Draft:DAWM Methodology Workshop

Integrated Deliverable Approach Workshop Methodology with Idea Evaluation
Facilitated workshops is a recognised method for fostering growth strategies. These workshops are often used as a part of scenario-planning or future growth strategies. The aim being to provide insights into future scenarios, encourage strategic planning, promote growth opportunities, team collaboration, enhance skills and understanding, share research findings and address conflicts. A major challenge for enterprises and startups is the lack of stakeholder engagement. Workshops address this by creating a collaborative process for engaging stakeholders during growth phases.

The Deliverable Approach Workshop Methodology (DAWM) helps structure business processes with logic; leading teams through complex situations by collaboration — reaching for a shared vision. In any dynamic business environment organisations face various challenges. Approach for that is to prioritise and address these issues systematically.

What is a Workshop?
Workshops are collaborative meetings involving technical staff, stakeholders, and management, focusing on tasks related to business growth, project management, planning, requirement specification, and user experience design. The facilitators, who are in charge of them, help the group communicate and collaborate effectively. Facilitators support participants, enhancing the workshop's productivity and effectiveness.

Success of Facilitated Workshops
The DAWM workshop methodology consists of three distinct cycles — each playing a unique role in business strategy.

1. "What it is?": Addressing current circumstances.

2. "What it might be?": Exploring potential future scenarios.

3. "Strategy": Focusing on the overall corporate approach and risk management.

DAWM Workshops
Investigation Development Workshops (IDW) integrate qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The DAWM workshop requires up to twelve attendees, one facilitator and an assistant. The facilitator manages time, organises discussions and gathers feedback.

The DAWM workshop utilises the BRIDGE and CRUX approaches to support verbal presentation with a one-pager handout and a forum for questions. The facilitator allows time for participants to share thoughts and suggestions, prompts passive attendees and shares key points with colleagues. After the workshop the facilitator instructs the group to document additional input in a survey report and uses the box-to-box methodology for analysis.

Workshop Crux Analysis Approach
The Crux methodology provides a clear framework for ensuring that the most critical issues are central to strategic decision-making. A systematic approach to identifying, prioritising and addressing challenges is essential for navigating the complexities of modern business environments. By involving all stakeholders and methodically breaking down and prioritising challenges by importance, companies can develop more effective strategies that align with their core values and long-term goals. The implementation of the CRUX methodology is analysed in seven steps, which will be detailed in the following paragraphs. The graph below provides the Entroopia templates for CRUX business cases:

1. Identifying Challenges: Gathering input from stakeholders to list challenges.

2. Decomposing Challenges: Breaking down challenges into manageable components.

3. Clustering Related Challenges: Group related challenges to identify common themes.

4. Filtering Challenges: Eliminating less critical issues.

5. Prioritising Challenges: Sequencing challenges based on importance and urgency.

6. Rating the Importance of Challenges: Assessing the potential impact of each challenge.

7. Identifying Crux Challenges: Focusing on significant, difficult-to-solve challenges.

CRUX Results for Deliverables
Implementing this structured approach allows companies to convert various challenges into a prioritised list of actionable items. By concentrating on the most critical issues—those that signify significant threats or opportunities—organisations can better align their strategic initiatives. This methodology ensures that immediate concerns are promptly addressed while supporting long-term strategic objectives.

MCDA Processing
Businesses increasingly prioritise evaluation to manage resources efficiently and make timely decisions. The Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) is utilised for assessing product creativity, despite potential time and subjectivity challenges. Contextualization clarifies concept selection in creative workshops through Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), aiding decision-makers in finding optimal compromises where no single perfect solution exists.

The evaluation process involves defining context, assessing ideas, processing with MCDA and debating outcomes. Addressing various contextual aspects and criteria like originality and feasibility. Successful ideas must meet criteria such as applicability, value, feasibility and innovation—selected or customised by decision-makers.

Various approaches to weight elicitation ensure balanced evaluations. Methods include individual assessment, expertise-based criteria assessment and consensus evaluation.

These methods facilitate comprehensive idea assessment through individual, aggregated or consensus-based evaluations. Culminating in prioritised action on urgent challenges and organised clustering of issues. Initial stakeholder input is crucial for identifying and addressing organisational challenges comprehensively.

Similar to existing systems designed to assist in decision-making based on multiple criteria, we consider a collection$$A=\{a_1 \ldots a_m\}$$ of m alternatives that need to be ranked, and a set $$F=\{f_1 \ldots f_n\}$$of n criteria to be optimised. The outcome of the multi-criteria decision problem can be represented as a decision matrix $$(m\times n)$$ where each element indicates the assessment or value of the alternative ai according to the criterion $$f_j$$. The approach is succinctly described as follows:

Each criterion is used to evaluate alternatives by comparing them pairwise. The preference is expressed as a numerical value on a scale from 0 to 1, where 0 denotes no preference or indifference and 1 indicates a strong preference.

The decision-maker determines the generalised criterion, which is the measure that quantifies the difference in performance or preference. $$f_j$$ represents a generalised preference function $$P_j( d )$$ where: $$d=\{f_j( a_i ) - f_j( a_k )\}$$ $$W=\{W_1 \ldots W_2\}$$
 * A weighting vector is a metric that quantifies the relative significance of each condition:

$$\pi = \begin{cases} & \Alpha\times\Alpha\rightarrow[0,1] \\ \pi(a_i, a_k) & \textstyle \sum_{j=1}^n W_jP_j[f_j( a_i) - f_j( a_k )]\displaystyle\end{cases}$$
 * Provide an overview of the preference relation π for all the alternatives

$$\phi^+(a_i)=\tfrac{1}{n}\textstyle \sum_{i=(\mathit{\neq\Kappa})}^n \displaystyle\pi(a_i, a_k)$$
 * To calculate the uni-criterion flows, we need to analyse the valued outranking graph and determine the flow leaving each node α, as described by:

$$\phi^- (a_i)=\tfrac{1}{n}\textstyle \sum_{i=(\mathit{\neq\Kappa})}^n \displaystyle\pi(a_i, a_k)$$ $$\phi (a_i)=\phi^+ (a_i)-\phi^- (a_i)$$
 * And the flow that is coming in is:
 * Calculation of business flow:

Integrating MCDA with DAWM
The MCDA approach aims to recommend outcomes that closely align with the expectations of the decision-maker. These results are derived through deductive reasoning and mathematical computations with a template metrix intended for consultation purposes.

The ultimate responsibility for deciding which ideas and activities to pursue lies with the individual tasked with making the decision. The outcomes serve as a foundation for integrated discussions within the DAWM methodology among decision-makers, specialists and stakeholders during the implementation phase. This approach facilitates a balanced integration of intellectual processes and instinctual decision-making, taking into account validated considerations of business risks and competitors.

The table below presents a study of the risk matrix for a startup.The company's risk management department can adjust the ratings in the matrix to ensure they align with the organisation's overall structure and strategic objectives. This adaptability allows for a tailored approach to risk management, addressing specific needs and priorities of the startup.


 * Insert risk impact weight in the MCDA:

$$R(a_i)=\phi (a_i)*r$$
 * Finalized the DAWM:
 * DAMN methodology has been finalized by incorporating competitor analyses using a matrix approach ranging from low to high or 0% to 100%.
 * In this context, the alternative with the highest score is preferred, regardless of small differences between alternatives.
 * Rankings were determined by sequentially evaluating ideas proposed by each participant group and calculating averages to ascertain net flows.
 * Subsequently, rankings were established by computing combined scores based on specified preferences and weights, resulting in overall flows.
 * Business growth is linked to risk reduction and avoiding less critical areas of growth.

Deliverables and Goals
In developing the DAWM workshop, the goals were continually refined throughout the project. Through engagement in workshops and thoughtful reflection on participant interactions, the key objectives were established :


 * 1) Express a wide range of values: The workshop aims to uncover diverse values, address ethical considerations and foster a nuanced growth environment. It recognises the influence of personal experiences on values, thus emphasising the importance of a diverse participant group with varied life experiences and expertise levels.
 * 2) Engage team spirit: One of the primary goals involves facilitating workflow activities that enable participants to express their values derived from personal experiences, thereby raising overall business value.
 * 3) Navigate conflicting values: Participants are encouraged to collaboratively address value tensions beyond surface-level recognition. This approach to the workshop supports decision-making on conflicting values and design trade-offs, considering power dynamics to ensure equitable participation.
 * 4) Utilise hidden resources: Optimisation efforts aim to uncover underutilised company resources. Participants contribute novel ideas and insights that may not typically surface in daily operations. This can raise productivity without additional investments.
 * 5) Stakeholder engagement: The workshop's stakeholder identification process focuses on ownership, knowledge, rights and contributions. All integral to the company's strategic growth.
 * 6) Minimise specialist involvement: Facilitation in strategic workshops prioritises creating an inclusive environment over extensive facilitator expertise. This approach aims to democratise workshop participation and applicability across diverse settings. Supporting startups by leveraging existing team strengths and bridging knowledge gaps.