Recent Papers and Presentations...
GeoEnviroPro Webinar - Nov. 1, 2023
"Using Decision Science to Gain Clarity and Insight for Complex Decisions" Co-Authored with Dan Schneider (Horizon Environmental)
Abstract: Dan and Bill provided an overview of the field of decision science, and how adoption of these common sense tools and frameworks will save you time, money, effort and help you create more value out of your projects. They will also explain how understanding where or why your preferred decision solution would change is at least as important as estimating what you expect.
"Using Decision Science to Gain Clarity and Insight for Complex Decisions" Co-Authored with Dan Schneider (Horizon Environmental)
Abstract: Dan and Bill provided an overview of the field of decision science, and how adoption of these common sense tools and frameworks will save you time, money, effort and help you create more value out of your projects. They will also explain how understanding where or why your preferred decision solution would change is at least as important as estimating what you expect.
| using_decision_science__2__as_presented.pdf |
Mine Closure Conference 2023, Reno, NV - Paper and Presentation
"Using Decision Science to Build Trust in Mine Closure Decisions" - Co-Authors Daniel Schneider (Horizon Environmental), Andrew Thrift (Teck)
Abstract: In today’s changing social and environmental landscape, society requires organizations to shift to an ever-evolving world of ‘tell me what you are doing’, through to ‘show me what impact you are having’, and now to ‘involve me in your work’. With public trust in mining at an all-time low globally (Dhawan 2023), decision transparency involving competing objectives and unavoidable trade-offs can help build trust with Communities of Interest, titleholders, and regulators in mine closure decisions. For years, the multiple accounts analysis decision science tool has been widely adopted for tailings site management (ECCC 2016) and closure objective trade-off evaluation. Mine closure professionals may not be fully aware of how a broader decision science approach may be used to provide clarity and confidence for the complex decision-making required in mine closures.
Decision science offers a structured approach to integrate and weigh multiple perspectives on objectives, risks, trade-offs, and preferences, that supports efficient mine closure planning. Breaking complex decisions down using logical frameworks with a structured and transparent approach helps people gain a common understanding, so that they can identify and discuss objectives. It exposes options across competing objectives at the core of difficult decisions. In contrast to other approaches such as gut feel and ‘we’ve always done it this way’, it addresses multiple objective trade-offs directly. It is a conceptually intuitive and easily applied approach. An intentional shift to structured, logical thinking provides confidence and clarity resulting in higher efficiency projects, cost savings, and a significant reduction in re-work.
A decision science approach includes: (1) front end facilitation to frame the decision or decision series, (2) assessment of the project objectives including potentially conflicting desires of internal or external Communities of Interest, (3) divergent creative thinking to identify new alternatives that better fulfill the prioritized objectives, (4) qualitative and quantitative analysis to assess and contrast alternatives based on how well they fulfill desired objectives, (5) threat identification and uncertainty management aspects that will flow into the project management and execution phase of the closure.
A healthy decision culture, where teams and decision-makers foster a culture of inquiry instead of advocacy allows people embrace creative conflict and curiosity around differing values and objective trade-offs. This results in a shared understanding, identifies superior alternatives, reduces risk, and accelerates project development. Our industry can benefit from adopting a decision science approach to the many important, complex decisions we all face, as we work to increase efficiency, reduce cost, and build trust in mine closure decisions.
"Using Decision Science to Build Trust in Mine Closure Decisions" - Co-Authors Daniel Schneider (Horizon Environmental), Andrew Thrift (Teck)
Abstract: In today’s changing social and environmental landscape, society requires organizations to shift to an ever-evolving world of ‘tell me what you are doing’, through to ‘show me what impact you are having’, and now to ‘involve me in your work’. With public trust in mining at an all-time low globally (Dhawan 2023), decision transparency involving competing objectives and unavoidable trade-offs can help build trust with Communities of Interest, titleholders, and regulators in mine closure decisions. For years, the multiple accounts analysis decision science tool has been widely adopted for tailings site management (ECCC 2016) and closure objective trade-off evaluation. Mine closure professionals may not be fully aware of how a broader decision science approach may be used to provide clarity and confidence for the complex decision-making required in mine closures.
Decision science offers a structured approach to integrate and weigh multiple perspectives on objectives, risks, trade-offs, and preferences, that supports efficient mine closure planning. Breaking complex decisions down using logical frameworks with a structured and transparent approach helps people gain a common understanding, so that they can identify and discuss objectives. It exposes options across competing objectives at the core of difficult decisions. In contrast to other approaches such as gut feel and ‘we’ve always done it this way’, it addresses multiple objective trade-offs directly. It is a conceptually intuitive and easily applied approach. An intentional shift to structured, logical thinking provides confidence and clarity resulting in higher efficiency projects, cost savings, and a significant reduction in re-work.
A decision science approach includes: (1) front end facilitation to frame the decision or decision series, (2) assessment of the project objectives including potentially conflicting desires of internal or external Communities of Interest, (3) divergent creative thinking to identify new alternatives that better fulfill the prioritized objectives, (4) qualitative and quantitative analysis to assess and contrast alternatives based on how well they fulfill desired objectives, (5) threat identification and uncertainty management aspects that will flow into the project management and execution phase of the closure.
A healthy decision culture, where teams and decision-makers foster a culture of inquiry instead of advocacy allows people embrace creative conflict and curiosity around differing values and objective trade-offs. This results in a shared understanding, identifies superior alternatives, reduces risk, and accelerates project development. Our industry can benefit from adopting a decision science approach to the many important, complex decisions we all face, as we work to increase efficiency, reduce cost, and build trust in mine closure decisions.
| using_decision_science_to_build_trust_in_mine_closure_decisions_-_final_8-15.pdf |
Society of Decision Professionals Annual Meeting 2023 - Poster - December 2021
"Indifference and Why You Should Care - Helping Teams Build Decision Confidence" Co-authored with Frank Wimberley (Teck)
Abstract: This is an approach you can use to assist decision-making given uncertainty.
Teams facing an important decision may mis-spend substantial time trying to achieve precision on what will happen when it is usually as important, if not more so, to understand where, how, and why the decision would change. Indifference Assessment can provide confidence, relieve concern, and provide an understandable context for the decision.
Indifference is the specific outcome within a distribution of possible outcomes, at which a decision-maker would be indifferent to the decision path chosen. The ideal action below this point differs from the ideal action above. In most decision trees, the indifference assessment is arithmetically simple.
The further the expected result is from the indifference point, the less precision is required in the estimation of the expected result. If the expected result is far from the indifference value, then decision confidence should be high. The range of the uncertainty must also be taken into consideration. Conversely, as the expected result nears the indifference point, the probability of making an incorrect choice increases. Remember that as the probability of being wrong increases confidence decreases, and the value of doing more work to clarify the decision increases, so we must also look at the confidence range of the uncertainty.
As with Value-of-Information (VoI), the degree of precision and therefore the time and cost to achieve it has no value if it doesn’t have a likelihood of altering the decision. The contrast to VoI is that an indifference assessment does not require the option to obtain new information. It merely balances the two paths extending from a binary decision point.
Taking an “Indifference Approach” enables faster, more confident decisions. It provides decision-makers with sound logic and clarity on decisions large and small. Everyone wants to make the correct decision. One cannot do that without a clear understanding of the conditions that would cause you to not care which path is chosen.
"Indifference and Why You Should Care - Helping Teams Build Decision Confidence" Co-authored with Frank Wimberley (Teck)
Abstract: This is an approach you can use to assist decision-making given uncertainty.
Teams facing an important decision may mis-spend substantial time trying to achieve precision on what will happen when it is usually as important, if not more so, to understand where, how, and why the decision would change. Indifference Assessment can provide confidence, relieve concern, and provide an understandable context for the decision.
Indifference is the specific outcome within a distribution of possible outcomes, at which a decision-maker would be indifferent to the decision path chosen. The ideal action below this point differs from the ideal action above. In most decision trees, the indifference assessment is arithmetically simple.
The further the expected result is from the indifference point, the less precision is required in the estimation of the expected result. If the expected result is far from the indifference value, then decision confidence should be high. The range of the uncertainty must also be taken into consideration. Conversely, as the expected result nears the indifference point, the probability of making an incorrect choice increases. Remember that as the probability of being wrong increases confidence decreases, and the value of doing more work to clarify the decision increases, so we must also look at the confidence range of the uncertainty.
As with Value-of-Information (VoI), the degree of precision and therefore the time and cost to achieve it has no value if it doesn’t have a likelihood of altering the decision. The contrast to VoI is that an indifference assessment does not require the option to obtain new information. It merely balances the two paths extending from a binary decision point.
Taking an “Indifference Approach” enables faster, more confident decisions. It provides decision-makers with sound logic and clarity on decisions large and small. Everyone wants to make the correct decision. One cannot do that without a clear understanding of the conditions that would cause you to not care which path is chosen.
| sdp-_houston_indifference_poster_2023_-_haskett_wimberley_mar22.pdf |
SDP Vancouver Chapter Talk - December 2021
"Objectives and Objective Centered Decision Support"
Abstract: Objectives are fundamental to decision support. Obtaining agreement on the objectives, identifying trade-offs, and prioritizing are important steps before decision pathways are chosen. But how do you reduce the bias (“subjective objective” bias)? We will examine how to create functional objectives hierarchies, apply an Arena or Strategy Domain approach to objectives, then identify and prioritize the Material Objectives that will be used to assess decision pathways.
"Objectives and Objective Centered Decision Support"
Abstract: Objectives are fundamental to decision support. Obtaining agreement on the objectives, identifying trade-offs, and prioritizing are important steps before decision pathways are chosen. But how do you reduce the bias (“subjective objective” bias)? We will examine how to create functional objectives hierarchies, apply an Arena or Strategy Domain approach to objectives, then identify and prioritize the Material Objectives that will be used to assess decision pathways.
| Objectives and Objective Centered Decision Support (pdf) |
SPE Paper and Presentation Dubai Convention - Sept 2021
"Four Simple Questions - The Decision-Centric Approach to Projects and Project Management"
Abstract: A decision-centric approach to projects creates confidence, improves value, and shortens time to revenue. A straight-forward objective based approach to managing project decisions is presented in the form of four primary questions. Those question are:
Affective ability – Accepted risk-management options of acceptance, mitigation, transfer, and acceptance present the decision options within this category. In considering the consequences the options, decision tools such as Indifference Assessment and Pain and Regret Assessment.
Affordable Mitigation – while most projects can benefit through risk mitigation, such effort must make economic sense. Mitigation paths must add value to the project through added upside or elimination of at least a portion of downside threat. The value of these efforts are aided by use of tools such as Value-of-Information, Value-of-Control, and Value-of-learning.
Being wrong – Making a regretful decision is always a possibility but the source of the “wrongness” and its likely impact is often overlooked by teams.
In project planning and execution, decision-makers are often presented with a plethora of issues, threats, and opportunities. From development planning through implementation significant time and resource waste can be cut by prioritizing effort to the issues that matter. Understanding the issues in the context of materiality and then what to do, if anything, about an issue, becomes key to maximizing success. This approach cuts waste and focuses the attention on what matters.
Decision Intelligence not only increases the probability of making the best decisions, it also prioritizes work to those items that matter either for value or decision path. While most of the decision tools referenced are well documented in the literature, placing them into the context of the Four Question Approach allows teams and management to focus more closely on efficiently mitigating issues, shortening work-flow, and creating significantly higher decision confidence. This novel approach works well in all phases of project planning through project management implementation.
"Four Simple Questions - The Decision-Centric Approach to Projects and Project Management"
Abstract: A decision-centric approach to projects creates confidence, improves value, and shortens time to revenue. A straight-forward objective based approach to managing project decisions is presented in the form of four primary questions. Those question are:
- Does the issue/threat/opportunity make a material difference to the project?
- Can anything be done to affect the outcome?
- Can you afford to do anything about it?
- What if you are wrong?
Affective ability – Accepted risk-management options of acceptance, mitigation, transfer, and acceptance present the decision options within this category. In considering the consequences the options, decision tools such as Indifference Assessment and Pain and Regret Assessment.
Affordable Mitigation – while most projects can benefit through risk mitigation, such effort must make economic sense. Mitigation paths must add value to the project through added upside or elimination of at least a portion of downside threat. The value of these efforts are aided by use of tools such as Value-of-Information, Value-of-Control, and Value-of-learning.
Being wrong – Making a regretful decision is always a possibility but the source of the “wrongness” and its likely impact is often overlooked by teams.
In project planning and execution, decision-makers are often presented with a plethora of issues, threats, and opportunities. From development planning through implementation significant time and resource waste can be cut by prioritizing effort to the issues that matter. Understanding the issues in the context of materiality and then what to do, if anything, about an issue, becomes key to maximizing success. This approach cuts waste and focuses the attention on what matters.
Decision Intelligence not only increases the probability of making the best decisions, it also prioritizes work to those items that matter either for value or decision path. While most of the decision tools referenced are well documented in the literature, placing them into the context of the Four Question Approach allows teams and management to focus more closely on efficiently mitigating issues, shortening work-flow, and creating significantly higher decision confidence. This novel approach works well in all phases of project planning through project management implementation.
| spe-205848 Four Questions manuscript in pdf |
DAAG (SDP - Society of Decision Professionals)
"They Hate Us and Can’t Be Trusted - Decision Support in the midst of conflict and confrontation"
| sdp 2019 Annual Meeting - They hate us pdf |
DAPUB - Denver Advanced Practices in Unconventional Basins
"Uncertainty in Unconventional Basins"
Abstract: Companies spend a time and money trying to reduce uncertainty believing that to be the key to increasing confidence of making the correct decision. Often, this time and capital is wasted. They’ve spent too much and have taken too long, losing profit and competitive advantage in the process because they have not fully understood the uncertainty present or know how to effectively handle it. We are going to look at ways to identify and deal with uncertainty efficiently and effectively through the value chain; from play entry, early development, operational efficiency, to infrastructure planning.
Undoubtedly, there are times when uncertainty reduction is important and value creative, but when is enough enough? When does additional learning destroy value? There are tools, including Value of Information, Value of Control, and Value of Learning (VoL, a new approach, helps us with operational efficiency), that help us to understand the materiality of attempting to reduce uncertainty.
As we look at uncertainty potential reduction/resolution, we will approach the effort using four questions that should always be asked:
1/ Is this uncertainty material?
2/ Can we do anything about it?
3/ Is it worth doing anything about it?
4/ What if we are wrong?
Our quest is to be efficient explorers, developers, and producers, but more than that, we also have strategic opportunities in uncertainty identification/handling. Control, positioning, and the creation/preservation of competitive advantage becomes the ultimate reward for understanding and properly handling uncertainty in our unconventional projects.
"Uncertainty in Unconventional Basins"
Abstract: Companies spend a time and money trying to reduce uncertainty believing that to be the key to increasing confidence of making the correct decision. Often, this time and capital is wasted. They’ve spent too much and have taken too long, losing profit and competitive advantage in the process because they have not fully understood the uncertainty present or know how to effectively handle it. We are going to look at ways to identify and deal with uncertainty efficiently and effectively through the value chain; from play entry, early development, operational efficiency, to infrastructure planning.
Undoubtedly, there are times when uncertainty reduction is important and value creative, but when is enough enough? When does additional learning destroy value? There are tools, including Value of Information, Value of Control, and Value of Learning (VoL, a new approach, helps us with operational efficiency), that help us to understand the materiality of attempting to reduce uncertainty.
As we look at uncertainty potential reduction/resolution, we will approach the effort using four questions that should always be asked:
1/ Is this uncertainty material?
2/ Can we do anything about it?
3/ Is it worth doing anything about it?
4/ What if we are wrong?
Our quest is to be efficient explorers, developers, and producers, but more than that, we also have strategic opportunities in uncertainty identification/handling. Control, positioning, and the creation/preservation of competitive advantage becomes the ultimate reward for understanding and properly handling uncertainty in our unconventional projects.
| dapub Haskett Uncertainty in Unconventional Basins pdf.pdf |
Older Papers and Presentations...
Evaluation of Unconventional Resource - Back in 2004 we published (with Jeff Brown) the benchmark paper on the evaluation of unconventional resource plays. The efficient assessment of unconventional play potential requires the optimization of the pilot phase... a balance between the truthfulness of the initial wells and the learning to be done. Initial wells are not necessarily representative of the wells from the eventual fully developed field. As such there can be confusion; true and false positives and true and false negatives. How much data in the form of wells drilled and completed is useful is dependent on where the uncertainty moves from non-systemic to systemic. The other aspect to be aware of is that our uncertainty is not a well's productivity, but the distribution or family of wells we will have within the distribution of well families that we *could* have. This enables a multitude of decision management implications.
| spe_96879 Evaluation of Unconventional Resource |
Optimal Appraisal Well Location Through Efficient Uncertainty Reduction And Value Of Information Techniques - In 2003 we presented a paper at the SPEE meeting in Dallas (SPE 84241) on efficient appraisal of discoveries. We included initial thoughts on uncertainty learning and daughter distribution changes dependent on appraisal drilling location. The overall objective was to eliminate as much uncertainty as possible with the fewest number of appraisal wells. This ends up being a balance of learning and risk. Too far away from the discovery location increases dry hole probability, but drilling too close eliminates learning.
| spe_optimal_appraisals_-_haskett.pdf |