Objectives tree (non mathematical) [Logic]

Prev: AT commands dial, accept, and manipulate voice and data calls.
Next: A Christian response to Martial Art?

From: Richard on 18 Apr 2010 10:02

I cannot think of a better newgroup to post this to. I'm looking at
project cycle management. Object is to set objectives to improve the
town economically.

I'm tying to create a problem tree, (or objectives tree) which involves
cause and effect (or means and ends).

The problem is to do with a place, say a town.

The results of the problem tree gets incorporated into on objectives
tree. At the top of the objectives tree we essentially have what turns
into "project purpose", below that "ouputs" and below that "activities".
The activities produce outputs, outputs bring about the purpose.

The town has shops that are closing. That makes town visitors decrease.
Which tends to make shops closing. Okay, we have a cause and effect
loop going on there.

But, anyway, here is my problem, I always want to write the problem tree
thusly, from top to bottom:

Shops Closing (Focal problem)

Poor environment
Poor advertising
Poor transportation
Poor visitor numbers

This gets converted to:

Shops opening (Project purpose)

Improve environment (output)
Do advertising (output)
Improve transportation (output)
Increase visitor numbers(output)

Note, although "increase visitor numbers" is down as an ouput, it cannot
be achieved independently, it relies on the other three outputs. All the
other ouputs can be achieved independently. I think that might be a problem.

Obviously, increasing visitor numbers are crucial to reverse shops
closing. But, it cannot be right(I muse), that we have "increase vistor
numbers" as an output in the objectives tree - but it I put it their
because, intuitively, it seems it needs to be there.

Are we in a situation here where "increase visitor numbers" is a broad
equivalence to the other three outputs, and I should leave the outputs
to these other three? It's like having an ouput of "increase visitor
numbers" *but leaving it unsaid*.

I've also wondered what should be seen as the best focal problem, should
it be "shops closing" or "insufficient visitors". I'm not sure there is
any difference:

Increase visitors (Project purpose)

Improve environment (output)
Do advertising (output)
Improve transportation (output)
shops openning (output)

Which, if shops openning is basically an equivalence to the other three
ouputs leaves us with:

Increase visitors (Project purpose)

Improve environment (output)
Do advertising (output)
Improve transportation (output)

Same is when the project purpose was "shops opening!

Anyway, I'm trying to come up with a logical and non-problemmatic
objectives tree.

Thanks.

From: Ken Pledger on 18 Apr 2010 16:48

In article <830hoeFu2mU1(a)mid.individual.net>,
Richard <yuk(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:

> I cannot think of a better newgroup to post this to....

It's possible that you may get help from the operations research
people in <sci.op-research>.

Ken Pledger.

From: Richard on 18 Apr 2010 17:29

On 18/04/2010 21:48, Ken Pledger wrote:
> In article<830hoeFu2mU1(a)mid.individual.net>,
> Richard<yuk(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> I cannot think of a better newgroup to post this to....
>
> It's possible that you may get help from the operations research
> people in<sci.op-research>.
>
> Ken Pledger.

Hi.

Thanks. But, I think I might have solved things sufficiently.

I've been taking a kind of mathematical aproach, or a logical approach
and there was a fault in my reasoning. And I should have included shop rent.

Writing as I did:

Shops openning (Project purpose)

Improve environment (output)
Do advertising (output)
Improve transportation (output)
Increase visitor numbers(output)

-is wrong.

But something like this is right:

Shops openning (Project purpose)
| |
Increase visitor numbers Low rents
|
Improve environment (output) (some output, whatever)
Do advertising (output)
Improve transportation (output)

- is right.

Shops opening as a a project purpose depends on increasing visitor
numbers AND low rents. Increasing visitor numbers AND low rents should
be an objective but not written down as ouputs.

Achieve the ouputs and you will get both increase in visitor numbers AND
low rents *required* for "shops openning".

Previously I was getting into a situation which made no sense:

Using a kind of (false) logic, I ended up saying:

Shops opening (Project purpose)

Improve environment (output)
Do advertising (output)
Improve transportation (output)

-was equivalent to -:

Increase visitors (Project purpose)

Improve environment (output)
Do advertising (output)
Improve transportation (output)

-which is balony. :c)

"Shops openning", as a project purpose, has one more output than
"increase visitors" - low rent.

Anyway, I think I know what I'm doing now. :c)

From: Richard on 18 Apr 2010 17:36

From: Tronscend on 19 Apr 2010 10:55

"Richard" <yuk(a)ntlworld.com> skrev i melding
news:831bt1Fuf2U1(a)mid.individual.net...
> On 18/04/2010 21:48, Ken Pledger wrote:
>> In article<830hoeFu2mU1(a)mid.individual.net>,
>> Richard<yuk(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
.......

> Thanks. But, I think I might have solved things sufficiently.
>
.......

Looks like it, but as an interested layman ....

a) "means" and "ends" are not ontological kinds, so to speak;
they are a two-step chain of events arbitrarily lifted out of an otherwise
seamless timeline.
IOW, you can move the two-step window back and forth, seeing event 1 as the
cause/precondition for E2,
and then move one step, seeing E2 as C/P for E3 and so forth, and of course
the other way (E-1 to E1...).
So there is per se nothing wrong with seeing "Increase visitors" both as an
end in relation to "Better advertizing (etc.)", and as a means in relation
to "Shops opening". It is a matter of convenience or purpose, either in
analysis or in presentation.

b) In the problem, you introduced both a timeline as well as a reciprocal
effect (fewer visitors, shops closing, even fewer visitors, more shops
closing .... etc.). A cycle.
To the degree that this is an important part of the presentation of the
problem, perhaps you might consider including it in the model also when
presenting the solution (More visitors, fewer shops closing, even more
visitors, shops opening....).
Opening the loop to plot it on a timeline, you might get some quantifiable
points like "More than 10x visitors (needing product x (coffee, gas,
lodging...) may constitute a market for 10x businesses (by 10th of
February); 10x businesses may constitute an attraction for 20x visitors (by
25th of May); More than 20x visitors (needing product x (coffee, gas,
lodging...) may constitute a market for 20x businesses ....." ; IOW the
upward spiral, or a part of a business cycle or whatever you may want to
call it.
Anyway, the point is to distinguish "timeless" "logical" loops from actual
temporal events.

T

| Next | Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: AT commands dial, accept, and manipulate voice and data calls.
Next: A Christian response to Martial Art?