Decision-making is a fascinating field. Do you know the difference between a "tough" decision and a "bad" one? Not every bad outcome is the result of a bad decision, just like not every GOOD outcome is the result of a good decision. Decision theorists describe tough decisions as ones that are:
- Complex
- Ambiguous, and/or
- Conflictual
That pretty much sums up most of the decisions any of our teams have to face, doesn't it! In contrast, a "bad" decision is one in which we regret the WAY we made a decision. It is one in which we gain knowledge that, in hindsight, would have had us make a different choice.
What do people typically do when faced with a tough decision In short, they tend to trust their gut. They often lean toward things they've done in the past, or things they've seen others do. Innovative alternatives are often overlooked and logic traps go unconfronted. They seldom apply rational decision procedures and will tend to behave as if the tough decisions are actually easy. Decision theorists say a "tough" decision can become a "bad" decision when the uncertainty, ambiguity and conflict are ignored, treated superficially and/or explained away. This is exactly what our family conference methods are designed to prevent.
Theorists differ about the causes of bad decisions. People who favor rational, systematic decision-making processes say that bad decisions are the result of flawed thinking. People who favor more intuitive approaches believe that bad decisions result from inexperience, inadequate information or a tendency to minimize or explain away signs of trouble. There are a few key features of truly bad decisions:
Addressing The Wrong Problem: This happens when people don't distinguish the problem from its symptoms.
Failing to Use Participation: Skip over people and hurry through at your own peril, for this is the road to ending up with an incomplete understanding of the situation!
Being Distracted By Conspicuous Options: When there are "obvious choices", people often won't look for alternatives.
Overreacting to Time Pressure and Stress: This can lead some groups to make decisions that are overly risky or half-baked.
Over-relying on Intuition: It's tough under these circumstances to get people to stand back, try to be objective and use a systematic process for making their decision.
Using Dogmatic Decision Practices: Under pressure, people will often cling rather fiercely to their preferred modes of making decisions when they would benefit greatly by at least considering an alternative.
Failing to Deal With Values: People often assume decisions to be "value-free". When are they ever?
Problems in Making Subjective Estimates: This usually shows up as over-optimism.
Failure to Use Analysis Problems Communicating Analytical Results: Often key decision-makers aren't expert in all the areas needed for consideration and are intimidated by analytical information that is out of their domain or over their heads. When this happens, they may shy away from it and fail to give the group adequate or accurate data.
Ignoring Ethics
Learning Failures: This is when groups don't do "autopsies" on their decisions or processes and fail to learn from failure or from missed opportunities.
These are a few signs that would indicate your team is on the road to a bad decision — a decision that may have a bad outcome because their process was flawed. Your job is to help your group avoid these pitfalls. Keeping them from rushing to conclusions, skipping over potentially divergent opinions or ignoring the realities of uncertainty, ambiguity or conflict will help them through to a sound decision. There is no guarantee that the outcome will be what they hope, but it greatly improves their chances of it. It also ensures that they will be satisfied with their process — regardless of the outcome — knowing they did their best and that they are solid, as a team, for tackling tough decisions.
Tell a Friend
