Collaboratively Evaluate Alternatives and Develop Team Recommendations Using the Model
The study team should compare alternatives against the status
quo to find how they will meet the objectives developed in step 2.
Promising alternatives should then be modeled in the shared vision
model so that team members can collaboratively evaluate specific
performance measurements. Based on results from the shared vision
models, the team should find a consensus on specific recommendations
for changing a current resource-management plan.
Critical Difference: The team uses a collaboratively built model (the SVPM) to evaluate impacts of alternatives based on decision criteria. Formulation and evaluation can be done faster and cheaper, so there are more iterations in SVP than in a P&G study.
Example from the National Drought Study
All alternatives should undergo an
initial screening process. This evaluation will eliminate alternatives
that do not address the planning objectives or do not contain all the
elements required to make the plan complete. The remaining alternatives
should be ranked starting with the most promising and then modeled in