| Question |
Answer |
| Pros of individual decision making |
productive and quick, does not require meeting with others.consistant set of values and accountability is clear |
| Cons of individual decision making |
mistakes based on heuristics and sensory misperceptions |
| What are the hidden traps of decision making? |
confirming evidence trap, sunk costs trap, framing trap,anchoring trap, Status quo, recallability trap, base rate trap |
| What is the anchoring trap? |
When considering a decision, the mind gives disproportionate weight to the first information it receives. Initial impressions, estimates, or data anchor subsequent thoughts and judgments. This mental phenomenon is known as anchoring |
| What is the confirming evidence trap |
This trap is the bias that leads us to seek out information to support our existing point of view while avoiding information that contradicts it. |
| What are the problems with anchoring? |
we seldom question the appropriateness or validity of the anchor in the current situation. We fail to make sufficent adjustments from the anchor to our current estimate. we underestimate the high end of the range and overestimate the low end of the range. |
| How do you avoid the anchoring trap? |
View the problem from different perspectives, seek the info and opinons of others(tell them as little as possible) |
| How do we avoid the confirming evidence trap? |
play devils advocate or ask someone else to.Ask yourself; What's the strongest reason to make a different choice? The second strongest? The third? |
| What is the Status Quo trap? |
We instinctively stay with what seems familiar. Thus we look for decisions that involve the least change. Breaking the status quo means taking action, and when we take action, we take responsibility, thus opening ourselves up to blame and regret |
| How do we avoid the status quo trap? |
Remind yourself of your objectives and examine how they would be served by the status quoIdentify other options – don’t assume that there aren’t anyAsk yourself if you would choose the status-quo alternative if it was not the status quoAvoid exaggerating |
| Sunk Costs trap? |
We tend to make choices in ways that justify past decisions, even when the latter no longer seem valid. This frequently occurs when we’re unwilling, consciously or not, to admit a mistake. |
| How to avoid the sunk costs trap? |
Seek feedback from those who were uninvolved in the earlier decision. Examine why admitting a past mistake distresses you. Be on the lookout for the influence of sunk-cost biases in subordinates’ decisions and recommendations. Don’t cultivate a failure- |
| Framing Trap? |
The way you fram a question can profoundly influence the answer or decision |
| How do you avoid the framing trap? |
frame the problem in a way that advances the objectives. don't automatically accept the inital frame. Reframe the problem and look for distortions. Pose problems in neutral redundant language that objectivly combines losses and gains. Constantly evaluat |
| Recallability trap |
we belive that we recall frequent events more easily than infrequent ones and likely events more easily than unlikely events |
| Problems with the recallability trap |
Recall is based on vividness, recency and retrievability. Presumed associations can impact our assessment of the likelyhood of two event occurring together |
| How do we aviod the recallability trap? |
Each time you make an estimate or forcast examine your assumptions to make sure that you are not being unduly swayed by memory distortions. Get direct statistics |
| Base rate trap? |
The base rate fallacy, also called base rate neglect, is an error that occurs when the conditional probability of some hypothesis H given some evidence E is assessed without taking sufficient account of the "base rate" or "prior probability" of H. |
| How to aviod the base rate fallacy |
pay attention only to relevant data. avoid mixing up one type of probability statement with another type of probability statement |
| Pros and Cons of group decision making |
Pros: groups can generate more alternative solutions and can better defibe complex problems. Cons: groupthink can lead to incomplete definitions of problems, may only generate 1 or 2 clone type solutions, fail to reconsider alternatives, poor information |
| Common Group decision errors |
organizational culture,group dynamics, abilene paradox, group think, brainstorming, |
| Describe organizational culture biases |
organ that are preoccupied with status differences, the one best way of doing things,and heavily reward individual behaviour can be problamatic. some societies may inhibit spontaneity and deter others from saying whats on their mind, ideas expressed in cl |
| Group dynamics |
communications, group size, conflict handling,and group cohesion |
| The abilene paradox |
Abilene paradox is a paradox in which a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of any of the individuals in the group. It involves a common breakdown of group communication in which each member mistake |
| Components of the Abilene Paradox |
public agreement on the situation even though privately they may not see the situation as a problem, group members disagree with the decision but believe that their feelings are in the minority, vocalizations are based upon misinterpretations of the group |
| Conditions of Groupthink |
highly cohesive group,insulated from outsiders, no procedures for accurately defining problems or exploring alternatives, or a failure to follow decision making procedures, members heavily influenced by the leaders behavior, time pressures |
| Symptoms of Groupthink |
failure to examineunderlying assumptions, illusion of invulnerability, believe that the group is inherently moral, rationalize any resistance to their assumptions us v them mentality, self-censorship,mind guards, stop the flow of info, illusion of unanim |
| Prevent Groupthink |
encourage team members to air objections and doubts, team leaders should guide and facilitate not direct,assign a devil's advocate, full participation is needed, keep in touch with reality, don't evaluate or reject any alternatives until all alternatives |
| Prevent Groupthink |
encourage team members to air objections and doubts, team leaders should guide and facilitate not direct,assign a devil's advocate, full participation is needed, keep in touch with reality, don't evaluate or reject any alternatives until all alternatives |
| 5 problems with brainstorming |
social loafing, self-limiting behavior, conformity, production blocking,downward norm setting |
| conformity, |
people may be afraid of being negativly perceived because of differing view points |
| production blocking, |
may forget your idea as you are waiting for your turn to speak |
| downward norm setting, |
group is only as strong as its weakest member; group sets goals on that basis |
| self-limiting behavior |
, pulling yourself from participation out of a lack of interest or because you don't see a payoff |
| social loafing, |
blending in and letting the group do all the work |
| Techniques used to overcome brainstorming problems |
team diversity: offers conflicting differing view points, analytical reasoning, organizational memory: reduces idea repetition, use trained facilitators, set high bench marks for the number of ideas generated,membership change , and constructive conflict |
| Devil's Advocacy Technique |
1)group generates a potential solution 2)group assigns a devil's advocate 3)advocate critiques the solution 4)group generates more information 5)they decide to change to use or not use the solution |
| Nominal Group Technique |
1)individual analysis 2)RR share idea w/group-no critique 3)each member writes down analysis -to be sure of details 4)discussion q&a 5)vote and rank ideas to reach consensus |
| The four elements of Vroom Jago |
1)Individual or Group decision 2)Is the decision MT or MD driven? time v. development 3)Situational Variables? 4)What type of decision tree? TI TG DI DG? |
| Eight situational variables |
Quality requirement,Commitment requirement, leaders information, problem structure, commitment probability, goal congruence, Subordinate conflict, subordinate information |
| Quality requirement, |
QR how important is the technical quality of the decision? |
| Commitment requirement, |
CR How important is subordinate commitment to the decision? |
| leaders information, |
LI Do I have enough info to make a high quality decision? |
| problem structure, |
ST Is the problem well structured? |
| commitment probability, |
CP Will my subordinates be committed to the decision I make? |
| goal congruence, |
GC Do the subordinates share share the organizational goals? |
| Subordinate conflict, |
CO Is conflict among subordinates over preferred solutions likely? |
| subordinate information |
SI Do the subordinates have enough info to make a high quality decision? |
| The first step in creating a decision statement is to identify |
whether you are dealing with an entrepreneurial or disturbance problem |
| Decision analysis= |
entrepreneurial problems. |
| Decision analysis begins with a decision statement and ends when it is resolved by the answers to |
What purpose? Which? How? |
| Problem analysis= disturbance problems or |
cause and effect |
| Problem analysis begins with the deviation or problem statement and ends with the answer to the question: |
why? |
| Use mind grip to frame your initial problem/decision statement |
write down three sets of 2 words that best describe your problem or decision then choose the combination that best represents your prob or decis and use those words to write a restatement of the problem. |
| Mind Stretch |
here you ask why is it necessary? Where should it be done? Who should do it? When should it be done? What should be done? How should it be done? These questions give you a broad understanding of the problem |
| Mind Focus |
Why Why why? |
|
|
| Metaphorical Thinking |
use analogies or metaphors to put something you don’t know in terms you do know. Ask what is this situation like? This distortion can lead to new insights that can then be applied to our real problems |
| Problem Reversal |
reverse cause and effect or replace key words with antonyms in order to trigger insight |
| SCAMPERing |
S-Substitute C-Combine A-Adopt M-Magnify or Modify P-Put to other uses E-Eliminate R-Rearrange or Reverse |
| Problem Diagnosis |
What triggered the event? Constraints? Essential elements? What decisions affect this one? workable scope? Insight from others? iterative process-as u gain more info |
HHS Shrek
