess such as PBMA uses MCDAMCDA is well-suited to contexts thatinvolve multiple objectives (such as, forexample, health improvement, equity,knowledge generation, staff safety…) Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 4
  • 5. Goal of MCDATo produce recommendations regardingresource allocation decisions that are asrelevant to decision-makers as possibleWhere relevance is defined in terms of theability of the recommendations to reflectthe real life setting in which the decisionshave to be made (as opposed to a RandomControlled Trial, for example) Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 5
  • 6. Principles of MCDAAll relevant information is included inthe process, acknowledging varyingdegree of qualityAnalysis can apply to a multitude ofpossible alternativesObjective is to produce a compositeassessment of each possible alternative Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 6
  • 7. Principles of MCDA (2)Ignoring a specific consideration isequivalent to assigning it a weight ofzero i.e. there is no getting away fromMCDA, the only choice is whether it willdone explicitly or not, and by whoRelevant considerations directly linkedto the scope of the decisions required Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 7
  • 8. MCDA CriteriaBasis for process recommendationsMust be specified at outset of processMust be explicitly weightedOperational enough to assess proposalsShould not overlap (mutually exclusive)Need to be clearly definedRating scale specific to each criterion Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 8
  • 9. CriteriaBasis for process recommendationsPoints to the importance of aligning criteriawith organizational objectives andreflecting social values as the criteria willdetermine the direction of the resourceallocation Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 9
  • 10. CriteriaMust be specified at outset of processCriteria do not vary by proposal for change.All criteria are applied to all possiblecourses of action considered. Allowscomparisons of totally disparate courses ofaction Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 10
  • 11. CriteriaMust be explicitly weightedRelative importance of criteria should be identified.Weighting can’t be avoided- no weighting is acceptingequal weights Methods to elicit relative importance weight for criteria Relative importance should be plausible and intuitive Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 11
  • 12. CriteriaOperational enough to assess proposalsCriteria are not selected on the basis of theavailability of data or evidence but on therelevance to the decision making process.However, criteria must be defined in a waythat allows the development of ameasurement metric. Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 12
  • 13. CriteriaShould not overlap (mutually exclusive)Obvious overlap must be avoided. Someoverlap will exist. The goal is to avoidobvious double counting yet remainpragmatic- the process is designed fordecision makers not mathematicians. Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 13
  • 14. CriteriaNeed to be clearly definedCriteria must be defined with claritysufficient to ensure consistency ofinterpretation both by stakeholderssubmitting proposals for changes and byreviewers Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 14
  • 15. CriteriaRating scale specific to each criterionRating is not a “meet/does not meet” a givencriterion. Rating is about the impact in terms ofeach criterion. And impact measurement is morethan “positive”, “null” or “negative”. Typically ascale with 3 or 4 grades is sufficient to capture allrelevant information Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 15
  • 16. Results of the application of the criteria Each possible course of action (investment or disinvestment) gets a score The score provides a single measure of each possible action’s net benefit or impact The scores depend on the criteria and their weights Scores are comparable across all courses of action because net benefits are measured on the same basis Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 16
  • 17. Managing the evidence in MCDA Education on process and expectations on using evidentiary base All relevant information is used Business case template used for query submission adapted to the process Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 17
  • 18. SummaryPriority setting involves values, it can’t beavoidedObjective is to make these valuejudgements explicit and transparentValues are reflected in the decision makingor evaluation criteria and their weightsCriteria, in turn, determine content ofresource allocation recommendations Craig Mitton & Francois Dionne | Priority Setting & Resource Allocation | 18