i-Delphi Compared to Other Methods

i-Delphi is a unique software-based system designed to implement the Delphi method and to enhance it with many innovations enabled by the World Wide Web. It is useful to note the major distinctions between i-Delphi and other systems that may seem at least superficially similar but are built on different principles.

1.	i-Delphi is not a technique for choosing between alternatives by breaking them into components that can be voted on separately and then combined mathematically to obtain a score for each alternative. That technique has greatest applicability when issues can readily be separated into discrete factors and there is general agreement that all important influences have been identified. The Delphi method does not require meeting those or any other conditions.
2.	During i-Delphi projects, views of participants are solicited and tabulated. Delphi is not, however, an exercise in democracy or predicated on a representative sample of any population. Delphi's effectiveness depends on deliberately assembling non-representative panels of individuals with unusual capacities to contribute.
3.	Outcomes of i-Delphi projects are determined by the interaction of panelists, not by establishing which views get the most votes. Consensus is often reached during i-Delphi projects. However, it can be equally or more valuable to uncover and consider the nature and extent of irreconcilable disagreements between panelists. Reasons for extreme views are particularly important.
4.	i-Delphi’s principal value is superior ability to arrive at the best available solution to a particular problem. It is not used as a managerial technique for promoting “buy-in” of eventual implementers by including them in a deliberative process.
5.	i-Delphi enables panelists to collaborate without traditional constraints of time and place. However, it is far more than a technique for holding meetings in cyberspace. i-Delphi has a sharper focus: to address complex problems in a proven process that includes defined objectives, carefully constituted panels, flexible interaction between panelists, total anonymity of contributions, avoidance of detrimental group dynamics, immediate feedback, multiple iterations through an evolving set of questions and issues, and facilitation by an experienced moderator.