.jpg)
Case 1 Vacation Homes
1.1 Introduction
The Case is most interesting because it was not done by CVA but rather by one of the executives of a CVA client that has used CVA many times. He decided to use it personally to evaluate three Alternatives for a vacation home. He recently gave CVA permission to use his project as a case example. His hierarchy is a beautiful example to follow for buying or selling a home. And as a matter of interest, the other fifteen cases all have hierarchies that can serve as templates for future projects. There was very little that he needed as far as coaching to do the task on his own laptop at home.
The three Alternatives in this case are Cape Cod, Contemp for Contemporary and Maine. (Where the location of the Contemporary is located is not mentioned.)
The Top Vectorgram shows the winning Alternative to be CapeCod with a score of 100% and 4.11.
Contemp came in at 97.9% of the winner at 4.02
and Maine came in at 90.4% at 3.71.
Here is the Top Vectorgram.
Vacation Home's Top Vectorgram
Before going futher, some facts should be reviewed so as to better appreciate what has transpired in the calcuation of the Alternatives' scores.
This case has 49 Criteria Endpoints. Had there been no weighting of importance applied to them, all of them would have had an equal percent of contribution and the scores for the Alternaives would have been obtained by merely taking the average of the Alternatives' performance scores for each Criteria. i.e. summing the scores and dividing by 49. Thus, each Criteria would have had a Percent of Contribution of 1/49 or 2.04%.
However, in this Case History, there are biases and therefore there is a Hierarchy of Criteria showing priorities and all the elements of the Hierarchy have been assigned Weights of Importance. As a consequence, the simple Configuration Percentages of 2.04% for each Criteria have now been reassigned.
In the the lower left section of the Criteria_Smry_Sheet, the 49 Criteria Endpoints are sorted in descending order based on their Percentages of Contribution. The list is also divided into four Quadrants of importance using (as close to) 25% of the running Cum of Contribution, as their boundaries.
As a result, 4 Criteria are in the 1st Quandrant of Importance, 7 in the 2nd, 12 in the 3rd and 26 in the 4th. The weighted Percentages of Contribution range from 6.6% to 0.3%. i.e. the topmost important Criteria percentage has increased by 323% from its original 2.04% to be 6.6%; and the least important Criteria has had its 2.04% reduced by 86.7% to 0.3%.
Thus, these contribution Percentages in column 15 vividly show the impact of the Priority and Weighting process. Column 18 shows the name of the Criteria Endpoint's Node. Clicking anywhere on the Criteria's row will produce a pulldown menu which will enable the user to go the Vectorgram of the Criteria's Node for examination of the vectors of that Criteria etc. Once the observer is through examining the Vectorgram he or she can elect to return to the Criteria_Smry_Sheet and continue the examination of the other Criteria.
This technique of using the Criteria_Smry_Sheet as launching pad to view key Vectorgrams is one approach that an observer might follow to become acquainted with the facts that caused the final scoring in the Analysis.
Vacation Home's Top Vectorgram
Stopped editing here......
'
The following is a complete set of Node Vectorgrams. They will be preceded by a chart of the outline showing the 23 Nodes.
contain the Criteria of the top two Quadrants as subcomponents in their charts. The Nodes are in Outline Order and the Criteria will be prefixed by their parent Nodes and numbered from 1 to 11 to indicate their order of importance.
1.0 Location
1.1 Time/Distance
1.1.1 Home 3rd
1.1.2 Work 4th
1.1.4 Traffic 5th
House
House Setting
Neighborhood 7th
Rooms
Number of Baths 10th
House Beauty
Room Flow 8th
Cost
Purchace Price 1st
Necessary Improvements 2nd
Optional Improvements 11th
Investment Value 6th
Ongoing Cost
Taxes 9th
7. Investment Value
The Histogram in the Criteria Smry Sheet shows how many loser Criteria scores have to be fixed to beat the winner. It also shows that Cape Cod won the two most important Criteria Quadrants
CapeCod's score of 4.75 for Nec Improvements Costs is 1.00 better than Contemp and 4.00 better than Maine. If Contemp and Maine were to improve their Nec Improvements scores to match the winner their % would increase to 99.5% for Contemp and 96.9% for Maine. If you look at the Cost Vectorgram it is clear that Cape Cod is the strong winner here at 100% vs 91.9% and 82.2%
for Contemp and Maine.
if Contemp also fixed Taxes, Num of Baths its score would be 101.4% of CapeCod. But these Criteria are not easiliy fixed and should not be considered viable.
If Maine also fixed Home, Work, and Traffic its score would be 101.2% of CapeCod. But again these Criteria are not at all fixable and should be discarded.
The only possible Criteria that is practically negeotiable is Necessary Improvements Costs and that apparently was not veasible. Hence Contemp and Maine fall short of being serious contenders. Final Comment, Maine had the most disireable features of all three but its distance and need of improvements were too tough.
Cape Cod is therefore a solid Alternative and should be selected.
Contemp came in at 97.9% of the winner at 4.02 and Maine came in at 90.4% at 3.71.
The Histogram in the Criteria Smry Sheet shows how many loser Criteria scores have to be fixed to beat the winner. It also shows that Cape Cod won the two most important Criteria Quadrants
CapeCod's score of 4.75 for Nec Improvements Costs is 1.00 better than Contemp and 4.00 better than Maine. If Contemp and Maine were to improve their Nec Improvements scores to match the winner their % would increase to 99.5% for Contemp and 96.9% for Maine. If you look at the Cost Vectorgram it is clear that Cape Cod is the strong winner here at 100% vs 91.9% and 82.2%
for Contemp and Maine.
if Contemp also fixed Taxes, Num of Baths its score would be 101.4% of CapeCod. But these Criteria are not easiliy fixed and should not be considered viable.
If Maine also fixed Home, Work, and Traffic its score would be 101.2% of CapeCod. But again these Criteria are not at all fixable and should be discarded.
The only possible Criteria that is practically negeotiable is Necessary Improvements Costs and that apparently was not veasible. Hence Contemp and Maine fall short of being serious contenders. Final Comment, Maine had the most disireable features of all three but its distance and need of improvements were too tough.
Cape Cod is therefore a solid Alternative and should be selected.
Comparison of Three Vacation Home Prospects
1.______Location
_________1.Time/Distance
_____________1.Home
_____________2.Work
_____________3.Family
_____________4.Traffic
_________2.Beach
_____________1.Beach Distance
________________1.Walking
________________2.Driving
_____________2.Beach Access
________________1.On foot
________________2.Parking
________________3.Sitting
_____________3.Beach Facilities
_________________1.Rest Rooms
_________________2.Eating
_____________4.Beach Quality
________________1.Size
________________2.Water
________________3.Sand
________________4.Beauty
_________3.Community
____________1.Attractions
_______________1.Family
_______________2.Visitors
____________2.Shopping
_______________1.Everyday
_______________2.Recreational
____________3.Town
_______________1.Niceness
_______________2.Services
1______Location 2 House
1 House Setting
1 Yard
1 Land
2 Size
3 Privacy
2 Driveway
3 Neighborhood
2 Rooms
1 Bed Rooms
1 Size
2 Number
2 Number Baths
3 Porch/Deck
4 Kitchen
1 Cabinets
2 Size
3 Appliances
4 Floor
5 Eating
5 Living Room
1 Size
2 Fireplace
6 Extra Room
1 Storage
2 Laundry
3 Potential
3 House Beauty
1 Workmanship
2 Design
3 Room Flow
3 Cost
1 Purch Price
2 Necessary Improvements
3 Optional Improvements
4 Ongoing Costs
1 Taxes
2 Maintenance
5 Investment Value
Comparison of Three Vacation Home_Prospects Workbook
Return to the Top
Return to the Main Index
How to reach CVA Inc.
V(ma)Requirements
CVA Founder
V(ma)Help