Structured Analytic Techniques: Difference between revisions
bold Tag: 2017 source edit |
removed --- |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
''' Are there gaps in the data? | ''' Are there gaps in the data? | ||
'''Source''': (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 160) | '''Source''': (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 160) | ||
=== Technique 1: Getting Started Checklist === | === Technique 1: Getting Started Checklist === | ||
| Line 29: | Line 27: | ||
* '''STEP 5''': Who are the primary customers? Are their needs clear? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 111) | * '''STEP 5''': Who are the primary customers? Are their needs clear? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 111) | ||
* '''STEP 6''': Are there other stakeholders with differing perspectives? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 111) | * '''STEP 6''': Are there other stakeholders with differing perspectives? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 111) | ||
=== Technique 1: Starbursting === | === Technique 1: Starbursting === | ||
| Line 37: | Line 33: | ||
[[File:media/Figure-6.5-Starbursting-Example.png]] (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 167) | [[File:media/Figure-6.5-Starbursting-Example.png]] (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 167) | ||
=== Technique 1: Force Field Analysis === | === Technique 1: Force Field Analysis === | ||
| Line 49: | Line 43: | ||
[[File:media/table-4.2.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 133) | [[File:media/table-4.2.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 133) | ||
=== Technique 1: Key Assumptions Check === | === Technique 1: Key Assumptions Check === | ||
| Line 61: | Line 53: | ||
[[File:media/table-6.4.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 186) | [[File:media/table-6.4.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 186) | ||
=== Technique 1: Red Hat Analysis and Structured Brainstorming === | === Technique 1: Red Hat Analysis and Structured Brainstorming === | ||
| Line 72: | Line 62: | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Use sticky notes to brainstorm without discussion. Focus on what the adversary would consider when acting. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 323) | * '''STEP 2''': Use sticky notes to brainstorm without discussion. Focus on what the adversary would consider when acting. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 323) | ||
* '''STEP 3''': Group and analyze ideas for common themes. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 323) | * '''STEP 3''': Group and analyze ideas for common themes. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 323) | ||
=== Technique 1: Structured Brainstorming === | === Technique 1: Structured Brainstorming === | ||
| Line 81: | Line 69: | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Post sticky notes on a wall and rearrange them into groups based on similarities. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 251) | * '''STEP 2''': Post sticky notes on a wall and rearrange them into groups based on similarities. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 251) | ||
* '''STEP 3''': Analyze themes and draw conclusions for further investigation. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 251) | * '''STEP 3''': Analyze themes and draw conclusions for further investigation. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 251) | ||
== Technique Level 2 == | == Technique Level 2 == | ||
| Line 93: | Line 79: | ||
[[File:media/table-4.3.png]] | [[File:media/table-4.3.png]] | ||
=== AI Content Detection === | === AI Content Detection === | ||
| Line 101: | Line 85: | ||
* '''Pay attention to details like hands, faces, lighting, textures, and patterns.''' | * '''Pay attention to details like hands, faces, lighting, textures, and patterns.''' | ||
* '''Use tools like [Wasitai Detector](https://wasitai.com) and [Scribbr AI Detector](https://www.scribbr.com/ai-detector/).''' | * '''Use tools like [Wasitai Detector](https://wasitai.com) and [Scribbr AI Detector](https://www.scribbr.com/ai-detector/).''' | ||
=== Technique 2: Decision Matrix === | === Technique 2: Decision Matrix === | ||
| Line 110: | Line 92: | ||
* '''STEP 2''': List criteria and options. Consolidate items to remove overlap. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 454) | * '''STEP 2''': List criteria and options. Consolidate items to remove overlap. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 454) | ||
* '''STEP 3''': Assign weights and score options. Calculate the total score and choose the best option. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 456) | * '''STEP 3''': Assign weights and score options. Calculate the total score and choose the best option. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 456) | ||
=== Technique 2: Devil’s Advocacy === | === Technique 2: Devil’s Advocacy === | ||
| Line 120: | Line 100: | ||
* '''STEP 1''': Start with the project’s goals, assumptions, and gaps. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 187) | * '''STEP 1''': Start with the project’s goals, assumptions, and gaps. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 187) | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Build a logical case against the proposed decision by focusing on potential pitfalls. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 187) | * '''STEP 2''': Build a logical case against the proposed decision by focusing on potential pitfalls. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 187) | ||
=== Technique 2: Mind Maps === | === Technique 2: Mind Maps === | ||
| Line 129: | Line 107: | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Brainstorm possible explanations and group ideas into categories. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 233) | * '''STEP 2''': Brainstorm possible explanations and group ideas into categories. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 233) | ||
* '''STEP 3''': Expand the mind map by drawing connections between ideas. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 234) | * '''STEP 3''': Expand the mind map by drawing connections between ideas. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 234) | ||
=== Technique 2: Morphological Analysis === | === Technique 2: Morphological Analysis === | ||
| Line 137: | Line 113: | ||
* '''STEP 1''': Define the problem’s dimensions (group, activity, method, impact). (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 404) | * '''STEP 1''': Define the problem’s dimensions (group, activity, method, impact). (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 404) | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Combine dimensions to generate alternative scenarios and refine them. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 404) | * '''STEP 2''': Combine dimensions to generate alternative scenarios and refine them. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 404) | ||
=== Technique 2: Multiple Hypothesis Generation—Simple Hypotheses === | === Technique 2: Multiple Hypothesis Generation—Simple Hypotheses === | ||
| Line 146: | Line 120: | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Clarify each hypothesis using Who, What, When, Where, and Why. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 207) | * '''STEP 2''': Clarify each hypothesis using Who, What, When, Where, and Why. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 207) | ||
* '''STEP 3''': Select the most promising hypotheses for further analysis. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 207) | * '''STEP 3''': Select the most promising hypotheses for further analysis. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 207) | ||
=== Technique 2: Pros-Cons-Faults-and-Fixes === | === Technique 2: Pros-Cons-Faults-and-Fixes === | ||
| Line 155: | Line 127: | ||
* '''STEP 2''': List pros and cons, and develop fixes for the cons. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 277) | * '''STEP 2''': List pros and cons, and develop fixes for the cons. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 277) | ||
* '''STEP 3''': Compare the pros and cons, and assess the risk associated with each. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 278) | * '''STEP 3''': Compare the pros and cons, and assess the risk associated with each. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 278) | ||
=== Technique 2: What If? Analysis === | === Technique 2: What If? Analysis === | ||
| Line 163: | Line 133: | ||
* '''STEP 1''': Assume the event has occurred and develop a chain of reasoning for how it happened. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 350) | * '''STEP 1''': Assume the event has occurred and develop a chain of reasoning for how it happened. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 350) | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Rank scenarios based on severity and probability. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 351) | * '''STEP 2''': Rank scenarios based on severity and probability. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 351) | ||
== Technique Level 3 == | == Technique Level 3 == | ||
| Line 176: | Line 144: | ||
[[File:media/Figure%207.6A%20Creating%20an%20ACH%20Matrix.png]] (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 245) | [[File:media/Figure%207.6A%20Creating%20an%20ACH%20Matrix.png]] (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 245) | ||
=== Technique 3: Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) === | === Technique 3: Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) === | ||
| Line 187: | Line 153: | ||
[[File:media/figure-10.4-swot-analysis.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 188) | [[File:media/figure-10.4-swot-analysis.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 188) | ||
=== Technique 3: Foresight Quadrant Crunching === | === Technique 3: Foresight Quadrant Crunching === | ||
| Line 197: | Line 161: | ||
[[File:media/table-13.3.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 354) | [[File:media/table-13.3.png]] (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 354) | ||
=== Technique 3: Indicators === | === Technique 3: Indicators === | ||
| Line 205: | Line 167: | ||
* '''STEP 1''': Brainstorm indicators for each scenario. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 328) | * '''STEP 1''': Brainstorm indicators for each scenario. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 328) | ||
* '''STEP 2''': Refine the indicators, ensuring they are observable, valid, reliable, and stable. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 328) | * '''STEP 2''': Refine the indicators, ensuring they are observable, valid, reliable, and stable. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 328) | ||
== Technique Level 4 == | == Technique Level 4 == | ||
Revision as of 05:54, 22 September 2024
Research Resources
Eight Rules for Successful Brainstorming
File:/topic/research/media/EIGHT-RULES-FOR-SUCCESSFUL-BRAINSTORMING.png
Technique Level 1
Technique 1: Chronologies and Timelines
File:Media/Figure-7.2-Timeline Estimate.png (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 211)
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Identify all key events and arrange them chronologically in a table with one column for the date and one column for the event. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 159)
- STEP 2: Select relevant information from the event narrative and organize it along the timeline. Can the data be categorized? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 160)
- STEP 3: Review the timeline by asking questions:
Are assumptions about evidence considered? Does the duration and sequence of events make sense? Are there gaps in the data? Source: (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 160)
Technique 1: Getting Started Checklist
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: What prompted the analysis? Is it a report, development, or customer request? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 110)
- STEP 2: What is the key question that needs to be answered? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 110)
- STEP 3: Why is the issue important, and how will analysis make a difference? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 110)
- STEP 4: Has the question been answered before? What has changed? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 110-111)
- STEP 5: Who are the primary customers? Are their needs clear? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 111)
- STEP 6: Are there other stakeholders with differing perspectives? (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 111)
Technique 1: Starbursting
Find the template from [MindTools-Starbursting](https://www.mindtools.com/ab1w9zu/starbursting) or [download here](./media/Starbursting.pdf).
File:Media/Figure-6.5-Starbursting-Example.png (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 167)
Technique 1: Force Field Analysis
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Define the problem or goal clearly. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 133)
- STEP 2: Brainstorm the main factors influencing the issue. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 133)
- STEP 3: Create two lists—one for supporting arguments and one for opposing ones. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 133)
- STEP 4: Assign values to the arguments to determine their strength. Calculate the total score to determine the dominant side. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 133)
File:Media/table-4.2.png (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 133)
Technique 1: Key Assumptions Check
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Gather a group, including outsiders, to brainstorm assumptions. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 185)
- STEP 2: List assumptions on a whiteboard and critique them. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 185)
- STEP 3: Categorize assumptions as supported, uncertain, or unsupported. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 186)
- STEP 4: Refine the list and update based on group feedback. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 186)
File:Media/table-6.4.png (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 186)
Technique 1: Red Hat Analysis and Structured Brainstorming
- Avoid mirror imaging—assuming others think like you. Red Hat Analysis helps to view problems as others might, particularly adversaries.*
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Gather analysts with knowledge of the target, environment, or decision-makers. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 323)
- STEP 2: Use sticky notes to brainstorm without discussion. Focus on what the adversary would consider when acting. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 323)
- STEP 3: Group and analyze ideas for common themes. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 323)
Technique 1: Structured Brainstorming
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Gather a team of analysts. Use sticky notes for brainstorming, focusing on possible causes or factors. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 250)
- STEP 2: Post sticky notes on a wall and rearrange them into groups based on similarities. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 251)
- STEP 3: Analyze themes and draw conclusions for further investigation. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 251)
Technique Level 2
Technique 2: Deception Detection
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Use deception detection checklists to assess the situation. Consider the motives, past practices, and the source’s credibility. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 161)
- STEP 2: Analyze deception potential using checklists such as MOM (Motive, Opportunity, Means) and POP (Past Opposition Practices). (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 256)
AI Content Detection
How to detect synthetic content:
- Pay attention to details like hands, faces, lighting, textures, and patterns.
- Use tools like [Wasitai Detector](https://wasitai.com) and [Scribbr AI Detector](https://www.scribbr.com/ai-detector/).
Technique 2: Decision Matrix
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Identify the decision or question. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 454)
- STEP 2: List criteria and options. Consolidate items to remove overlap. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 454)
- STEP 3: Assign weights and score options. Calculate the total score and choose the best option. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 456)
Technique 2: Devil’s Advocacy
- Devil’s Advocacy helps critique decisions or plans by exploring what could go wrong.*
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Start with the project’s goals, assumptions, and gaps. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 187)
- STEP 2: Build a logical case against the proposed decision by focusing on potential pitfalls. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 187)
Technique 2: Mind Maps
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Write the focal question at the center of the page. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 233)
- STEP 2: Brainstorm possible explanations and group ideas into categories. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 233)
- STEP 3: Expand the mind map by drawing connections between ideas. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 234)
Technique 2: Morphological Analysis
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Define the problem’s dimensions (group, activity, method, impact). (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 404)
- STEP 2: Combine dimensions to generate alternative scenarios and refine them. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 404)
Technique 2: Multiple Hypothesis Generation—Simple Hypotheses
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Brainstorm hypotheses. Write them down and consolidate similar ideas. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 207)
- STEP 2: Clarify each hypothesis using Who, What, When, Where, and Why. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 207)
- STEP 3: Select the most promising hypotheses for further analysis. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 207)
Technique 2: Pros-Cons-Faults-and-Fixes
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Define the decision clearly. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 277)
- STEP 2: List pros and cons, and develop fixes for the cons. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 277)
- STEP 3: Compare the pros and cons, and assess the risk associated with each. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 278)
Technique 2: What If? Analysis
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Assume the event has occurred and develop a chain of reasoning for how it happened. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 350)
- STEP 2: Rank scenarios based on severity and probability. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 351)
Technique Level 3
Technique 3: Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH)
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: List hypotheses to be considered. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 209)
- STEP 2: Assess information for consistency with each hypothesis. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 209)
- STEP 3: Refine hypotheses and conclusions based on inconsistencies. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 210)
File:Media/Figure 7.6A Creating an ACH Matrix.png (Pherson and Heuer, 2021, p. 245)
Technique 3: Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT)
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Define the objective clearly. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 188)
- STEP 2: List strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 188)
- STEP 3: Identify strategies for exploiting strengths and opportunities, and mitigating weaknesses and threats.
File:Media/figure-10.4-swot-analysis.png (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 188)
Technique 3: Foresight Quadrant Crunching
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Break the lead hypothesis into component parts and identify critical dimensions. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 354)
- STEP 2: Use 2x2 matrices to generate alternative scenarios. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 354)
File:Media/table-13.3.png (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 354)
Technique 3: Indicators
Step-by-Step Guide:
- STEP 1: Brainstorm indicators for each scenario. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 328)
- STEP 2: Refine the indicators, ensuring they are observable, valid, reliable, and stable. (Beebe and Pherson, 2015, p. 328)
Technique Level 4
(To be expanded)
Technique Level 5
(To be expanded)
References
Cite error: <ref> tag with name "BeebePherson2015" defined in <references> is not used in prior text.
Cite error: <ref> tag with name "PhersonHeuer2021" defined in <references> is not used in prior text.