Top
Search
What They Say...

"I had been consistently astounded by the way in which their methods for the visualization and clarification of reasoning processes enables one to impose order on chaos and see what is really going on in complex, contentious and tangled debates..."
- Dr Neil Byron, former Commissioner, Productivity Commission

"They are making a significant contribution to the improvement of analytical standards in the public policy arena, particularly among young professionals. Austhink deserves the country's thanks for this."
- Ross Babbage, Founder, Kokoda Foundation

 "Austhink's methods for dissecting and clarifying complex pieces of analysis or public policy are first class."
- LTGEN (ret) Peter Leahy, former Chief of Army

"That Austhink has devised new methods for doing this is enormously to its credit and I only hope more businesses will start to adopt such methods. It will save an immense amount of money, time and frustration for them."
- Bruce Page, Energy Consultant  

More

Custom Mapping

Austhink can develop custom maps of complex issues, debates, or cases. The map at right for example is a distillation of the case for a desalination plant for Victoria. It was developed for, and working closely with, one of the leading authorities in this area.

Benefits of having such maps include:

  • Rational Consensus. A map displaying all the relevant considerations is a powerful tool for dissolving misperceptions and disagreements.
  • Communication. With maps you can easily share understanding of issues and arguments. This yields efficiency dividends; for example newcomers to the debate can get “up to speed” very quickly.
  • Accountability. A map gets “on record” the case for some position, making the position transparently defensible and updating of the case easy.

Depending on scope, a custom mapping exercise can take from a few days to many months.

Example: the Abrams Tank debate

In 2006 Australian Army commissioned Austhink to map the arguments bearing on the controversial decision to purchase the US Abrams tank. Austhink produced a substantial report exhaustively mapping the lines of argument, revealing that while there had been errors on both sides, Army’s critics had failed to properly grasp the case or check the assumptions underpinning their objections to the decision.