This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Brown, R. Search for Related Content

The Operation Was a Success but the Patient Died: Aider Priorities Influence Decision Aid Usefulness

School of Public Policy, George Mason University, University Boulevard, Fairfax, Virginia 22030-4444
rexvbrown{at}aol.com

The usefulness of quantitative decision aid is often impaired and its usage impeded by the misaligned priorities of analysts and the middlemen who employ them. Analysts’ professional orientation may dispose them to attend to analytic processes more than to deciders’ needs and to stick with outdated practices. As a result, their analyses may be technically sound but disregard key knowledge, make unrealistic assumptions, or answer the wrong questions. Middlemen’s financial or other conflicts of interest exacerbate such defects. Deciders may have to take more control of analyses (and analysts) and, for example, bypass middlemen.

Key Words: decision analysis: applications; organizational studies: behavior

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. V. Brown Working with Policy Makers on Their Choices: A Decision Analyst Reminisces Decision Analysis, March 1, 2009; 6(1): 14 - 24. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. E. Pate-Cornell and R. L. Dillon The Respective Roles of Risk and Decision Analyses in Decision Support Decision Analysis, December 1, 2006; 3(4): 220 - 232. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. W. Merkhofer Erratum: My Analysis Was Useless at Best!!!? Disagreement Between Analytic Results and Client Decisions Does Not Necessarily Mean the Analysis Was Useless Interfaces, March 1, 2006; 36(2): 174 - 175. [Abstract] [PDF]