Euclid: Strategic alternative assessment matrix

The vast amount of information that must be considered to solve inherently ill‐structured and complex strategic problems creates a need for tools to help decision makers (DMs) recognize the complexity of this process and develop a rational model for strategy evaluation. Over the last several decades, a philosophy and a body of intuitive and analytical methods have been developed to assist DMs in the evaluation of strategic alternatives. However, the intuitive methods lack a structured framework for the systematic evaluation of strategic alternatives while the analytical methods are not intended to capture intuitive preferences. Euclid is a simple and yet sophisticated multiobjective value analysis model that attempts to uncover some of the complexities inherent in the evaluation of strategic alternatives. The proposed model uses a series of intuitive and analytical methods including environmental scanning, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), subjective probabilities, and the theory of displaced ideal, to plot strategic alternatives on a matrix based on their Euclidean distance from the ideal alternative. Euclid is further compared to the quantitative strategic planning matrix (QSPM) in a real world application. The information provided by the users shows that Euclid can significantly enhance decision quality and the DM's confidence. Euclid is not intended to replace the DMs, rather, it provides a systematic approach to support, supplement, and ensure the internal consistency of their judgments through a series of logically sound techniques. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

ON EISLER'S GENERAL PSYCHOPHYSICAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION AND HIS FECHNERIAN INTEGRATION

The general psychophysical differential equation (GPDE) for calculating 'intrasubjective' relations, is reviewed and it is argued that: ( a ) the use of calculus and Weber functions are unnecessary for the determination of such relations: simple algebraic methods are available, ( b ) Taylor's expansion in the derivation of GPDE is not necessary: a short cut method is suggested and applied instead, ( c ) GPDE is untenable as an empirical model, for it is based on one definition and one assumption which are both arbitrary and purely mathematical, ( d ) The sources of error in the validation procedures used by Eisler are pointed out; ( e ) by means of a validity test and the due treatment of a dozen sets of experimental data, the Fechnerian integration as well as GPDE are invalidated.     

NOTE ON THE VALIDITY OF THE POWER LAW

On the basis of previous experimental findings, it is argued that the power law is not based on a true (subjective) ratio scale, but on a quasi-ratio scale. Hence, and in spite of the results of the cross-modality matching, the validity of the power law, as well as the validity of models and equations in which a subjective scale is involved, is doubted. It is further indicated that the validity of Brown's law can, under special conditions, be tested by the relation between subjective variables of velocity, length and time. Finally, the relation between the power law and Luce's theorem is discussed briefly.