What are Structured Analytic Techniques?

I just finished reading Richards J. Heuer Jr.'s ISA paper "Taxonomy of Structured Analytic Techniques" and I'm pleased to see that the process formerly known as Alternative Analysis, sometimes called Red Teaming, has been renamed "Structured Analytic Techniques". The reason, which is fairly obvious once you hear it, is that an "alternative" analysis implies that it's something you do from time to time, or on an infrequent basis. Instead, Heuer writes, "We now think those tools and other similar techniques should be used regularly and normally as “best practices,” and this is what are now called structured analytic techniques (SAT)."

The following is Heuer's general breakdown of the different methods of SAT:
Decomposition and Visualization: "The two basic tools for coping with complexity in analysis are: (1) break things down into their component parts, so that we can deal with each part separately, and (2) put all the parts down on paper or a computer screen in some organized manner such as a list, matrix, map, or tree so that we and others can see how they interrelate as we work with them.

Indicators, Signposts, Scenarios: "The human mind tends to see what it expects to see and to overlook the unexpected. Change often happens so gradually that we don’t see it, or we rationalize it as not being of fundamental importance until it is too obvious to ignore. Identification of indicators, signposts, and scenarios creates an awareness that prepares the mind to recognize change."

Challenging Mindsets: "A simple definition of a mindset is “a set of expectations through which a human being sees the world.”5 Our mindset, or mental model of how things normally work in another country, enables us to make assumptions that fill in the gaps when needed evidence is missing or ambiguous. When this set of expectations turns out to be wrong, it often leads to intelligence failure. Techniques for challenging mindsets include reframing the question in a way that helps break mental blocks, structured confrontation such as devil’s advocacy or red teaming, and structured self-critique such as what we call a key assumptions check. In one sense, all structured techniques that are implemented in a small team or group process also serve to question your mindset. Team discussions help us identify and evaluate new evidence or arguments and expose us to diverse perspectives on the existing evidence or arguments."

Hypothesis Generation and Testing: “Satisficing” is the tendency to accept the first answer that comes to mind that is “good enough.” This is commonly followed by confirmation bias, which refers to looking at the evidence only from the perspective of whether or not it supports a preconceived answer. These are among the most common causes of intelligence failure. Good analysis requires identifying, considering, and weighing the evidence both for and against all the reasonably possible hypotheses, explanations, or outcomes. Analysis of Competing Hypotheses is one technique for doing this."

Group Process Techniques: "Most structured techniques are best used as a collaborative group process, because a group is more effective than an individual in generating new ideas and at least as effective in synthesizing divergent ideas. The structured process helps identify differences in perspective between team or group members, and this is good. The more divergent views are available, the stronger the eventual synthesis of these views. The specific techniques listed under this category, such as
brainstorming and Delphi, are designed as group processes and can only be implemented in a group."

While it’s true that Richards J. Heuer’s work focuses on intelligence analysis at the 3-letter agencies, I believe that he provides a wonderful resource for commercial BI analysts as well. Forecasting is not an exact science, and a adding a little rigor to how it’s done is always a good thing, in my opinion.