The technical methodology described covers more aspects of RN than are normally relevant in anyone practical application of the system. The methodology has been described as an integrated approach. Clearly, the more rigorous the results required, the more full-scale, fully systematic, and integrated is the application required. In this connection, it should be noted that only a small selection of the repertoire of methods and techniques used in the Priority Systems approach has been covered. However, each part of RN has been designed to stand alone, independently of other parts in a practical and computationally efficient way.
RN moves beyond traditional computerized financial and accounting systems, which are essentially information systems rather than decision systems. It is also a development beyond most conventional decision systems and models which are usually probablistic systems (White, 1975) lacking any 'intelligent front end' (Bundy et aI, 1983; Mitra and Phelps, 1984). RN by contrast is an expert decisioncome-information system. It allows for policy, value and estimational judgements involving qualitative considerations which are not subject to a single maximization criterion to be analysed, quantified, tested and combined with hard empirical data in respect of budgetary decision-making, and precise financial implications of such judgements to be calculated and systematically evaluated. It provides a basis for differing judgements of decision-makers and interest groups with diverse backgrounds and biases to be explicitly spelt-out, sometimes reconciled, and the effects of variations of judgements on outcomes to be analysed.
It provides a means of handling some facets of issues which lack well-defined, scalar value measures of merit, and for substitute measures to be used where the collection of relevant objective data is prohibitively expensive or impossible. It allows decision-makers' subjective valuations to be directly incorporated into the decision-making algorithm, rather than treated as extraneous "noise" as in conventional financial analysis. The method produces proportional, ratio-producing measures of priority, thereby allowing legitimate use of powerful statistical tools like regression analysis for testing quantitative hypotheses and concordance measures for testing pooled team decisions.
These are indispensable requirements for accountable financial planning and budgetary decision-making, and for auditing and evaluating the allocation of organizational resources. They point to dramatic improvements in the development and measurement of managerial judgements and decisions on planning and financial matters.