1 / 17

RPM-Explorer - A Web-based Tool for Interactive Portfolio Decision Analysis

RPM-Explorer - A Web-based Tool for Interactive Portfolio Decision Analysis Erkka Jalonen and Ahti Salo Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology P.O. Box 1100, 02015 TKK, Finland http://www.sal.tkk.fi firstname.lastname@tkk.fi Robust Portfolio Modelling (RPM)

jacob
Download Presentation

RPM-Explorer - A Web-based Tool for Interactive Portfolio Decision Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RPM-Explorer - A Web-based Tool for Interactive Portfolio Decision Analysis Erkka Jalonen and Ahti Salo Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology P.O. Box 1100, 02015 TKK, Finland http://www.sal.tkk.fi firstname.lastname@tkk.fi

  2. Robust Portfolio Modelling (RPM) • Extends Preference Programming to portfolio problems • A subset of project proposals is selected in view of multiple evaluation criteria • Project and portfolio value expressed as a weighted sum of criteria scores • Admits incomplete information about criterion weights and projects’ scores • Focus on non-dominated portfolios (NDP) • A rational DM would not choose a dominated portfolio  focus on NDPs • All NDPs are computed with specialised algorithms • Core Index value convey the share of NPDs that contain a given project • Liesiö, Mild, Salo (2006). Preference Programming for Robust Portfolio Modeling and Project Selection, EJOR (to appear).

  3. Impact of Additional Information (1/2) • Dominance relations depend on the information set S • Loose statements lead to a large number of non-dominated portfolios (NDP) • Complete information typically leads to a unique portfolio • Additional information makes the set of NDPs smaller • This information is modelled through a smaller weight set ( ) and/or narrower score intervals ( ) • Several preference elicitation methods can be employed • No new portfolio can become non-dominated • Elicitation efforts can be focused on borderline projects • Additional information affects the Core Index of borderline projects only • Narrower score intervals needed for borderline projects only

  4. Impact of Additional Information (2/2) • No information  A rank-ordering • 542 NDPs  109 NDPs • 104 borderline projects  64 borderline projects

  5. Decision Support in RPM Selected Core projects  choose Large set of projects Multiple criteria Resource and portfolio constraints Add. core Preceding core proj. Additional information Decision rules, heuristics Loose statements on weights and scores Borderline projects focus on Borderline Not selected Add. exter. Compute non-dom. portfolios Negotiation, iteration Update ND portfolios Exterior proj.  discard Preceding exterior

  6. RPM-Explorer - Background • Old: Analyses often suggest a single optimal solution • Recommendation often stated in written documents • Such documents provide little support for the interactive exploration of results • New: Provide an interactive interface to the analysis • Allow stakeholders to specify their preferences about the importance of criteria • Produce decision recommendations based on the stakeholders’ preferences • Visualise decision recommendations for projects based on Core Index values • Make use of widely available communication technologies (=Internet)

  7. Decision Support Tools for RPM E.g Opinions-Online©(voting tool) RPM-Explorer© RPM-Solver© Selected Core projects  choose Large set of projects Multiple criteria Resource and portfolio constraints Add. core Preeding core proj. Additional information Decision rules, heuristics Loose statements on weights and scores Borderline projects focus on Borderline Not selected Add. exter. Compute non-dom. portfolios Negotiation, iteration Update ND portfolios Exterior proj.  discard Preceding exterior

  8. Application of RPM-Explorer - Case Study (1/4) • Development of the strategic research agenda for the Association of Packaging Industry in Finland • Collaborative consultation process (i) producing research themes (70 participants) (ii) commenting and elaboration of themes (the same participants as in previous phase) (iii) evaluating of themes (10 evaluators) (iv) analysing them first personally and then jointly in a workshop (15 decicion makers) • Research themes treated as ’projects’

  9. Application of RPM-Explorer - Case Study (2/4) • Themes (~80) evaluated with regard to three criteria (i) innovativeness (ii) feasibility (iii) relevance • evaluated on a 1-to-7 Likert-scale • theme-specific scores computed as the mean of evaluators’ ratings • Results communicated by RPM-Explorer and as pdf-documents • Interactive analysis of themes with DMs in two workshops • First one with the Board of the Association (14 leading industrialists) • Second with 10 including external stakeholders

  10. Application of RPM-Explorer - Case Study (3/4) Theme Producers Decision Makers ThemeEvaluators RPM-Explorer analysis applet Internet Opinions-Online © questionnaire software RPM- Solver analysis software RPM-Explorer configuration files Opinions- Online© Database

  11. Application of RPM-Explorer - Case Study (4/4) • An Example: Theme Group 4: Packaging Materials

  12. RPM-Explorer in Use (1/2) Specifications of preferences results in corresponding adjustments in real-time

  13. RPM-Explorer in Use (2/2) Several visualization tools Explicit support for project selection

  14. RPM-Explorer - Conclusions • Positive feedback from users • RMP-Explorer clearly stimulated workshop discussions • Generic software for many problem contexts and uses • Personal learning through Internet-mediated preference analysis • Collaborative decision making in facilitated workshops • Software may introduce several benefits • Decision making: Personal interests, sensitivity analyses • Communication: Increased commitment, enhanced understanding • Information elicitation: Guidance for focusing the elicitation efforts

  15. RPM-Decisions© (1/2) • RPM-Decisions© • Combines RPM-Solver and RPM-Explorer • Under intensive development • Demo available • New Features • Web-interface to analysis (RPM-Explorer) • Criteria hierarchies • Project interdependencies • Soft budget constraints • www.rpm.tkk.fi

  16. RPM-Decisions© (2/2) • Spread-sheet form data input • Scores, costs and constraints • Preference elicitation wizard • Constraint wizards • Computation • Approximative algorithms for large problems • Exact algorithms for up to 70 projects • Interactive analysis • Core indexes, decision rules, robustness • Score scatter plots, additional information • Export for interactive analysis web-interface

  17. On-going RPM Applications • Management of infrastructure assets • Optimization of road and bridge maintenance and repair programmes • Allocation of resources among different asset classes in view of multiple criteria • Voluntary conservation of forest reserves • Evaluation of conservation value of sites offered by forest owners • Design of optimal decision analytic evaluation process • Innovation management • Valuation of intellectual property rights (Nokia Wireless Technologies) • Evaluation of longitudinal data from innovation programmes (Salo et al., 2006) • Solicitation, commenting, evaluation and selection of innovation themes

More Related