Robust Decision Making: Coping with Uncertainty: Predicting the Future and Then Acting on Our Predictions Leaves Us Vulnerable to Surprises. So We Need Decisions That Will Work in a Variety of Potential Situations

By Lempert, Robert J.; Popper, Steven W. et al. | The Futurist, January-February 2010 | Go to article overview

Robust Decision Making: Coping with Uncertainty: Predicting the Future and Then Acting on Our Predictions Leaves Us Vulnerable to Surprises. So We Need Decisions That Will Work in a Variety of Potential Situations


Lempert, Robert J., Popper, Steven W., Bankes, Steven C., The Futurist


Robust decision making (RDM) is a framework for making decisions with a large number of highly imperfect forecasts of the future. Rather than relying on improved point forecasts or probabilistic predictions, RDM embraces many plausible futures, then helps analysts and decision makers identify near-term actions that are robust across a very wide range of futures--that is, actions that promise to do a reasonable job of achieving the decision makers' goals compared to the alternative options, no matter what future comes to pass. Rather than asking what the future will bring, this methodology focuses on what we can do today to better shape the future to our liking.

RDM emerged from work at RAND beginning in the early 1990s, when we, analysts Robert Lempert and Steven Popper, were separately grappling with policy problems characterized by deep uncertainty and potentially non-equilibrium dynamics--in particular, climate change and the transition of east European communist societies to market economies. Meanwhile, RAND computer scientist Steve Bankes was grappling with the question of how one can use imperfect computer models to inform policy decisions, particularly to deal with the next wars rather than previous ones.

In brief, RDM uses the computer to support an iterative process in which humans propose strategies as potentially robust across a wide range of futures. The computer then challenges these strategies (stress tests) using simulations and data extrapolations to suggest futures where these strategies may perform poorly. The alternatives can then be revised to hedge against these stressing futures, and the process is repeated for the new strategies.

Rather than first predicting the future in order to act upon it, decision makers may now gain a systematic understanding of their best near-term options for shaping a long-term future while fully considering many plausible futures. The result is near-term policy options that are robust--i.e., that, compared to the alternatives choices, perform reasonably well across a wide range of those futures.

The strength of robust decision making is its flexibility. In this iterative process, the computer retains the full range of uncertainties, multiple interpretations, and other ambiguities and can bring key bits of information to decision makers' attention at any point where it might help distinguish among the merits of alternative decision options. This process can help break down institutional barriers to considering multiple futures, because it provides systematic criteria for determining which futures ought to be considered. It can help decision makers avoid "over-arguing," which occurs when decision makers pretend they are more certain than they actually are to avoid losing credibility in policy debates--by allowing them to acknowledge multiple plausible futures and to make strong arguments about the best policies for hedging against a wide range of contingencies.

Computer-supported RDM at its root combines the best capabilities of humans and machines. Humans have unparalleled ability to recognize potential patterns, draw inferences, formulate new hypotheses, and intuit potential solutions to seemingly intractable problems. Humans also possess various sources of knowledge--tacit, qualitative, experiential, and pragmatic--that are not easily represented in traditional quantitative formalisms. Working without computers, humans can often successfully reason their way through problems of deep uncertainty, provided that their intuition about the system in question works tolerably well.

Using their talent for storytelling, humans can challenge each other with "what if" scenarios to probe for weaknesses in proposed plans. These processes succeed because the best response to deep uncertainty is often a strategy that, rather than being optimized for a particular predicted future, is well hedged against a variety of different futures and evolves over time as new information becomes available. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Robust Decision Making: Coping with Uncertainty: Predicting the Future and Then Acting on Our Predictions Leaves Us Vulnerable to Surprises. So We Need Decisions That Will Work in a Variety of Potential Situations
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.