The Conceptual Design of the AMF Project Plan (Application of the Cogniscope System), CWA PROJECT FDA-195-2
Summary: Pending
An IM Report
This is an INTERACTIVE MANAGEMENT REPORT, on contract work done by Christakis's consulting company. The project was titled AMF an acronym for Administrative Management of Files. It dealt with attempts to improve procedures in use by the Food & Drug Administration's Drug Evaluation Center in Washington, D.C.
The report gives results of Interactive Management Workshops held in January, February & March 1995, for Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
This main body of the report is 49 pages. However the report contains 78 pages of appendices, as follows:
A) Correspondence and Workshop Planning materials, done in 1994.
B) Text of 113 clarified idea statements regarding problems(requirement to be met, according to the report terminology) after the first Nominal Group Technique session.
C) Tabular listing of the problems(requirements) ranked most important by the participants
D) Following the first ISM session, the computer had sorted the problems (requirements) into 20 categories. These categories were then reviewed and discussed in the workshop and each category was given a name. Appendix D is a printout of all of the text of all the problems statements (requirement) sorted by NAMED CATEGORIES.
To Warfield's despair, Christakis persists in calling the named categories Clusters. Use of the word Cluster at this stage of ISM is counterproductive, because it confuses the thinking of the participants, when they might later have to deal with a true IM Cluster, which is a GROUP of NAMED IM CATEGORIES. (An IM CATEGORY is a group of idea statements, WHILE AN IM CLUSTER is a group of IM CATEGORIES, the term Cluster applies in IM terms to a higher level of understanding than that to be found when dealing only with IM Categories. Poor Warfield has never been able to convince Christakis to use both terms and to differentiate their use and meaning. Although Christakis himself understands the distinction, he does not understand the value in teaching and using the distinctive terms with his workshop participants)
E) This appendix is the result of another Nominal Group Technique session, in which participants contributed ideas (options) for meeting the problems(requirement). The text of each idea statement (option) is VERBATIM, more or less, as given by the participants, and has not yet been clarified by group discussion.
F) The options in Appendix E are now printed in clarified wording. They have been reworded for use in the upcoming ISM session.
G) This appendix shows the results of the second ISM session held for this workshop group. The idea statements (options) have been sorted by the computer into IM CATEGORIES, and here again, Christakis has termed these categories Affinity Clusters rather than Affinity Categories as he should have done if using correct IM terms. Appendix G shows the names of the IM CATEGORIES which have been chosen through group discussion, and gives text of each idea statement(option) in its appropriate list under the category name.
H) Tabular listing of the idea statements (options) ranked most important by the group.
I) Preliminary Options Field listing all the ideas(options) in separate categorized columns. This Options field was used as the basis for the Options Profile which is pages 37-40 of the main text of the IM REPORT.
J) Tabular listing of Delphi voting in response to the Options Profile.
Rose made a photocopy of the main text of this report, the first 49 pages, and has filed it in John's Manuscripts file cabinet (Although John did not write this report, it is a companion to the report titled Designing the Development of Regulatory Science, which used much of John's writings, so Rose decided to keep both manuscripts together. Ordinarily titles not authored by John would be in the PAPERS BY OTHERS file cabinet. This is confusing, I know, but the best I could do with Christakis's stuff.) The information on this title is entered in the BYOTHERS database, and has been duplicated in this IMREPORT database
As of this writing, in November 1996, there are two copies of the full, 126-page printed report described above, and John is keeping both of these in his REPORTS file cabinet in Room 10.
Additional Info
- Description: One DVD
- Publication Year: 1996
Published in
Catalog
Leave a comment
Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Show All Catalog Items
- The Conceptual Design of the AMF Project Plan (Application of the Cogniscope System), CWA PROJECT FDA-195-2