A632.3.3.RB_MaceRoyce
Describe the 3 different methodologies of dealing with complex, multiple stakeholders, and environmental decision processes in your organization. Reflect on the process you would apply to ensure the most successful process possible. Describe each element in detail and make clear the available options and consequences.
There are three different methodologies that my organization applies to the decision-making process as they relate to complexity, multiple stakeholders, and environment:
1) Keep the objective in mind - As an organization, we always want to keep the objective in mind. This helps us to focus on the necessities required to accomplish the mission. Since the organization has a fairly singular objective of producing air traffic control services anytime and anywhere in the world within 72 hours, the real complexity comes from coordinating with other units/agencies (multiple stakeholders) and the environment (where the mission needs to be performed).
The process that we employ as an organization to alleviate any decision-making issues related to multiple stakeholders and environment come in the form of timely planning practices. For example, our organization has annual training that takes place over the course of two weeks. This training simulates what it would be like to actually execute our mission in a real world scenario by setting up an airfield and conducting air traffic operations. A simulation if you will.
We start planning as an organization for the next annual training period at least a year in advance by contacting other organizations for logistical and operational help. We also look at the environment in which we will be executing the mission by specifically looking at the specific location, limiting factors, and other planning factors that relate to the environment. Essentially, we are planning for the next annual training period as soon as current training period has ended.
In tying this reflection blog to the weekly discussions (specifically my own), it can also be mentioned that After Action Reports (AAR) are a huge part of our planning process as it relates to our objective. As an organization, we compile the "what went right" and "what went wrong" after every annual training period. This helps us to refocus on the mission with the objective in mind for the next annual training period. There really are no consequences to this process and it allows us to plan such a big event without the pressures of time constraints. Consistently refining our planning processes and decision-making procedures helps us narrow down the ability to plan contingencies within a 72 hour period without any major issues.
2) Readiness is the key - Another methodology that is employed within my organization relates to readiness. As a military organization, it is vital that all members are physically and mentally ready to make decisions. Naturally, if a member is not ready to perform the mission physically or mentally and their decision-making skills are impaired, the mission/objective may suffer. As an organization, we constantly monitor the readiness of our members (meeting standards set forth by the organization) to ensure that the objective doesn't suffer due to flawed decision-making.
For example, if a member is becoming addicted to a commonly consumed product such as alcohol, their decision-making processes can become impaired. The subsequent decisions can then affect the member's ability to make decisions that contribute positively to the organization's complex, stakeholder related, and environmental decisions. More specifically, a DUI can leave a member of the organization physically incapacitated and/or mentally incapacitated. Complex decisions become harder, stakeholders lose faith, and environments become unfriendly for those that are physically and/or mentally unprepared.
The consequences of looking at readiness too closely can become an issue when we narrowly focus on readiness items that we as an organization or as individuals feel are most important. For example, I have been apart of an organization where physical training assessments are the most important focus. Passing this test becomes the "hot topic" in the organization and the focus shifts almost completely to the physical aspect of readiness. As this takes place, the mental health of the members throughout the organization inherently becomes less of a focus although it is also of vital importance to any organization.
3) Continuous improvement processes maintain relevancy - The last methodology employed in my organization pertains to continuous improvement. The ability for our organization to constantly improve helps us remain relevant within our field of expertise and provide the services that we are entrusted with. For example, continuous improvement within my organization comes in the form of brainstorming, AARs, and anonymous suggestion boxes. These forms of improvement allow the decision-making processes of the organization to become more expansive. The organization as a whole pushes to continually improve by allowing free thought and ideas to be contributed by all members. Decisions become more inclusive and more decisions become available at a quicker rate.
Continuous improvement can only become a consequence if we fail to recognize the people who improve the processes. I have seen people work hard to improve processes and many times are not acknowledged for their contributions. People inherently want to be recognized for good work and when they get ignored... They will many times take their improvement mindedness to another organization. In short, reward the improvement makers and praise their work. Their decision-making skills and abilities may help take the organization to the next level and/or into the future.
After reflecting on the aforementioned methodologies, it is my belief that combining them with the new decision-making approaches of "building the information base", "identifying constraints", and "strengthening organizational capabilities" (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001), we can take decision-making to the next level. We can create a "paramount" decision-making process that allows us to cover most if not all facets of the framing process. This enables us as both organizations and/or leaders to make effective decisions as quickly and effectively as humanly possible.
References
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions.
New York, NY: Wiley.
There are three different methodologies that my organization applies to the decision-making process as they relate to complexity, multiple stakeholders, and environment:
1) Keep the objective in mind - As an organization, we always want to keep the objective in mind. This helps us to focus on the necessities required to accomplish the mission. Since the organization has a fairly singular objective of producing air traffic control services anytime and anywhere in the world within 72 hours, the real complexity comes from coordinating with other units/agencies (multiple stakeholders) and the environment (where the mission needs to be performed).
The process that we employ as an organization to alleviate any decision-making issues related to multiple stakeholders and environment come in the form of timely planning practices. For example, our organization has annual training that takes place over the course of two weeks. This training simulates what it would be like to actually execute our mission in a real world scenario by setting up an airfield and conducting air traffic operations. A simulation if you will.
We start planning as an organization for the next annual training period at least a year in advance by contacting other organizations for logistical and operational help. We also look at the environment in which we will be executing the mission by specifically looking at the specific location, limiting factors, and other planning factors that relate to the environment. Essentially, we are planning for the next annual training period as soon as current training period has ended.
In tying this reflection blog to the weekly discussions (specifically my own), it can also be mentioned that After Action Reports (AAR) are a huge part of our planning process as it relates to our objective. As an organization, we compile the "what went right" and "what went wrong" after every annual training period. This helps us to refocus on the mission with the objective in mind for the next annual training period. There really are no consequences to this process and it allows us to plan such a big event without the pressures of time constraints. Consistently refining our planning processes and decision-making procedures helps us narrow down the ability to plan contingencies within a 72 hour period without any major issues.
2) Readiness is the key - Another methodology that is employed within my organization relates to readiness. As a military organization, it is vital that all members are physically and mentally ready to make decisions. Naturally, if a member is not ready to perform the mission physically or mentally and their decision-making skills are impaired, the mission/objective may suffer. As an organization, we constantly monitor the readiness of our members (meeting standards set forth by the organization) to ensure that the objective doesn't suffer due to flawed decision-making.
For example, if a member is becoming addicted to a commonly consumed product such as alcohol, their decision-making processes can become impaired. The subsequent decisions can then affect the member's ability to make decisions that contribute positively to the organization's complex, stakeholder related, and environmental decisions. More specifically, a DUI can leave a member of the organization physically incapacitated and/or mentally incapacitated. Complex decisions become harder, stakeholders lose faith, and environments become unfriendly for those that are physically and/or mentally unprepared.
The consequences of looking at readiness too closely can become an issue when we narrowly focus on readiness items that we as an organization or as individuals feel are most important. For example, I have been apart of an organization where physical training assessments are the most important focus. Passing this test becomes the "hot topic" in the organization and the focus shifts almost completely to the physical aspect of readiness. As this takes place, the mental health of the members throughout the organization inherently becomes less of a focus although it is also of vital importance to any organization.
3) Continuous improvement processes maintain relevancy - The last methodology employed in my organization pertains to continuous improvement. The ability for our organization to constantly improve helps us remain relevant within our field of expertise and provide the services that we are entrusted with. For example, continuous improvement within my organization comes in the form of brainstorming, AARs, and anonymous suggestion boxes. These forms of improvement allow the decision-making processes of the organization to become more expansive. The organization as a whole pushes to continually improve by allowing free thought and ideas to be contributed by all members. Decisions become more inclusive and more decisions become available at a quicker rate.
Continuous improvement can only become a consequence if we fail to recognize the people who improve the processes. I have seen people work hard to improve processes and many times are not acknowledged for their contributions. People inherently want to be recognized for good work and when they get ignored... They will many times take their improvement mindedness to another organization. In short, reward the improvement makers and praise their work. Their decision-making skills and abilities may help take the organization to the next level and/or into the future.
After reflecting on the aforementioned methodologies, it is my belief that combining them with the new decision-making approaches of "building the information base", "identifying constraints", and "strengthening organizational capabilities" (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001), we can take decision-making to the next level. We can create a "paramount" decision-making process that allows us to cover most if not all facets of the framing process. This enables us as both organizations and/or leaders to make effective decisions as quickly and effectively as humanly possible.
References
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H. C., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions.
New York, NY: Wiley.
Comments
Post a Comment