Framing elements for data collection in army field environments – problem structuring for acquisition of the right data right

Abstract

Good Problem Structuring Methods (PSM) practice involves the use of agreed methods within an appropriate study environment that ensures sound process is applied in a holistic manner. This is particularly valuable where the Operations Research (OR) issue relates to an Ackoff or mess and where there will be different viewpoints, value sets, perceptions and positions. Many Australian Army studies fall into this category. Despite the nature of such complicated issues, progress on such considerations as equipment acquisition or improved procedures must still be made. In our view, partnership between the client problem owner) and the analytical community is key to this process. Typically the study owner would engage the Operations Researchers to develop an agreed analytical campaign of which Army field data collection would be an integral part. In this paper we investigated if development of an agreed trial data collection plan would be amenable to such a soft OR approach. The notion here is that if a set of invisibles relating to gaining an understanding of the system of study as a whole are achieved, then the actual process of formulating a field data collection plan becomes relatively straightforward and more likely to fulfil the study owners' needs. The challenge in this case is twofold - knowing what data to collect (the right data) and how to collect it (the data right). In this paper we describe our experiences in developing a data acquisition model. We detail how an agreed analytical data acquisition campaign can be designed through an appreciation of a set of framing elements: system understanding, stakeholder needs, analyst needs and data collection opportunities. Adherence to this protocol means the next stage of actual identification of the key discriminating features (data) and a field data collection plan already include the twin PSM goals of a credible process and delivering a usable product. Inherent to the process are agreement of a study plan and definition of the roles and responsibilities of the study sponsor and the analysts. This paper describes how the initial framing elements can be used as a basis for developing a working model of the system, identification of the critical features and shared data collection plan which focusses attention on the discriminating factors. This data collection plan becomes part of the overall analytical study and thus contributes to providing credible, auditable and transparent insights to address the overall study question. While this paper is based on experience with Army, the concept should be applicable to other military domains. Because of the adherence to a sound plan, the study owner can have confidence that the credibility of the process will provide protection from unhelpful criticism by other parties. It is our belief that there is a significant gap in the literature, and that papers such as this one, will help develop a Code of Best Practice for trial data collection.