Top-level acquisition decisions are complex and multi-objective. This implies difficulties in appropriately accounting for all relevant factors to select the best alternative. In addition, there are difficulties and deficiencies in the actual implementation of the decision process. The difficulties and deficiencies in the top-level acquisition decision-making are explored by this thesis. The thesis suggests improvements through intensive use of a quantitative, judgment-based decision technique derived from Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT). Emphasis is put on demonstrating MAUT's capability for incorporating subjective judgment, in order to reduce the existing doubts about its usefulness for top-level decision-making. The thesis recommends use of the MAUT procedure as the central tool for comprehensive evaluation of the decision alternatives. It argues that such use would solve some of the essential decision-making problems and in addition contribute to the quality and efficiency of the decision process.

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

http://archive.org/details/multiattributeut1094520612

Colonel, Israeli Air Force