Expert Opinions in Forecasting: The Role of the Delphi Technique

Expert opinion is often necessary in forecasting tasks because of a lack of appropriate or available information for using statistical procedures. But how does one get the best forecast from experts? One solution is to use a structured group technique, such as Delphi, for eliciting and combining expert judgments. In using the Delphi technique, one controls the exchange of information between anonymous panelists over a number of rounds (iterations), taking the average of the estimates on the final round as the group judgment. A number of principles are developed here to indicate how to conduct structured groups to obtain good expert judgments. These principles, applied to the conduct of Delphi groups, indicate how many and what type of experts to use (five to 20 experts with disparate domain knowledge); how many rounds to use (generally two or three); what type of feedback to employ (average estimates plus justifications from each expert); how to summarize the final forecast (weight all experts’ estimates equally); how to word questions (in a balanced way with succinct definitions free of emotive terms and irrelevant information); and what response modes to use (frequencies rather than probabilities or odds, with coherence checks when feasible). Delphi groups are substantially more accurate than individual experts and traditional groups and somewhat more accurate than statistical groups (which are made up of noninteracting individuals whose judgments are aggregated). Studies support the advantage of Delphi groups over traditional groups by five to one with one tie, and their advantage over statistical groups by 12 to two with two ties. We anticipate that by following these principles, forecasters may be able to use structured groups to harness effectively expert opinion.

[1]  Thomas R. Stewart,et al.  The Delphi technique and judgmental forecasting , 1987 .

[2]  E. Noelle-Neumann WANTED: RULES FOR WORDING STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRES , 1970 .

[3]  Janet A. Sniezek,et al.  An examination of group process in judgmental forecasting , 1989 .

[4]  Peter Ayton,et al.  The consistency, coherence and calibration of holistic, decomposed and recomposed judgemental probability forecasts , 1988 .

[5]  K. Brockhoff,et al.  The Performance of Forecasting Groups in Computer Dialogue and Face-to-face Discussion , 2002 .

[6]  Frederick C. Miner,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Three Diverse Group Decision Making Approaches , 1979 .

[7]  G. Katona,et al.  The Art of Asking Questions , 1951 .

[8]  M. Bardecki,et al.  Participants' response to the Delphi method: An attitudinal perspective , 1984 .

[9]  Fergus Bolger,et al.  The calibration of subjective probability: Theories and models 1980–94. , 1994 .

[10]  Paul Goodwin,et al.  Decision Analysis for Management Judgment , 1998 .

[11]  Gordon Welty,et al.  The Necessity, Sufficiency and Desirability of Experts as Value Forecasters , 1974 .

[12]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications , 1976 .

[13]  G. William Walster,et al.  A comparative study of differences in subjective likelihood estimates made by individuals, interacting groups, Delphi groups, and nominal groups☆ , 1973 .

[14]  J. Scott Armstrong,et al.  Principles of forecasting , 2001 .

[15]  K. Hill,et al.  The methodological worth of the Delphi forecasting technique , 1975 .

[16]  R. Dawes Judgment under uncertainty: The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making , 1979 .

[17]  Thomas R. Stewart,et al.  Improving Reliability of Judgmental Forecasts , 2001 .

[18]  Paul E. Meehl,et al.  Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction: A Theoretical Analysis and a Review of the Evidence , 1996 .

[19]  Philip M. Hauser,et al.  Social Statistics in Use. , 1975 .

[20]  Hal R. Arkes,et al.  Overconfidence in Judgmental Forecasting , 2001 .

[21]  N. Dalkey,et al.  The Delphi Method, IV , 1970 .

[22]  A. Delbecq,et al.  Nominal Versus Interacting Group Processes for Committee Decision-Making Effectiveness , 1971 .

[23]  George Wright,et al.  A Reevaluation of Research and Theory , 1991 .

[24]  Reza Moinpour,et al.  Managerial Judgment in Marketing: The Concept of Expertise , 1983 .

[25]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  The Effectiveness of Nominal, Delphi, and Interacting Group Decision Making Processes , 1974 .

[26]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Timid choices and bold forecasts: a cognitive perspective on risk taking , 1993 .

[27]  R. Erffmeyer,et al.  The Delphi Technique: An Empirical Evaluation of the Optimal Number of Rounds , 1986 .

[28]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[29]  George Wright,et al.  Delphi: A reevaluation of research and theory , 1991 .

[30]  Peter Whalley,et al.  The Supra-Additivity of Subjective Probability , 1983 .

[31]  John Rohrbaugh,et al.  Improving the quality of group judgment: Social judgment analysis and the Delphi technique. , 1979 .

[32]  Robert U. Ayres Technological forecasting for decision‐making (2nd edn), Martino, Joseph, AmsterdarnINew York: North‐Holland, 1983. Price: $29.00. Pages: 385 , 1984 .

[33]  Joseph L. Schofer,et al.  IV.C. Experiments in Delphi Methodology , 2002 .

[34]  Thomas Dietz,et al.  Methods for analyzing data from Delphi panels: Some evidence from a forecasting study , 1987 .

[35]  George Wright,et al.  The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis , 1999 .

[36]  Robert J. Genetski,et al.  Long-Range Forecasting: From Crystal Ball to Computer , 1981 .

[37]  George Wright,et al.  Coherence, Calibration, and Expertise in Judgmental Probability Forecasting , 1994 .

[38]  Joseph Paul Martino,et al.  Technological Forecasting for Decisionmaking , 1975 .

[39]  G. Gigerenzer Why the distinction between single-event probabilities and frequencies is important for psychology (and vice versa). , 1994 .

[40]  Bernice W. Polemis Social Statistics in Use. Philip M. Hauser , 1976 .

[41]  Carolyn Y. Woo,et al.  Entrepreneurs' perceived chances for success , 1988 .

[42]  Janet A. Sniezek,et al.  Confidence depends on level of aggregation , 1991 .

[43]  George Wright,et al.  The impact of task characteristics on the performance of structured group forecasting techniques , 1996 .

[44]  Irving M. Lane,et al.  Quality and Acceptance of an Evaluative Task: The Effects of Four Group Decision-Making Formats , 1984 .

[45]  L D Phillips,et al.  Subjective propabilities inferred from estimates and bets. , 1967, Journal of experimental psychology.

[46]  D. MacGregor Decomposition for Judgmental Forecasting and Estimation , 1999 .

[47]  Elizabeth C. Hirschman,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[48]  W. E. Riggs,et al.  The Delphi technique: An experimental evaluation , 1983 .

[49]  J. Keith Murnighan,et al.  Group Confidence Pressures in Iterative Decisions , 1982 .

[50]  N. Hatton ASKING QUESTIONS , 1979, The Medical journal of Australia.

[51]  S. Cochran,et al.  Use of self-ratings to improve group estimates: Experimental evaluation of delphi procedures , 1970 .

[52]  Roger J. Best,et al.  An experiment in Delphi estimation in marketing decision making. , 1974 .

[53]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[54]  Frederick J. Parenté,et al.  An examination of factors contributing to delphi accuracy , 1984 .

[55]  Marvin A. Jolson,et al.  http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless , 2022 .

[56]  Robin M. Hogarth,et al.  A note on aggregating opinions , 1978 .

[57]  Janet A. Sniezek,et al.  A Comparison of Techniques for Judgmental Forecasting by Groups with Common Information , 1990 .

[58]  G. W. Hill Group versus individual performance: are n + 1 heads better than one?" psychological bulletin , 1982 .

[59]  G. W. Fischer When oracles fail—A comparison of four procedures for aggregating subjective probability forecasts , 1981 .

[60]  J. R. Salancik,et al.  The construction of Delphi event statements , 1971 .