53 / 177
FFI-RAPPORT 16/00707
51
The first step in the analysis phase is to concisely define the problem. From there the
dimensions, or
parameters
, that best characterise the problem are identified. The last step in the
analysis phase is to assign a range of relevant conditions, or
values
, for each parameter. It is
important to ensure that the values are mutually exclusive and exhaustive for the given
parameter, insofar as that is possible. Together, the parameters and corresponding values make
up the morphological space, shown in table 6.1 as an example of a morphological matrix.
Parameter A
Parameter B
Parameter C
Parameter D
Parameter E
Value A1
Value B1
Value C1
Value D1
Value E1
Value A2
Value B2
Value C2
Value D2
Value E2
Value B3
Value C3
Value E3
Value B4
Table 6.1
Example of a morphological matrix
The next steps belong to the synthesis phase. First, one does an internal consistency analysis of
the morphological matrix. The matrix shown in the example here consists of 2 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 3 =
144 theoretically possible combinations. This number is too vast to comprehend from an
analytical point of view, and, additionally, not all of the combinations, or pairings, are plausible.
It is the purpose of the internal consistency analysis to weed out these implausible parings. One
compares the values to one another, one by one, asking the question: if A1, is B1, B2, C1 and so
on possible? Internally consistent pairings of the
values
, meaning pairs that would be possible in
the real world, are thus identified and fed into a consistency matrix giving you the total range of
possible solutions existing in you morphological space. This is called the solution space for your
given problem. From there you feed the results of the consistency analysis into an IT tool, which
defines all scenarios which find consistent solutions on all
parameters
, i.e. a scenario which
could exist in the real world. The resulting list of scenarios is called the outcome matrix.
Finally, evaluating the scenarios using common sense, you see if any are similar enough to
comprise a scenario class. The result is a final number of scenario classes from which you make
specific scenario descriptions.
17
As a tool in this final process, FFI has developed a scenario
template adapted to the PreservIA project, enabling us to more easily describe a larger number
of scenarios. The template is presented in chapter 7.
Morphological analysis was chosen in this project because it a method to structure and analyse
complex problems, and the purpose of the assessment in this report is indeed a complex
problem. We found, however, that while the method was suitable to identify issues related to
security, it was less helpful with issues of safety. The same difficulty arose when FFI researcher
Sunniva Meyer undertook a task of similar, if not higher, complexity: to map all threats to the
security of an entire nation [43]. She reflected that because the sample space of such a complex
17
All the steps of the morphological box are defined in [39 p.9]