Define the Problem

Omnis believes the most important step in any analysis is defining the problem you are trying to solve. Our experience shows that two of the biggest constraints an analyst faces are time and resource limitations. Therefore, we teach analysts strategies to help them focus their time and resources on the critical issues of an analysis. These strategies include identifying their customer (i.e., persons who will use the analysis), determining his or her expectations and needs, understanding past analysis, and recognizing impediments (e.g., bureaucratic, legal). Properly defining the problem should culminate in formulating a list of initial questions the analyst seeks to answer. These questions guide which hypotheses we generate and test, what information we collect and analyze, and—ultimately—which conclusions we derive.

Generate and Refine Hypotheses

Once an analyst determines which questions to address (Defining the Problem), the logical next step is to seek answers. We teach analysts to generate as many plausible hypotheses as possible. These hypotheses are potential answers to the question being analyzed. Our focus during this step of the analytic process is creativity and comprehensiveness because, if an analyst does not consider all possibilities, it is hard to gain confidence in his or her conclusion. And, by generating as many hypotheses as possible, an analysts has a greater likelihood of including the correct one. Since our mindsets and biases can limit our objectivity we also advocate seeking as many alternative perspectives as possible.

After listing plausible hypotheses, analysts use techniques that enable them to test—or evaluate—the likelihood of each hypothesis. The first technique involves organizing hypotheses into a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive set. By organizing hypotheses this way, analysts can draw conclusions from eliminating or discrediting hypotheses. We also teach analysts ways to facilitate testing hypotheses by asking the following questions:

     1. For this hypothesis to be valid, what must be true? (Necessary Conditions)
     2. If this hypothesis is valid, then what should I expect?

By organizing hypotheses in a testable manner, analysts position themselves to seek relevant information and draw logical conclusions.

Acquire Information

Omnis believes one of the greatest challenges facing today's analysts is information overload. Our experiences indicate the amount of information at our fingertips is increasing exponentially each year and without a strategy for sorting through irrelevant and unreliable information, we are bound to drown in a sea of data. That is why we teach methods for identifying and evaluating relevant information sources. Our goal is to help analysts sort valuable information from noise, especially when working under time and resource constraints. Our approach teaches analysts to:

We believe evaluating information and sources is the most crucial aspect because inaccurate information can be more dangerous than no information at all. Therefore, we teach analysts techniques to independently corroborate information and validate sources, especially when faced with the potential for deception or misinformation. It is important to recognize that information gathering is iterative. Acquiring information enables analysts to test hypotheses and draw conclusions, thus raising new questions and hypotheses which require additional information.

Structure Information

Our experiences indicate that people have a difficult time making sense of vast amounts of unstructured data. Because of this, Omnis teaches analysts to organize and visualize information for the purpose of identifying and characterizing relationships. Analysts use the insights drawn from these relationships—such as trends, patterns, and correlations—to test hypotheses and draw conclusions. Omnis believes that many flaws in analytic reasoning stem from mischaracterizing or misrepresenting data sets. Therefore, we teach analysts effective techniques for visualizing data sets, including:

• Creating timelines of chronological data
• Mapping geospatial data
• Constructing link charts of associations (e.g., network diagrams or concept maps)
• Diagramming decision or process flows

While the application of many of these techniques relies on software tools, Omnis believes that such tools are not a substitute for critical thinking, as every automated process contains embedded assumptions. Therefore, when we teach clients to apply these tools, we stress appropriate applications and limitations.

Test Hypotheses

Our experiences show that it is possible to support any hypothesis, given the vast amount of information available today. Because of this, Omnis believes analysts should seek to disprove hypotheses rather than solely try to prove one hypothesis. Eliminating hypotheses narrows the field of possibilities, helping us gain confidence in our conclusions. Simply put, we subscribe to Sherlock Holmes' view that once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains no matter how improbable must be the truth." Dovetailing from Generating Hypotheses, analysts need to apply methods for testing the plausibility of hypotheses. Specifically, we teach analysts to identify and test the necessary conditions and assess the consistency of their expectations. The goal of testing hypotheses is to eliminate all but one, but this is rarely possible. Rather, this Step usually culminates in a relative comparison of the likelihood of two or more competing hypotheses (e.g., Analysis of Competing Hypotheses).

Make Assessments

After arriving at individual conclusions, Omnis teaches analysts to evaluate the implications and consequences of their conclusions being true. Doing so addresses key questions relevant to every analysis:

• How do I know what I know?
• So what?
• Are my conclusions consistent with one another and the larger context?
• What don't I know?

Addressing these questions helps synthesize conclusions into a cohesive assessment, especially when analyzing complex issues. Omnis teaches analysts techniques for modeling the dependencies and implications of complex relationships, assessing the relative likelihood (i.e., probabilities) of alternatives, and gaming potential scenarios. We also show analysts the value of seeking multiple, diverse perspectives when analyzing complex problems. One of our goals is to get analysts to think in terms not only of problems, such as threats and warning, but also in terms of solutions and opportunities.

Draw Conclusions

Omnis believes that the value of any analysis derives from the inferences—or conclusions—analysts make. These conclusions usually derive from insights gleaned while structuring information or deduced when testing hypotheses. However, our experiences indicate that people have difficulty articulating the logic, reasoning, and assumptions used to support their conclusions. For this reason, we teach analysts methods and techniques to help them organize their reasoning and identify hidden assumptions. Specifically, we advocate and teach Argument Mapping as an effective tool for structuring reasoning and articulating assumptions. We believe that failure to identify and scrutinize assumptions is the primary cause of analytic mistakes.

Communicate Assessments/Analysis

We believe that analysis—regardless of rigor and accuracy—is worthless unless communicated effectively to consumers. For this reason, Omnis stresses to every analyst the importance of developing effective oral and written communication. Expressed imprecisely and ambiguously, even the most compelling analytic result may be deemed irrelevant. Analysts must be able to present and support their conclusions cogently, and express alternatives where warranted. Specifically, we teach best practices for analytic writing and briefing, methods for calibrating qualitative assessments, and methods for gauging confidence. We also believe that analysis is most effective when collaborative rather than when performed in isolation. Therefore, we teach analysts techniques for optimizing group dynamics and communications with peers, as well as techniques for facilitating the evaluation of arguments.