[Proj Man] Exercise 5 - Expert Judgment
What is the best tool use in expert judgment? @ least 1000words
“Expert Judgment is a term that refers specifically to a technique in which judgment is made based upon a specific set of criteria and/or expertise that has been acquired in a specific knowledge area, or product area, a particular discipline, an industry, etc.” (PMBOK, 3rd & 4th ed.)
It is true and tested that a project is a serious job, and cannot be simply undermined. It doesn’t matter how simple and small or how complicated and big it is, because projects are created to have one ultimate goal: to succeed in its endeavor. So, to achieve this, guidelines, principles and frameworks are made, thus making it a whole new subject to support the project itself: Project Management.
With Project Management, project workers need not to hassle themselves by making new outlines for their projects, because project management offers a wide variety of tools, frameworks and outlines that are certified and standardized, and are proved to be effective and efficient to make the project run smoothly and correctly. These elements make projects convenient and those eliminate possible complications of projects. Although Project Management is quite a humongous and complicated subject to learn, the irony is that it simplifies project work and load, and it lessens the possibilities of project failure.
Project Management has many subparts and elements, as described by the Project Management Body of Knowledge Book. These parts consist of step-by-step ways and procedures to every stage that a project will undergo. As I have noticed, most of the phases are redundantly stated in the book. But I do understand that it is for the consistency and betterment of the project. If a certain procedure is needed to be executed again and again, then it would be better.
One of those processes that keep on popping on almost all phases of a project is the EXPERT JUDGMENT.
So what about expert judgment and what is its’ importance?
According to PMBOK Book, Expert Judgment is often used to assess the inputs needed to develop a phase of development in a project. Such judgment and expertise is applied to any technical and management details during this process. Such expertise is provided by any group or individual with specialized knowledge or training, and is available from many sources, including other units within the organization, consultants, stakeholders, including customers or sponsors, professional and technical associations, and industry groups.
To better understand it, in layman’s term, Expert Judgment is a term that refers a specifically to a technique in which judgment is made based upon a specific set of criteria and/or expertise that has been acquired in a specific knowledge area, or product area, a particular discipline, an industry, etc. This knowledge base can be provided by a member of the project team, or multiple members of the project team, or by a team leader or team leaders. However, typically expert judgment requires an expertise that is not present within the project team and, as such, it is common for an external group or person with a specific relevant skill set or knowledge base to be brought in for a consultation, Some examples of resources of expert knowledge can be stakeholders, customers, professional and technical organizations, and other miscellaneous industry groups that may provide these types of services for a small fee, or may provider them free of charge (in some cases, only free if one of the members of the project team is a dues paying member of said organization).
In my own understanding, Expert Judgment is a process during the project development in which all the expertise and ideas of all the project stakeholders and people concerned meet. It is like a direct or an indirect meeting of these people, and the people involved will have to make a brainstorming to assess and make a certain phase or output better than it is in the present. This process, I think, indicates that the frameworks and guidelines given by Project Management books alone are not enough, and human expertise and skills are still needed for a project to be genuinely successful. So, the project team should not depend on Project Management books alone, but also put their trust to their team members to create an idealistic cover-up of the project.
So, if Expert Judgment truly fortifies a project, one might ask, what is the best tool to be used in expert judgment?
I have searched and read about Expert Judgment and it turns out that there are many and varying tools in Expert Judgment. It is varying, because Expert Judgment is present in almost all stages of a Project Management Cycle. So, the design of an Expert Judgment tool depends on what phase or stage it will be used in. So, we cannot really pinpoint what is the best expert judgment tool at present, unless we are going to indentify each one in every stage of management of a project.
So, what I am getting at is that I cannot really identify which would be the best tool for an Expert Judgment, but I have found a guide on how to assess and identify a good or better yet the best Expert Management tool for the certain phase of a project.
We’ll know if it’s a good tool for Expert Judgment if:
(1) It identifies multiple experts based on an explicit selection process and criteria, and including experts from different domains and disciplines of knowledge (e.g., science versus local knowledge).
This is true, because even though, let’s say the project is science-centered, we must also consider that there are also other expertise that are needed to complete the project. The tool must not be biases whatsoever in making judgments.
(2) It clearly defines the question for which a judgment will be elicited, making sure that the question separates (as much as possible) technical judgments from value judgments.
Clarity and distinguishable qualities should be elicited by the tool, so as not to complicate judgments made by the group.
(3) It decomposes complex judgments into simpler ones. This will improve both the quality of the judgment and, to the extent it helps to separate a specific technical judgment from the management outcomes of that judgment, its objectivity.
Of course, the simpler the judgments, the more understandable and clear it will be. Though a statement that expresses judgment should be supported with details as to how did this judgment came up is needed, it should be short and brief, to make the point stand out and avoid any complications.
(4) It documents the expert’s conceptual model. Not only will this help the quality of the judgment and its communication to others, but it will create a clear and traceable account that will facilitate future peer review.
It is true that a concept or a subject is more understandable when you have it presented in objects and models. A good expert judgment tool should have a functionality of making concepts into objects and such. Instead of long sentences and paragraphs, a good substitute would be a conceptual model.
(5) It uses structured elicitation methods to guard against common cognitive biases that have been shown to consistently reduce the quality of judgments (Morgan and Henrion, 1990)
The tool must remove unnecessary comments and judgment statements that is not helping in making good judgments, etc.
(6) It expresses judgments quantitatively where possible. The use and interpretation of qualitative descriptions of magnitude, probability or frequency vary tremendously among individuals. This seems likely to be amplified in a cross-cultural setting.
Of course, quantitative judgments are most likely preferable, because it gives an individual a concrete picture of the situation. Quality-based judgments have varying results and range that may cause confusion when assessing it.
(7) It characterizes uncertainty in the judgment explicitly, using quantitative expressions of uncertainty wherever possible to avoid ambiguity.
The tool must also be able to identify uncertainty levels in judgments statements, etc.
(8) It documents conditionalizing assumptions. Differences in judgments are often explained by differences in the underlying assumptions or conditions for which a judgment is valid.
To support judgment statements, assumptions as to where these statements come up must be valid, etc.
(9) It explores competing judgments collaboratively, through workshops involving local and scientific experts, with an emphasis on collaborative learning.
The tool must be able to effectively collaborate potential judgments from the experts, to make the expert judgment more effective and efficient.
So, these guidelines, for me, are very good for one to be able to identify a good Expert Judgment tool, or the best.
And I truly believe that expert judgment is a great tool in project management. It doesn’t only make a project at its best, but also makes the people involving the project have a good relationship with each other.
Is creating a strong bond of camaraderie among the project team helpful? Yes.
Is creating a good relationship of friendship a project? Maybe. :D
“Expert Judgment is a term that refers specifically to a technique in which judgment is made based upon a specific set of criteria and/or expertise that has been acquired in a specific knowledge area, or product area, a particular discipline, an industry, etc.” (PMBOK, 3rd & 4th ed.)
It is true and tested that a project is a serious job, and cannot be simply undermined. It doesn’t matter how simple and small or how complicated and big it is, because projects are created to have one ultimate goal: to succeed in its endeavor. So, to achieve this, guidelines, principles and frameworks are made, thus making it a whole new subject to support the project itself: Project Management.
With Project Management, project workers need not to hassle themselves by making new outlines for their projects, because project management offers a wide variety of tools, frameworks and outlines that are certified and standardized, and are proved to be effective and efficient to make the project run smoothly and correctly. These elements make projects convenient and those eliminate possible complications of projects. Although Project Management is quite a humongous and complicated subject to learn, the irony is that it simplifies project work and load, and it lessens the possibilities of project failure.
Project Management has many subparts and elements, as described by the Project Management Body of Knowledge Book. These parts consist of step-by-step ways and procedures to every stage that a project will undergo. As I have noticed, most of the phases are redundantly stated in the book. But I do understand that it is for the consistency and betterment of the project. If a certain procedure is needed to be executed again and again, then it would be better.
One of those processes that keep on popping on almost all phases of a project is the EXPERT JUDGMENT.
So what about expert judgment and what is its’ importance?
According to PMBOK Book, Expert Judgment is often used to assess the inputs needed to develop a phase of development in a project. Such judgment and expertise is applied to any technical and management details during this process. Such expertise is provided by any group or individual with specialized knowledge or training, and is available from many sources, including other units within the organization, consultants, stakeholders, including customers or sponsors, professional and technical associations, and industry groups.
To better understand it, in layman’s term, Expert Judgment is a term that refers a specifically to a technique in which judgment is made based upon a specific set of criteria and/or expertise that has been acquired in a specific knowledge area, or product area, a particular discipline, an industry, etc. This knowledge base can be provided by a member of the project team, or multiple members of the project team, or by a team leader or team leaders. However, typically expert judgment requires an expertise that is not present within the project team and, as such, it is common for an external group or person with a specific relevant skill set or knowledge base to be brought in for a consultation, Some examples of resources of expert knowledge can be stakeholders, customers, professional and technical organizations, and other miscellaneous industry groups that may provide these types of services for a small fee, or may provider them free of charge (in some cases, only free if one of the members of the project team is a dues paying member of said organization).
In my own understanding, Expert Judgment is a process during the project development in which all the expertise and ideas of all the project stakeholders and people concerned meet. It is like a direct or an indirect meeting of these people, and the people involved will have to make a brainstorming to assess and make a certain phase or output better than it is in the present. This process, I think, indicates that the frameworks and guidelines given by Project Management books alone are not enough, and human expertise and skills are still needed for a project to be genuinely successful. So, the project team should not depend on Project Management books alone, but also put their trust to their team members to create an idealistic cover-up of the project.
So, if Expert Judgment truly fortifies a project, one might ask, what is the best tool to be used in expert judgment?
I have searched and read about Expert Judgment and it turns out that there are many and varying tools in Expert Judgment. It is varying, because Expert Judgment is present in almost all stages of a Project Management Cycle. So, the design of an Expert Judgment tool depends on what phase or stage it will be used in. So, we cannot really pinpoint what is the best expert judgment tool at present, unless we are going to indentify each one in every stage of management of a project.
So, what I am getting at is that I cannot really identify which would be the best tool for an Expert Judgment, but I have found a guide on how to assess and identify a good or better yet the best Expert Management tool for the certain phase of a project.
We’ll know if it’s a good tool for Expert Judgment if:
(1) It identifies multiple experts based on an explicit selection process and criteria, and including experts from different domains and disciplines of knowledge (e.g., science versus local knowledge).
This is true, because even though, let’s say the project is science-centered, we must also consider that there are also other expertise that are needed to complete the project. The tool must not be biases whatsoever in making judgments.
(2) It clearly defines the question for which a judgment will be elicited, making sure that the question separates (as much as possible) technical judgments from value judgments.
Clarity and distinguishable qualities should be elicited by the tool, so as not to complicate judgments made by the group.
(3) It decomposes complex judgments into simpler ones. This will improve both the quality of the judgment and, to the extent it helps to separate a specific technical judgment from the management outcomes of that judgment, its objectivity.
Of course, the simpler the judgments, the more understandable and clear it will be. Though a statement that expresses judgment should be supported with details as to how did this judgment came up is needed, it should be short and brief, to make the point stand out and avoid any complications.
(4) It documents the expert’s conceptual model. Not only will this help the quality of the judgment and its communication to others, but it will create a clear and traceable account that will facilitate future peer review.
It is true that a concept or a subject is more understandable when you have it presented in objects and models. A good expert judgment tool should have a functionality of making concepts into objects and such. Instead of long sentences and paragraphs, a good substitute would be a conceptual model.
(5) It uses structured elicitation methods to guard against common cognitive biases that have been shown to consistently reduce the quality of judgments (Morgan and Henrion, 1990)
The tool must remove unnecessary comments and judgment statements that is not helping in making good judgments, etc.
(6) It expresses judgments quantitatively where possible. The use and interpretation of qualitative descriptions of magnitude, probability or frequency vary tremendously among individuals. This seems likely to be amplified in a cross-cultural setting.
Of course, quantitative judgments are most likely preferable, because it gives an individual a concrete picture of the situation. Quality-based judgments have varying results and range that may cause confusion when assessing it.
(7) It characterizes uncertainty in the judgment explicitly, using quantitative expressions of uncertainty wherever possible to avoid ambiguity.
The tool must also be able to identify uncertainty levels in judgments statements, etc.
(8) It documents conditionalizing assumptions. Differences in judgments are often explained by differences in the underlying assumptions or conditions for which a judgment is valid.
To support judgment statements, assumptions as to where these statements come up must be valid, etc.
(9) It explores competing judgments collaboratively, through workshops involving local and scientific experts, with an emphasis on collaborative learning.
The tool must be able to effectively collaborate potential judgments from the experts, to make the expert judgment more effective and efficient.
So, these guidelines, for me, are very good for one to be able to identify a good Expert Judgment tool, or the best.
And I truly believe that expert judgment is a great tool in project management. It doesn’t only make a project at its best, but also makes the people involving the project have a good relationship with each other.
Is creating a strong bond of camaraderie among the project team helpful? Yes.
Is creating a good relationship of friendship a project? Maybe. :D