Dear Malcolm,
I completely identify and appreciate that time is of essence and prioritization is the key. In fact this is what motivated me to suggest a matrix because such framework may give direction to assessment. But if there is none, I wonder what would be the approach for relative assessment of options? I'm afraid then evaluation would be subjective and not objective/accountable.
On your contention that 'weights of different parameters are likely to be not equal', I again agree, and clarify that this why in my previous mail, I didn't state scale and scores, but rather categorically mention that weights may be assigned (please read after agreement). [On this @Roelof (in mail of Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:49 PM) suggested, "we could give different criteria different weights, according to importance." I second that.]
Further, I submit that if exercise of having a scorecard to underpin the process is not undertaken, then
- different assessors will have different notions of relative importance of a parameter,
- this way they will end up deriving different conclusions, and
- in effect there will be further deliberations and we will actually loose time.
In my considerate view, this is essential. Seems @Roelof agrees. From my end if other colleagues agree, I stand to contribute on this further, and while doing so as suggested by @Mathieu (in mail of Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:54 PM), attempt would be to adhere to agreed upon definitions and to keep it simple.
Best,
Renu Sirothiya