About

Yanna Rider
Structured Analytic Techniques

Dr Yanna Rider has over ten years' experience in teaching thinking skills in Australia, the UK and the US. In the 1990s she taught at The University of Melbourne, then moved to the UK in 2002 where she established Rider Chapman Associates, returning to Australia in 2005 to work with Austhink. She missed her own company (yes, pun intended) so returned to a solo career in 2008.

Yanna is committed to effective training. Yet it is fiendishly difficult to measure or prove what effect this kind of training actually has in a work place: numbers are too small and confounding variables too many. So the only feasible measure of success is feedback: those who commission training must feel satisfied that it's targeting the right skills; equally, those who participate in it must feel that it was useful and worthwhile. And Yanna must stay in touch with academic and scientific research to ensure she's not peddling snake oil.

She is an energetic facilitator who tries to make training engaging and enjoyable as well as worthwhile. Her informal and approachable style is regularly praised by course participants. (Nevertheless, she was floored when she was asked for an autograph.)

She is a member of IAFIE (International Association For Intelligence Education) and of AIPIO; she is an Honorary Fellow of The University of Melbourne, and holds a current Australian Government security clearance.

She holds a PhD in Philosophy (on cognition) and an MA (First Class Hons), both from The University of Melbourne, as well as a few academic prizes and awards.

Structured Analytic Techniques

What are they?

Structured analytic techniques are methodologies for breaking down:

complex mental processes into discrete steps, or
complex issues into their components.

Since different tasks require different tools, having a 'toolkit' of such techniques can be useful.

The techniques typically have a strong visual component so we can literally see a representation of our thinking. This enables us to:

be more 'detached' and evaluate more objectively
backtrack, review and revise
communicate more clearly and so think more effectively in a group.

Some examples of structured analytic techniques are:

Analysis of Competing Hypotheses
Argument Mapping
Choice Matrices
Consequence Diagrams
Decision/Hypothesis Mapping
Influence Diagrams
Multiple Cause Diagrams
Scoping The Range.

Why use them?

Ordinary, 'global' judgments are too rough for high-stakes situations. Often, when confronted with a complex issue, we make a 'global' judgment: we reach a conclusion by looking at everything at once - or thinking that we do. In fact, we unconsciously discount much of the relevant information. We mentally simplify the task - and oversimplify the issue. Whether we judge intuitively or consciously, global judgments are, by their nature, rough. They are also subject to unconscious biases, blindspots, and limitations of working memory, that make the judgment sup-optimal. Whereas this is good enough for most everyday judgments, it's not good enough when getting it wrong is not an option - or when we are accountable for the way we made the judgment.

When judgments are important and not time-critical, such as the formulation of strategic policy or the consideration of major investments of money or resources, we can break down the complex process and then use appropriate techniques that make the judgments both more manageable and more rigorous. This puts us in control of each judgment and decreases the probability of error.

Training in structured analytic techniques can also help in time-critical situations. It helps develop the right intuitions, so we can make better high-speed judgments.


	About Yanna Rider Structured Analytic Techniques Yanna Rider Dr Yanna Rider has over ten years' experience in teaching thinking skills in Australia, the UK and the US. In the 1990s she taught at The University of Melbourne, then moved to the UK in 2002 where she established Rider Chapman Associates, returning to Australia in 2005 to work with Austhink. She missed her own company (yes, pun intended) so returned to a solo career in 2008. Yanna is committed to effective training. Yet it is fiendishly difficult to measure or prove what effect this kind of training actually has in a work place: numbers are too small and confounding variables too many. So the only feasible measure of success is feedback: those who commission training must feel satisfied that it's targeting the right skills; equally, those who participate in it must feel that it was useful and worthwhile. And Yanna must stay in touch with academic and scientific research to ensure she's not peddling snake oil. She is an energetic facilitator who tries to make training engaging and enjoyable as well as worthwhile. Her informal and approachable style is regularly praised by course participants. (Nevertheless, she was floored when she was asked for an autograph.) She is a member of IAFIE (International Association For Intelligence Education) and of AIPIO; she is an Honorary Fellow of The University of Melbourne, and holds a current Australian Government security clearance. She holds a PhD in Philosophy (on cognition) and an MA (First Class Hons), both from The University of Melbourne, as well as a few academic prizes and awards. Structured Analytic Techniques What are they? Structured analytic techniques are methodologies for breaking down: complex mental processes into discrete steps, or complex issues into their components. Since different tasks require different tools, having a 'toolkit' of such techniques can be useful. The techniques typically have a strong visual component so we can literally see a representation of our thinking. This enables us to: be more 'detached' and evaluate more objectively backtrack, review and revise communicate more clearly and so think more effectively in a group. Some examples of structured analytic techniques are: Analysis of Competing Hypotheses Argument Mapping Choice Matrices Consequence Diagrams Decision/Hypothesis Mapping Influence Diagrams Multiple Cause Diagrams Scoping The Range. Why use them? Ordinary, 'global' judgments are too rough for high-stakes situations. Often, when confronted with a complex issue, we make a 'global' judgment: we reach a conclusion by looking at everything at once - or thinking that we do. In fact, we unconsciously discount much of the relevant information. We mentally simplify the task - and oversimplify the issue. Whether we judge intuitively or consciously, global judgments are, by their nature, rough. They are also subject to unconscious biases, blindspots, and limitations of working memory, that make the judgment sup-optimal. Whereas this is good enough for most everyday judgments, it's not good enough when getting it wrong is not an option - or when we are accountable for the way we made the judgment. When judgments are important and not time-critical, such as the formulation of strategic policy or the consideration of major investments of money or resources, we can break down the complex process and then use appropriate techniques that make the judgments both more manageable and more rigorous. This puts us in control of each judgment and decreases the probability of error. Training in structured analytic techniques can also help in time-critical situations. It helps develop the right intuitions, so we can make better high-speed judgments.