Over the years, I have had clients ask for "a decision making process." My response used to be "there is no such thing; if there was a universal decision making process, we could program a computer to make decisions and we wouldn't need people" (which in some cases might be a good thing.)
But what I have come to realize is that the tools and approaches I provide in my presentations and books can be assembled into a framework for decision making. Judgement is still needed, but the key is to organize the decision making process in a way that maximizes results.
One limitation in the human brain shows up when you are trying to decide or prioritize between several options. Let's say you're introducing a new product or service, and there are eight different approaches you can use to promote it. If you try to decide between all eight at once, odds are you will lose some details, or have a hard time keeping all options in your head at once.
Another example is getting a group to agree on items for an agenda. There may be 10 items proposed, but only time for three to be addressed. Typically, people will spend a significant amount of time discussing what should be discussed...
A decision making tool that can be used in both these situations is a Paired Sort. The Paired Sort breaks down a "many option" decision into a set of either/or decisions, and then totals the results.
We have had a paired sort tool on our web site for a while, but have not promoted it. Moreover, it would not work on portable devices such as the iPhone or Blackberry. So we re-wrote the program and now it should work on any device. It also can be used for individuals or group prioritization.
Please try it out here and let me know what you think!
As well, as I work on doing a better job of organizing these tools and approaches to make them easier to use, I am looking for examples of the types of decisions you make and problems you face. These can be easy or hard, large or small. My goal is to make decisions easier by helping you identify what type of decision you have to make and presenting the appropriate tools. This may be through a map of decision making or through computer aided questioning. So please send some examples!
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
A decision making process?
Monday, June 13, 2011
We're moving, and other news
Blogger, First things first: we're moving. Our new contact information is Decision Advancement website: www.DecisionAdvancement.com My phone and e-mail are: If you haven't received an e-mail from me in a while, the name "Decision Advancement" may be new to you as well. When I started this endeavor, I called it "Thinking for Results". While thinking is still a key aspect of my work, I realized three things: Thus the name Decision Advancement. As I mentioned in the second point above, recently I have been working on tools for the capture, analysis, and communication of complex situations. Some of these tools draw on my background in physics and engineering. Many of them are visual tools, which capitalize on strength of the human brain to carry out visual analysis. (There are examples of some of these techniques on our website.) These tools allow people to quickly grasp the essential elements and especially the interconnectedness of situations so they can understand the complexity without eliminating details and losing important information as a result. Finally, more of my work these days is helping facilitate analysis of systems and situations to enable better decision making. In today's complex world, decision-making is tougher than it has been in a long time. Up until recently, it was possible to be successful by simply doing what had worked in the past. Either you worked on incrementally improving your own processes, or you copied the successful leaders in your situation. But there is now much more uncertainty with respect to the economy, business, political situations, technology, and so on. Capturing the complexity and understanding interactions between the different factors is key to making good decisions. And exploring alternative future scenarios to ensure you are not blindsided by an unexpected event is also crucial to reducing risk and achieving long-term success. For more information on these topics, please contact me directly, or visit our website for some examples of these tools and approaches. Whether you're someone who has attended an event where I spoke, or who has read one of my books, or someone I know some other way, please feel free to drop me a line and let me know what you are up to as well. Best regards, Randy Park Direct: 416-567-9540
14 Shand Avenue
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M8X 1T5
phone: (416) 567-9540
e-mail: rp@randypark.com
e-mail: rp@RandyPark.com
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Optimism and Pessimism about the future
Last week, I had two experiences which caused me to view the future more optimistically. The first was that I attended an event on systems dynamics and systems thinking hosted by Earl Haig high school here in Toronto.
The half-dozen students who organized this event have formed a system dynamics club at the high school, and held this event, complete with guest speakers, to educate their peers about systems thinking. These young people are far ahead of many adults in their realization of the importance of understanding how we make decisions.
The second experience was viewing a video which I learned about through the conference. The video is at: www.watersfoundation.org/webed/mod5/examples/mod5-5-11.html
This video shows three 6-year-old boys using a diagram of a reinforcing loop to solve relationship problems they were having on the playground. I found it incredibly inspiring. It is definitely worth watching.
The pessimism comes from the federal election we are experiencing, and the state of politics in Canada. Two things in particular are disturbing. As someone who emphasizes that the best decisions are made when we recognize our biases, identify our assumptions, seek out accurate information, cooperate with others, and behave civilly I find the behavior of Stephen Harper, our current Prime Minister, to be disappointing. He consistently tries to destroy, not debate, those who disagree with him. He chooses to ignore both scientific and economic experts when it comes to crimes and prisons, drug rehabilitation, and approaches to taxation. And he governs as a one-person show, without input from even members of his own party.
The other disturbing thing about the election is the sometimes irrational reaction that some people have had to the election and the candidates. One newspaper story told of a political science student who said "There's a lot I don't like in all the parties. So why would I pick one?" He intends to spoil his ballot.
I would hope that most voters will think things through a little bit more than this young man, and recognize that there are many decisions we have to make where we don't like any of the options, but we still have to choose. And further that if, like the majority of Canadians, you disagree with the way Stephen Harper conducts politics, that you think things though carefully before you vote on May 2. (If you are looking for practical information on voting strategically there is a website called www.projectdemocracy.ca which has more information.)
I debated long and hard whether to write a tip which contains a political stance. If my objection had been solely because I disagreed with someone's policies, I think I would have kept it to myself. But I'm truly concerned about the future of our country if Stephen Harper's approach to politics becomes the norm in Canada.
My hope is that the young people who are learning techniques for better cooperation and decision making don't lose these approaches when they become "adults."
Friday, December 17, 2010
Turning Embarrassment into Inspiration
I had a slightly embarrassing moment two Sundays ago. As part of my new role on the board of the Canadian Association of Professional Speakers I made a short presentation describing factors that affect the success of an association. It was based on a model I created that demonstrates that many factors are linked to member satisfaction. (If you would like more information on how the model helps explain association success or failure, drop me a note.)
The embarrassing part came after the presentation, when an audience member asked "do you have a Twitter account?" I do have one, but I had never seen much use for Twitter, and thus had a grand total of five posts. My response was "yes, but I don't Twitter much" (at which point my grammar was corrected; it should have been "I don't Tweet much." )
But that wasn't the most embarrassing part. The audience member asked for my Twitter username, and there was a long pause before I answered "I think it's thinking_guy."
My mission is to provide people with the motivation and tools to think more deeply and to address complexity rather than ignore it. My filter was that it was not possible to say anything useful in 140 character tweets. But faced with someone who wanted to follow me - presumably to know more than what I had for breakfast - I started thinking again about Twitter.
And this is where the inspiration struck: I realized I couldn't provide answers in 140 characters, but I might be able to inspire people's thinking by asking questions. So as of Monday morning, I started a daily question Tweet. If you like you can follow them at thinking_guy on Twitter. And feel free to respond to them.
The "tip" from this tip? Embarrassment often results when how we are perceived is different than how we think we should be perceived. Addressing it means changing either what we're doing or the perception. It can be a wake up call of a nagging issue we feel we should address, but have suppressed because we haven't figured out how to move forward.
If you have felt embarrassed, do you need to change your perception or your actions?
Good Thinking!
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
You Can Do It!
I had an interesting insight this past weekend. I was down in Arizona at an event for professional speakers as I will be a board member of the Canadian Association of Professional Speakers next year. This weekend workshop was hosted by the American equivalent of our Canadian association.
Brian Tracy, the creator of the Chicken Soup for the Soul series of books and an accomplished speaker, is on the American board and spoke briefly. He told us that in his experience the four most important words for people to hear are "You Can Do It."
Over the years as I have refined and enhanced the concepts and tools that I bring to my work they have typically become more challenging both to understand and to apply. For example, Scenario Exploration and System Dynamics are both challenging but certainly useful approaches when making decisions, especially for the future. Most people in my workshop struggle when they first try to apply these tools. Usually I acknowledge in the session that these are challenging tools. But I realized on the weekend that all too frequently I leave it at that, and don't include the encouragement that people may need to persevere with these approaches. Because although I recognize these tools are challenging, I think they are both necessary and achievable skills for people who want to make better decisions. In so many important areas of both work and society these days, good decision-making is hard work. But it is also certainly achievable for you.
The other difficulty I hear from people regarding thinking deeper is "I don't have time." But I believe it is worthwhile for everyone right up to a busy senior executive to carve out the time for deeper thinking.
So if you're one of those people who has been to a presentation I made or workshop I led, I want to give you this message now: You Can Do It. And if there is any way I can help you with that, please let me know.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Blame it on the System
A sad event occurred for me on Monday - the candidate I was supporting and volunteering for in the Toronto mayor's race pulled out. Sarah Thomson had been running third or fourth in most polls but didn't have the resources to continue. In particular she didn't have the money to advertise to get her message out to the voters and since she was in third or fourth place, the press didn't pay as much attention to her as to the front runners.
I bring this up because it is an example of System Dynamics - how a system can influence the outcome of a situation. In all political races, the front runners have considerable advantage because of reinforcing feedback loops: whomever is perceived to be the front runner is accorded more attention by the press, who then publicize the candidate more, which raises their profile and (generally) their support. Polls show the front runners as more popular, so the press pays more attention to them. Awareness of and support for second tier candidates tends to drop. (Of course the added attention can also mean increased scrutiny, which is why political strategists are always afraid of "peaking" too early in a campaign.)
System Dynamics can reveal a lot about the outcomes that result from our organizations. I recently facilitated some sessions of a System Dynamics game - a team based simulation of the manufacturing, distribution, and sale of products played on large table sized boards. Participants place orders and ship products over "weeks" of play, and they we look at what happened. It turns out that no matter who plays the game, the results tend to be qualitatively similar, with their decisions resulting in excesses and shortages of products. These outcomes result from two related factors: the system as designed provides little immediate feedback for the decisions people make, and people don't tend to think ahead and consider what is about to happen. It is extremely rare for a group to do really well; a system designed this way coupled with the way people think and make decisions will invariably give poor results.
Participants tend to take away lessons particular to their situation, but the overall message is that the system produces the behaviour. (The current political environment tends to produce certain behaviours as well; approaches such as simple messages, attack ads, and so on work because the majority of voters are not that interested in deeply exploring complex political issues. This is also a reinforcing feedback loop; as debate degenerates, people are turned off, and want to spend less time paying attention...)
Understanding the effect of System Dynamics can provide powerful insights into strategy, marketing, sales, social media, and many other areas. It often reveals why unintended consequences occur. And a System Dynamics analysis can provide a foundation for better decisions.
The next time you are confronting a particularly thorny issue, it may in fact be valid to "blame it on the system."
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Volcano Lessons: Preparing for Future Events
The Issue
If you've heard me speak at a conference or another event recently, you likely heard me say that in many important areas no one can predict the future.
So if you don't know what will happen, how can you prepare for it? The solution to this dilemma is that you don't have to predict future events in order to prepare for them.
We have a recent example with the Eyjafjallajokull volcano. Could anyone have foreseen the effect a single volcano could have on air travel around the world? Careful now, because that is a trick question: I am asking if anyone could have foreseen the effect, not the volcano.
The Thinking
People generally are not very good at looking to the future. There are many solid scientific studies detailing some of the failings in human thinking. Some examples: the first information we see "anchors" our expectation; we jump to conclusions; what we see is filtered by our experiences.
These characteristics of the hardware of our thinking result in several common behaviours from many people when it comes to preparing for future events. In order of increasing awareness, they are:
1. They don't look to the future at all, or
2. They look to the future, but decide future events can't be predicted so there is no point spending time on them, or
3a. They look to the future, consider some possible future events, but decide they are extremely unlikely and there is no point spending time on them, or
3b. They look to the future, consider some possible future events, and decide they can predict the future, so there is no point spending time on any other possible future events.
The problem with these approaches, even 3a and 3b, is that they are event driven. And probably the biggest failing of human thinking is that if something hasn't happened to us personally, we find it extremely difficult to conceive it will ever happen. So if you have personally never had a computer fail, or a hard drive crash, it will be tough to convince you that backing up your data is a necessary task. (Having worked with computers since the early days when they were much less reliable than they are now, I have had many such experiences, and thus am probably better than most at backing up my data.)
Instead Look at Consequences
Even the burgeoning field of risk management is often about identifying and quantifying risks, rather than looking at the consequences of the risks and most importantly how to minimize the consequences.
But if instead you look at what the effects would be if you lost some critical systems, you can prepare for future events without necessarily predicting why they might happen.
What would you do if some or all of your business or your work was disrupted? Start by asking simply "what would I need to do?" (You can look at how it might be disrupted, and how likely later on.)
Some specific examples:
Systems: telephone, Internet, loss of a computer, Blackberry, web site, e-commerce site, or electrical power (our power here in downtown Toronto is so reliable, I almost forgot that one!)
People: key personnel - what if someone was hit by the proverbial bus? And remember, almost everyone in an organization has unique knowledge. If you're working to a tight deadline on a project or a proposal, and the one person who knows where to go for the special binding is away, you may miss your deadline.
Suppliers: How vulnerable are you to a supply disruption, either short term or long term? What if a supplier shuts down for some reason? When I have designed electronic equipment, almost invariably there would be several times during the design when a decision had to be made: should we use a unique part which would enhance performance but is available from only one source, or compromise performance but have a design that wasn't dependent on a single supplier?
Customers: what if your largest, or several of your largest, customers went away (for whatever reason)?
In 2008 many financial professionals claimed "no one saw the recession coming" (though I maintain there were many warning signs.) Many investment advisors and investors were caught when they didn't examine what would happen to their investments if the stock market went down. As a result, they lost a lot of money, and some have had to delay retirement. Even without the warning signs, it was possible to prepare for the consequences of a stock market crash. I rebalanced investments in the summer of 2008 not because I predicted the stock market crash, but because I thought about the possible consequences and decided I didn't want to be worrying about which direction the market might take.
Some Examples
The Globe and Mail newspaper had an article discussing how various people who were stranded by the volcano handled the situation. For me, the most instructive example was the News Director from Corus Entertainment in Vancouver who was stranded in London. Corus had developed a process for employees to work remotely in response to the fears of a flu pandemic and disruptions from the winter Olympics. The fact that the system was already in place allowed him to be instantly productive. I'm sure no one at Corus was thinking of a volcano when they planned their remote work capability!
On a personal note, I always carry two laptop computers when going to do a presentation. It makes for a heavy bag when travelling through airports or up and down stairs. Yet after doing this for years, one time the graphic card in one of my computers failed. Without the backup computer, I couldn't have presented my slides.
What Steps Should You Take?
Identifying vulnerabilities is best done as a bottom up approach. Each employee knows their job best; asking them what is essential to the performance of their job is a good starting point. There is a worksheet at the end of this article to assist you with the process.
Sometimes having someone "interview" an employee can help them identify the equipment and tools they take for granted. This can be another employee in the organization, but be careful: unless they are from a different department they may be making the same assumptions as the interviewee.
In consolidating this information, I am a big believer in visual sharing of information. Bringing people together to jointly share their knowledge and experiences is most effective when everyone is looking at the same view.
We use tools such as Mind Mapping, Concept Mapping, and other types of diagrams to record this information. Decision making tools such as the Paired Sort tool can be used to prioritize items.
If you start at the individual level, and work up through departments to the organizational level you can consolidate the information and identify priorities. But remember not to ignore something simply because it doesn't seem likely (remember the volcano!)
Allocating a small but definite amount of time each week to creating and them maintaining these systems avoids the possibility that the effort fades as quickly as everyone's memory of the volcano.
Once the information is in place, taking it to the next level can involve Scenario Planning and System Dynamics to examine and model possible future events.
Conclusions
Back to the first question - while it is unreasonable to expect anyone to have predicted that a particular volcano would erupt in a way that would shut down European air space, it is entirely within reason to anticipate some event that might shut down air travel. (We even have a precedent with the days after 9/11.)
It is not possible to predict future events in many important areas. It is not possible to plan for every single eventuality. But you don't have to predict what will happen to be prepared, just think through the consequences of it happening.
As air travel in Europe returns to normal, I hope organizations will take away the right lesson. The obvious lesson is "no one could have predicted a volcano." The better lesson is "we must examine our vulnerabilities to unforeseen events."
