JURY OF EXEVUTIVE OPINION

OVERVIEW: This technique is part of a set of techniques that are useful in situations where past data do
not exist, causal relationships have not been identified, or some major change has occured in the
forecasting context which is not accounted for by other techniques (such as a Gulf War, trade
agreement, etc.). Evidence as to the validity of using these methods by themselves is mixed, although
using them correctly can provide very good forecasts, especially in uncertain environments. The
objective of these techniques is to provide logical, unbiased, and systematic quantitative estimates.
BASIC IDEA: Combines input from key information sources.
PROCEDURE: Very simple. Have "forecast meetings", perhaps beginning with initial estimates of the
forecast variables. Discussion ends when consensus is reached.
EXAMPLE: Mainframe computer forecasting is done by conducting a series of meetings between the two
mainframe analysts at a company, the Service director, and a Research Operations analyst. Typically,
three or four meetings are required in order to arrive at a forecast consensus. In between meetings, the
forecasts are examined by colleagues, both domestic and abroad, for feedback and reaction.
The jury of executive opinion method is about the oldest and simplest method of making sales forecast.
The method either formally or informally polls the top executive of the company for their assessment of
sales possibilities. The separate assessments are then combined into a sales forecast for the company.
This is sometimes often done by simply averaging the individual judgments. Disparate views are resolved
through group discussion. In some cases, the process amounts to little more than group guessing. In
other cases however, it involves the careful judgment of experienced executives who have studied the
underlying factors influencing their company’s sale.

DISADVANTAGES
 The forecast are based on opinions rather than on facts and analysis
 Averaging opinions reduces responsibility for accurate forecasting.
 The method is expensive because of the large amount of highly paid executive’s time it
consumes.
 The forecast may not properly weight the expertise of those most informed

resolved through group discussion. In some cases, the process amounts to little more than group
guessing. In other cases however, it involves the careful judgment of experienced executives who have
studied the underlying factors influencing their company’s sale.

DISADVANTAGES
 The forecast are based on opinions rather than on facts and analysis
 Averaging opinions reduces responsibility for accurate forecasting.
  The method is expensive because of the large amount of highly paid executive’s time it
consumes.
 The forecast may not properly weight the expertise of those most informed
resolved through group discussion. In some cases, the process amounts to little more than group
guessing. In other cases however, it involves the careful judgment of experienced executives who have
studied the underlying factors influencing their company’s sale.

DISADVANTAGES
 The forecast are based on opinions rather than on facts and analysis
 Averaging opinions reduces responsibility for accurate forecasting.
 The method is expensive because of the large amount of highly paid executive’s time it
consumes.
 The forecast may not properly weight the expertise of those most informed
resolved through group discussion. In some cases, the process amounts to little more than group
guessing. In other cases however, it involves the careful judgment of experienced executives who have
studied the underlying factors influencing their company’s sale.

DISADVANTAGES
 The forecast are based on opinions rather than on facts and analysis
 Averaging opinions reduces responsibility for accurate forecasting.
 The method is expensive because of the large amount of highly paid executive’s time it
consumes.
 The forecast may not properly weight the expertise of those most informed
resolved through group discussion. In some cases, the process amounts to little more than group
guessing. In other cases however, it involves the careful judgment of experienced executives who have
studied the underlying factors influencing their company’s sale.

DISADVANTAGES
 The forecast are based on opinions rather than on facts and analysis
 Averaging opinions reduces responsibility for accurate forecasting.
 The method is expensive because of the large amount of highly paid executive’s time it
consumes.
 The forecast may not properly weight the expertise of those most informed
resolved through group discussion. In some cases, the process amounts to little more than group
guessing. In other cases however, it involves the careful judgment of experienced executives who have
studied the underlying factors influencing their company’s sale.

DISADVANTAGES
 The forecast are based on opinions rather than on facts and analysis
 Averaging opinions reduces responsibility for accurate forecasting.
 The method is expensive because of the large amount of highly paid executive’s time it
consumes.
 The forecast may not properly weight the expertise of those most informed
resolved through group discussion. In some cases, the process amounts to little more than group
guessing. In other cases however, it involves the careful judgment of experienced executives who have
studied the underlying factors influencing their company’s sale.

DISADVANTAGES
 The forecast are based on opinions rather than on facts and analysis
 Averaging opinions reduces responsibility for accurate forecasting.
 The method is expensive because of the large amount of highly paid executive’s time it
consumes.
 The forecast may not properly weight the expertise of those most informed