This week's module not only introduced us to the concept of frame blindness, but it also gave us tools and strategies to deal with complex decision processes. The three tools our text introduced us to were building an information base, identifying constraints, and strengthening organizational capabilities (Hoch, 2001). Each of these tools must be used together for effective decision making processes.
Slotte (2014) describes the process of complex decision making in three phases similar to our text but with a slightly different spin. His three points were Dialog, Negotiation and Debate. It is important to have an open dialog for each of the stakeholders to come together and input data for a project. Negotiation allows those stakeholders to resolve issues, and deal with consequences or constraints of these negotiations. Finally, a debate gives opportunity to see the frames of others and understand who's view is the correctly gathered option for this particular decision needing to be made. I enjoyed the perspective of this researcher for spinning a slightly different light on the topic, as each phase combines the three tools from our class text to assist in the decision process.
Building a strong information base is perhaps one of the oldest rules in decision making. The more you know, the better your decisions will be. In today's world, each of us has the ability to scour the Internet to research and discover so many details which were not available to us in the past. By building a solid base of knowledge, this will aid a decision-maker in assuring their decisions are best possible for the organization.
One of the things my organization does to build strong information bases is a constant querying of our students (end users) about their experiences at and around the school. The unfortunate side of this method of query is the accuracy and relevance of data to each of the stakeholder groups. I worry with each survey that few students actually take the time to read the questions and respond appropriately. As I try to remind my students since one of the courses in my present curricula deals with data and data validity, if you respond to every question that all is wonderful then administration feels your responses validate the decisions being made. In today's world, most people hate surveys and will do anything to skip to the end quickly. For this reason, I always put a question in my surveys that a constant response would contradict their previous responses allowing me to negate that particular response from my consideration.
In this process it is important to understand what constraints affect your organization and what is holding you back from making future decisions. The old adage of what is good for the goose is good for the gander does not necessarily ring true, which is why this influx of information must be carefully scrutinized to assure the data fits the situation.
Constraints in our organization are plentiful. Each decision being made must meet an onslaught of conditions and requirements for the outcome of the project. Decisions negatively affecting the student body could cause decreases in enrollment, while decisions which make students too happy could be in violation of SACS requirements or State or Federal regulation.
Strengthening organizational capabilities is the mission of effective decision making. By diversification of your data gathering efforts, you are creating the opportunity for to strengthen and grow a group or organization. Ultimately, the decisions being made by my institution have increased student retention, as well as first time enrollments in a time when many other colleges around the nation are experiencing decreasing rates in both.
In my roll as a decision maker in my organization, I find that I must make decisions which affect my classroom and ultimately the rest of the college as well. Inside my frame of thinking as a teacher, I must make the decisions to keep all of my stakeholders happy. Each year, we review our curriculum and the outcomes of the lessons which were taught to determine if changes need to be made to the course work which is asked of my students. I also must gather data from the industry which my degree program serves in the local area. This assists me in determining which courses should be offered and if the skills being taught are currently those which we should be basing our student performance off of. For the identification of constraints, I refer to many different documents which guide our programs, first there is the State of Mississippi curriculum framework which gives guidance on which courses the State decided would be appropriate for our program. The next constraint is to assure all reporting guidelines are met for the college's SACS accreditation reviews which occur periodically. All of this in hand, I also have to worry about the strengthening of my organization. For my frame, this is the demand for my program which also influences the college's frame as well. Demand for my program is higher than I can accommodate, which is largely a result of success in job placement for my graduates, and a program which meets the rigor of the industry without causing student incapacitation.
The degree of complexity in making decisions grows as you climb your way up the organizational ladder. At the bottom of my organizational structure, the decision processes are relatively straight forward. However, as you move through department chair, deans, college vice presidents, provosts, and presidents offices, the number of inputs for each of their decisions grows exponentially. Currently, the decision makers in my organization are making effective decisions for our group, however, I wonder if they are using sound decision sciences to make those decisions or if their intuition is keenly happening upon a workable solution rather than the best possible. Perhaps one of the greatest occurrences in my current profession is the lack of people in decision making positions who do not have advanced degrees which required extensive research and decision investigation to obtain. I believe with higher levels of education, we all have the opportunity to learn better methods for data gathering, constraint recognition, and organizational growth. I wish I could say that every organization I have worked at valued these skills as much as Education does.
References:
Hoch, S. & Kunreuther, H. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Martinovski, B. (2014). Interactive alignment or complex reasoning: Reciprocal adaptation and framing in group decision and negotiation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 23(3), 497-514. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1007/s10726-013-9363-5
Slotte, S., & Hämäläinen, R.,P. (2015). Decision structuring dialogue. EURO Journal on Decision Processes, 3(1-2), 141-159. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1007/s40070-014-0028-7
No comments:
Post a Comment