HERMILIO NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

VALDIZÁN

FACULTY OF ECONOMICS
PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS

MULTIPOL METHOD

COURSE:
Economic Outlook

TEACHER:
Mr. Zambrano Toledo, Timoteo

RESPONSIBLE:
Durand Cori, George
Huarauya Campos, Yudith Laura
Laurencio Aquino, Janet
Placido Rivera, Clynton

TURN:
Tomorrow

HUÁNUCO - PERU
2018
 INDEX

INTRODUCTION
1. OBJECTIVES......................................................................................................4
2. DEFINITION.....................................................................................................4
3. CHARACTERISTICS........................................................................................6
4. PROCEDURES.........................................................................................7
6. REFERENCES..............................................................................................14
INTRODUCTION
1. OBJECTIVES

2. DEFINITION

From a historical perspective, the 'multipol' as a prospective tool,

it was developed in France to guide decision-making when there is
multiple options, and the most convenient one must be identified according to the context.

For the specialist, and one of the founders of foresight, Michel Godet, the method
Multipol emerges as a necessity to have multiple action criteria. In other words
suyas

The need to take into account the presence of multiple criteria in the
decision-making problems have motivated the development of multicriteria methods of
help in decision-making, as well as a very wide range of concepts and
procedures (vague sets, utility function, simplex, etc.). The method
Multipol (from Multicriteria and Policy) is undoubtedly the simplest, although not the
less useful. It is based on the evaluation of actions by weighted averages, of
the same way that the evaluation of the students in a class is done according to certain

subjects with assigned coefficients.[CITATION God93 318 10250 ].

Godet points out that this method evaluates the weighted average actions (statistically
spoken), and in turn, work is done with scoring scales.

On the other hand, for the State University of Bolívar, the multipol method would be
project evaluations according to government policies (or another institution) and scenarios
which are weighted by the projects as results of such political measures.
As they well point out:

For the prioritization of proposed projects for the strategic plan, we

use the MULTIPOL method because it allows for the evaluation of projects according to policies

and scenarios in this method the policies are weighted by the projects and the
scenarios are the results of the policies.[CITATION Uni 51 10250 ].
 Source: State University of Bolívar

In summary, it could be said then that the MULTIPOL allows you to select the
policies, criteria or solutions, in turn distribute actions and prioritize the best
scenarios. Since according to Michel Godet, the modus operandi of this is, in his words
suyas

In Multipol we find the classic phases of a criteria approach.

multiple the inventory of possible actions, the analysis of the
consequences and the development of criteria, the evaluation of actions, the
definition of policies and the classification of actions.[CITATION Mic07
90 \l 10250 ]

The administrator Gustavo also reaches this same conclusion, although more explicitly.
Tapia, from the University of Buenos Aires, pointing out:

Each action is evaluated in light of each criterion using a scale

simple notation. This assessment is obtained through questionnaires or
meetings of experts, requiring the search for a consensus. On the other hand
on the one hand, the judgment made on actions is not carried out uniformly:
It is necessary to take into account the different contexts related to the objective of the

study. A policy is a game of weights according to criteria that translates one of

 these contexts. This weighting of criteria may thus correspond to
different value systems of decision-makers, to strategic options not
determined, or even to different scenarios and evaluations that take into
considering the time factor.[CITATION Gus16 p 275 l 10250]

In its study of this method, the Society of Basque Studies 'Eusko Ikaskuntza'
It points out that the issues associated with decision-making fall within three frameworks.

aspects: select, distribute, and arrange.

3. CHARACTERISTICS

Source:

allows to guide decision-making: it allows us and guides us to take

decisions through various common criteria, essentially to understanding
and decision-making problem solving.

It helps us to make a comparative judgment: it is generally used to make a...

comparative judgment between heterogeneous projects or measures, so it can
 to be employed in evaluation.

Diversity of factors that can be integrated into the evaluation process:

Simplifies complex situations: Allows for step-by-step progress towards the search.
of a solution, with complete transparency.

The basis on which the selection of criteria and scoring is carried out
the results: are often simple, comprehensible, and determined by the
group that conducts the analysis.

It allows for a stable evaluation of the different elements: included in the

analysis, thus rationalizing the decision-making process.

It is frequently used in the planning and evaluation process.

It is used in the analysis of various alternatives.

It is used in the definition and negotiation of strategic options.

intervention.

You can contribute to the evaluation of a program or a policy by conducting the

balance of its effects

4. PROCEDURES

As is known, every decision regarding a set of actions to be taken is inscribed in the

framework of the following issues:

Deciding in favor of the best or best actions (selection).

Define a participation of the shares (election).
Determine a classification of the actions (ordering).

The Multipol procedure addresses these three issues, as it allows

Establish comparative judgments of actions, taking into account different contexts.
of study: whether they are contemplated policies and anticipated scenarios.

The process to develop the Multipol method, as it rightly points out[CITATION

Placeholder1 10250 ]it is a simple, adaptable, and flexible method, since it
As the analysis develops, study variables that were not previously introduced may be included.
considered, easily adapting to the needs of the context and the approach of
the experts.
The processes are:

Problem identification
List of possible actions
Analysis of the consequences
Development of the criteria
Assessment of actions
Definition of policies
Classification of actions
Documentation of the proposed actions

With the Multipol, the classic phases of a multicriteria approach reappear: the
enumeration of possible actions, the analysis of consequences and the elaboration
of criteria, the evaluation of actions, the definition of policies, and the classification of
the actions.

For Michel Godet, the originality of the Multipol comes from its simplicity.
flexibility of its use.

Thus, in the Multipol, each action is evaluated with respect to each criterion by
through a simple rating scale (0 to 20). This assessment is obtained by
through questionnaires or expert meetings, being necessary the
consensus search.[CITATION PlaceholderMarker1 p 318 t l 10250 ]

On the other hand, the judgment that actions deserve is not issued in a uniform manner:
Different contexts related to the study's objective must be taken into account.

One of the policies consists of associating a set of weights that varies in

function of the contexts. In this way, the sets of weights of the criteria
they may correspond to the different value systems of the decision makers, to
undetermined strategic options, or to multiple scenarios and evaluations that
they include the time factor. In practice, in each policy, experts assign a
weighting of the set of criteria.

Finally, in each policy, the Multipol procedure assigns an average score.

to the actions. In this way, a table of classification profiles is defined.
compared to the actions according to the policies.
The consideration of risk, related to uncertainty or conflicting hypotheses, is
It is carried out through a plan to stabilize the classifications of the shares according to
the policies. In this way, it is possible to verify the consistency of the results.

We will give an example1for your consideration of applicability:

APPLICATION FOR THE LAUNCH OF A NEW PRODUCT

They are five products that are estimated according to five criteria (launch cost, risk
of supply disruption, adjustment to the image, sales and profits) in order to
to decide which two products should be prioritized for launch. The
evaluation of actions according to the criteria (here, a scale from 0 to 20) remember with
great fidelity what happens to the students of a class to whom a grade is given in
each subject taught (criterion).

The overall classification of the students in a class does not depend solely on the grades.
obtained from each subject, but also from the coefficients assigned to these subjects.
Changing such coefficients amounts to adopting another selection policy.

Assuming for the new products to be launched, a first policy P is defined.1,

short-term mixed political call, which gives preference to low cost (coefficient 3 for
criterion 1) and the prestigious research (coefficient 3 for criterion 3), and the others
weights are distributed in the following way: 2 for criterion 1; 1 for criterion 5
y 6.

This example will be taken from the book From Anticipation to Action by Michel Godet.
1
According to this policy P1, the simple calculation of the weighted measures leads us to the
next ranking: 6,5,4,1,2,3. Therefore, 6 and 5 will be launched.

Trusting this classification can present drawbacks when, for some reason, it
produce a disruption of supplies (criterion 2) that prevents production.
According to this criterion, products 5 and 6 are incorrectly placed while for product
There is no risk of supply disruption. A policy that aims to diversify
The risks of breaking should rather advise the launch of products 6 and 1.

In a multi-criteria election, it is essential to ask the following question: What is

the consistency of the classification? I mean, is the classification obtained according to a policy?
the same according to the other policies that can be considered?

Generally, classifications vary from one policy to another, so it is advisable

appreciate your sensitivity in order to decide more knowledgeably the risks
eventualities that are accepted.

The classifications of products according to the policies

This is about defining a set of possible policies. This example considers

six policies that translate into different sets of weights and criteria.

[Link] policy or short term (P1This gives preference to low launch costs.
and to the adaptation to the image.
2. Profitability policy (P2to prefer low cost, benefit, and the figure of
businesses.
3. Mixed medium/long-term policy (P 3Here, profitability is also sought.
(beneficial, low cost), but without risk regarding security of
provisioning.
4. Image-prestige policy (P 4From this perspective, the economic demands
they are secondary concerning the ongoing concern about the continued presence in the
 market, even if it is limited, of a product that is considered the flagship of the
image.
5. Presence in the market (P5It is about occupying land, of acquiring parts
important aspects of the market in a symbolic field. From this perspective, the figure of
Business and image adequacy are important criteria.

6. Security policy of provisioning under profitability demands (P6)

It could also have been considered a political seventh, indifferent, that
it would grant the same weighting to all criteria. This policy is rejected as
significant lack of will and sense of strategic priorities due to
from the executives. Below are the sets of weights of
Criterion. To calculate the sum of the weights to be distributed, it is set at 10.

Based on this data, the Multipol program immediately provides two tables of
results and two summary graphs.

The first table provides a score for each action (product to be launched) according to each
policy (weighted sum scaled from 0 to 20). The overall average (average of the
Scores) and the standard deviation of the weighted scores appear in the two
last columns.
Comentario:el producto 1 tiene la puntuación de 11,10 para la política P1, y de 12,3
for P2, etc. Its overall average in the set of policies is 12.52 with a
standard deviation of 1.92. In policies P1 and P2, product 1 ranks fourth and
the third in the overall standings.

The second table contains the same information as the first one, but the actions
(products to be launched) are ordered according to the ranking obtained based on the average of the

policies. The calculation of the overall mean here is the result of a simple average of the
scores according to the policies. The Multipol software also allows for weighting the
policies based on their eventual hierarchy.

The result tables are displayed in two graphs. The first one shows for each product,
the profile of the rankings according to different policies, this software allows
select the subsets of actions whose profiles you wish to present (the scheme
of the set of profiles would be illegible). It will be highlighted that the profile of the

classifications is independent of the eventual weighting of policies.

Comments: the profile chart allows you to immediately find the
initial observation: products 5 and 6 have the same profile and are the best
classifieds in most policies, except in P1(security policy), in the
that product 1 is clearly overclassified. In contrast, the latter is very poorly done.
classified by other policies. This means that product 1 has a score
relatively high average. But with a strong standard deviation (great variation of the
average score from one policy to another). If two new products need to be launched without
It would be preferable to choose 6 and 1, with a preference for 6 and 5.

The classification of policies according to scenarios

The decision about the products to launch depends on the policies that are completed.
Such policies will be less suitable for the most likely scenarios of the environment.
future. Hence the natural idea of using the Multipol again to classify policies
according to the scenarios.

In this second step of Multipol, policies are treated as if they were 'actions' that
it is necessary to classify according to some 'policies' that are actually scenarios. To facilitate
it is considered that only three scenarios are feasible:

Reference scenario A: it is characterized by slow growth but

balanced; has a high probability of occurrence: 0.7
Scenario B of financial scarcity: has a probability of 0.2
Scenario C of international political crisis: has a probability of 0.1.

Classification of policies in relation to scenarios.

Data 1 entry
Number of objects: 6 policies to classify according to scenarios

Number of criteria: 5 the same criteria as before

Number of policies: 3 the three scenarios

Probabilities/weights of policies

Scenario A 0.70

Scenario B 0.20 is considered as the weighting of the policies

Scenario C 0.10 the probabilities of the scenarios

The table above is nothing more than the set of weights of the five criteria.
according to the six policies of the first step of Multipol. This time it is simply considered
in a dual manner: as an assessment of the importance of the criteria of each policy.

Scenarios A, B, C, the new policies also refer to different weightings.

of criteria. As before, some result tables and some
graphic representations (classification profile and stability plan). Here it
only these last ones are presented. Their reading provokes several comments: the policy of
Security is the best for scenarios B and C and the least good for scenario A.
(slow growth). In this reference scenario, the P policies2(profitability) and P5
(market presence) are by far the preferred ones.

What risk is taken by giving more preference to one policy over another? To answer
This question must take into account the probabilities of the scenarios. The profiles
not enough: also examine the stability plan for the classification of the policies that
it precisely integrates this dimension in the form of weighted scores.

In this example, scores are evaluated on a scale of 0 to 4. The chart of

profiles are independent of the weighting of the scenarios.

It is observed that the profitability policy (P2) stands out from all the others. The policy
medium-term mixed (P3) is in second place globally. Much farther away.
the security policy (P6) appears in third position and with a strong deviation
Typical of the scores: optimal for scenarios B and C, it is the red lantern des
escenario A, el más probable. Finalmente, si se tienen en cuenta unos escenarios
probables, we should prefer the two policies P2 and P3, according to which we would have to give
priority to the launch of product 6 and proceed to a choice between 5 and 1.
The Multipol method, due to its very nature, simple and adoptable, has already had
various interesting applications in diverse fields such as energy, health and the
transport
6. REFERENCES

Cereceda Meneses, D. (n.d.). Methods and Techniques of Foresight. Chile: Ministry of

Planning. Regional Planning Division.

Godet, M. (1993).De la anticipación a la acció: Manual de prospectiva y estrategia .

Barcelona, Spain: MARCOMBO S.A.

Godet, M. (1993).De la anticipación a la acción: Manual de prospectiva y estrategia.

Barcelona, Spain: MARCOMBO S.A.

Michel Godet y Philippe Durance. (2007).La Prospectiva Estraté[Link], Francia:

Prospektiker —European Institute of Foresight and Strategy—.

Tapia, G. (2016). On the methods to build prospective scenarios. SADAF,

261-278.

Bolívar State University, U. (n.d.). Strategic Planning 2014 - 2019.

Ecuador: State University of Bolívar.