LINKING ALTERNATIVES TO OBJECTIVES:
In Chapter Three we recounted how we designed the alternatives for the OCMS. In Chapter Four we described how the group of policymakers, through a carefully constructed interview vehicle, rankordered the 11 objectives, or, to put it another way, we determined the intensity of the group's preference for each objective. The remaining task is to use the rank-ordered objectives to select alternatives that, in the aggregate, form the officer career management system.
This chapter explains the technique we used to evaluate alternatives against objectives and to take into account the varying policy effect of decisions. A generic explanation illustrates the methodology. Appendices D and E contain specific information about the objectives and alternatives of this study, and Appendix B gives an example of how we decided about one functional aspect, entry point. This chapter gives a general understanding of the methodology; those interested in the quantitative details of the methodology should turn to the appendices.
The chapter first describes how we normalized objectives so they could be compared and then how we accounted for the different weights policymakers assigned to them. It then describes how we accounted for the different policy effects of increments of change, and it concludes with a discussion of how we made judgments about how well an alternative accomplished a given objective.