Difference between revisions of "Systematic Decision Making"
From Deliberative Democracy Institiute Wiki
(→Options) |
(→Options) |
||
| (23 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
Systematic decision making, is a way to try to systematically make collaborative and individual decisions. | Systematic decision making, is a way to try to systematically make collaborative and individual decisions. | ||
| + | |||
| + | {| class = "wikitable" | ||
| + | |+ '''Systematic Collaborative Decision Making''' | ||
| + | !'''Procedure''' | ||
| + | !'''Visualization''' | ||
| + | !'''Mechanism''' | ||
| + | !'''Partners''' | ||
| + | !'''Example''' | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | |'''Initiating a question''' | ||
| + | | | ||
| + | |The first person to start a question feels that some of his needs are not fulfilled. She ask herself how can this need be fulfilled? | ||
| + | |Just the initiator | ||
| + | | A customer enter into a government service office, and see that there is a long line. he feels that he is wasting his time, and she ''wants'' to finish the procedure as fast and as easy as can be. | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | |'''Initiator future vision''' | ||
| + | | | ||
| + | |The initiator picture a better world, where her needs are better fulfilled. To get attached to this vision, she should feel it, dream it, write to herself about it. she should be asked, how would she feel if such world exists. If she wants it. Does she believe she can achieve it, with the help of the facilitator. Is she ready to invest resources in such goal? How much resources can she allocate? If the answer to all is yes, and the resources are enough to proceed, the the quest can start. She will be harness to the procedure. her mind will be focused in resolving the problem. | ||
| + | |The Initiator and a facilitator | ||
| + | |The initiator will come to a future center and will be guided by a facilitator according to the above questions | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | |'''Finding core partners''' | ||
| + | | | ||
| + | |When we seek a solution to a problem, within an organization, the right partners should be found. They can be key stakeholders, they can be experts in the problem, or just people that you know that can help. They will be your ''Core Partners''. You should look for partners that have a good reputation in collaborating. Not all managers are good at collaboration, some are not suited and may have [[hidden agenda]] (For instance to prevent you from innovation so that they will not have to learn something new). The partners should resolve contradicting interests, to avoid ... | ||
| + | |||
| + | |} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===The initiative=== | ||
| + | Every question starts with a first person to raise a question. If he wants to find a solution for an organization, he should include the key stakeholders, so his decisions will be legitimized by the organization. So he should convene a meeting of the key-stakeholders, which will be called "core-members". After setting the problem and agreeing to address it, they should also find the stakeholders as a whole (especially the primary stakeholders) | ||
| + | |||
===Who are the stakeholders=== | ===Who are the stakeholders=== | ||
When we make decision that affects others, we should try to figure out who are the stakeholders. With whom should we take the decisions? The actual involvement of the decision makers will be according to the stages of the question, the availability and the type of decision maker. | When we make decision that affects others, we should try to figure out who are the stakeholders. With whom should we take the decisions? The actual involvement of the decision makers will be according to the stages of the question, the availability and the type of decision maker. | ||
This question should be asked through the whole process, and new stakeholders should come into the process, when thy are found to be stakeholders. | This question should be asked through the whole process, and new stakeholders should come into the process, when thy are found to be stakeholders. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===What is the story here?=== | ||
| + | We come forward with the subject of the discusion, and let everybody tell their story on the subject. | ||
===What are our needs?=== | ===What are our needs?=== | ||
| Line 16: | Line 48: | ||
Of course, visioning to high or to a place which is beyond our abilities will create an unrealistic vision, which will take us a lot of resources and may not mature. The Vision should be realistic, if we want to be able to build concrete solution to fulfill our needs. | Of course, visioning to high or to a place which is beyond our abilities will create an unrealistic vision, which will take us a lot of resources and may not mature. The Vision should be realistic, if we want to be able to build concrete solution to fulfill our needs. | ||
| + | ==SON== | ||
===First exploration of the field=== | ===First exploration of the field=== | ||
To achieve the vision we should get familiar with the field. We should ask ourselves general questions like, what do we know about this field of knowledge? What are the obstacles to achieve the vision. | To achieve the vision we should get familiar with the field. We should ask ourselves general questions like, what do we know about this field of knowledge? What are the obstacles to achieve the vision. | ||
| − | ===What are our plans to achieve the vision? | + | ===SON Facilitation=== |
| + | A SON should be researched and learned by mutual investigation of [[SO]]s, [[values]] and [[theory|theories]]. People are attuned to [[storytelling]], and therefore, storytelling should be used to investigate [[corroboration]] of theories, values and SOs. Experts could also teach participents in their field of expertise. | ||
| + | |||
| + | All objects of the field of decision, should be put to falsification and corroboration (with the consideration of trust and safe feelings of the [[stakeholders]]). | ||
| + | |||
| + | When clashing theories are raised, a falsifiable synthesis or a new falsifiable theory that explains all corroborated evidences should be produced, otherwise a clashes of theories can emerge and brake the deliberative process. If no such theory can be produce, we can advise participants to hold their judgment until new theory will emerge or one of the theories will gain sufficient corroboration. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Usually, more some participants will have more difficulties basing their theories on evidence. their thories are usually based on inner feelings that the thories answer. The new theories, should address these feeling and elevate their well being. For instance, it is said that religion give meaning and produce better communities. although religion is based of faith rather then on hard evidence, it answer the need for community and meaning. In deliberation between seculars and religious people, a new corroborated theory that answer the above feelings should be produced. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==What are our plans to achieve the vision?== | ||
We should try to set goals and milestones to create the vision. We should set options, and select them, by our ability to deliver them, by it's [[ROI]] and by their correspondence to our values. | We should try to set goals and milestones to create the vision. We should set options, and select them, by our ability to deliver them, by it's [[ROI]] and by their correspondence to our values. | ||
If the values are not homogeneous in the group, they should be discussed and explored to achieve better understanding and coordination. | If the values are not homogeneous in the group, they should be discussed and explored to achieve better understanding and coordination. | ||
| − | + | ===Options=== | |
| − | To achieve creativity we should start with free brainstorming, synthesis and the selecting. We should try to design from high level to low level. In each level we should use several options and select from them by using parmeters of theories ([[corroboration]]), values and [[ROI]]. | + | To achieve creativity we should start with free [[brainstorming]], synthesis and the selecting. We should try to design from high level to low level. In each level we should use several options and select from them by using parmeters of theories ([[corroboration]]), values and [[ROI]]. |
| − | + | ||
| + | ===Synthesis=== | ||
To try to make the process more knowledgeable and more effective, one might try to synthesize between different options. She might also try to find new solutions, when other options are been criticized. | To try to make the process more knowledgeable and more effective, one might try to synthesize between different options. She might also try to find new solutions, when other options are been criticized. | ||
| − | + | ===Selection=== | |
According to the goals, the [[ROI]], the corroboration of the theories, the exprience and the values, the group should select minmum set of options to put to the test. | According to the goals, the [[ROI]], the corroboration of the theories, the exprience and the values, the group should select minmum set of options to put to the test. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Devlope and Test=== | ||
| + | To see if the solution works, develop it and test it. If it works, put it to decision makers to allocate resources, if it doesn't work, go back to development or choose another option. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Problems== | ||
| + | If we are unable to achieve the goals or the vision we set to ourselves. Then we should ask ourselves what is the problem? | ||
| + | ===What is the story?=== | ||
| + | Ask people what is the problem, what they think is going wrong, what hearts them. | ||
| + | ===Define the problems=== | ||
| + | Try to define what are the problems that causes the inability to achieve the goals. Use criticism to select the most corroborated defenitions. | ||
| + | ===Select the most important Problems=== | ||
| + | From thus, select the ones that when solved will give the best advantage to the group. | ||
| + | ===Find solutions with OSSTD=== | ||
| + | Develop solutions with the Option, Synthesis, Selection, Test & Develop procesdure. | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[category: decision making]] | ||
| + | [[category: theory]] | ||
Latest revision as of 00:57, 10 February 2016
Systematic decision making, is a way to try to systematically make collaborative and individual decisions.
| Procedure | Visualization | Mechanism | Partners | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initiating a question | The first person to start a question feels that some of his needs are not fulfilled. She ask herself how can this need be fulfilled? | Just the initiator | A customer enter into a government service office, and see that there is a long line. he feels that he is wasting his time, and she wants to finish the procedure as fast and as easy as can be. | |
| Initiator future vision | The initiator picture a better world, where her needs are better fulfilled. To get attached to this vision, she should feel it, dream it, write to herself about it. she should be asked, how would she feel if such world exists. If she wants it. Does she believe she can achieve it, with the help of the facilitator. Is she ready to invest resources in such goal? How much resources can she allocate? If the answer to all is yes, and the resources are enough to proceed, the the quest can start. She will be harness to the procedure. her mind will be focused in resolving the problem. | The Initiator and a facilitator | The initiator will come to a future center and will be guided by a facilitator according to the above questions | |
| Finding core partners | When we seek a solution to a problem, within an organization, the right partners should be found. They can be key stakeholders, they can be experts in the problem, or just people that you know that can help. They will be your Core Partners. You should look for partners that have a good reputation in collaborating. Not all managers are good at collaboration, some are not suited and may have hidden agenda (For instance to prevent you from innovation so that they will not have to learn something new). The partners should resolve contradicting interests, to avoid ... |
Contents
The initiative
Every question starts with a first person to raise a question. If he wants to find a solution for an organization, he should include the key stakeholders, so his decisions will be legitimized by the organization. So he should convene a meeting of the key-stakeholders, which will be called "core-members". After setting the problem and agreeing to address it, they should also find the stakeholders as a whole (especially the primary stakeholders)
Who are the stakeholders
When we make decision that affects others, we should try to figure out who are the stakeholders. With whom should we take the decisions? The actual involvement of the decision makers will be according to the stages of the question, the availability and the type of decision maker.
This question should be asked through the whole process, and new stakeholders should come into the process, when thy are found to be stakeholders.
What is the story here?
We come forward with the subject of the discusion, and let everybody tell their story on the subject.
What are our needs?
Any decision is aimed at selecting the appropriate actions to yield high ROI and valuable outcomes. The outcomes of the actions should best serve the needs of the decision makers. This is called the need-decision-action-reward cycle. So, in the first step of systematic decision making, we should try to understand what are the needs we try to fulfill are.
This can be done quite well by the Motivational Interview method. By investigating to the reasons and basic motivation to do things.
What is the Vision?
According to the NDAR cycle, a result of our action will yield a situation that will fulfill our needs. So we should try to establish a vision of the situation in which our needs will be fulfilled. For example, if we will be rich, we can buy everything we need. So we will vision ourselves as rich people.
Of course, visioning to high or to a place which is beyond our abilities will create an unrealistic vision, which will take us a lot of resources and may not mature. The Vision should be realistic, if we want to be able to build concrete solution to fulfill our needs.
SON
First exploration of the field
To achieve the vision we should get familiar with the field. We should ask ourselves general questions like, what do we know about this field of knowledge? What are the obstacles to achieve the vision.
SON Facilitation
A SON should be researched and learned by mutual investigation of SOs, values and theories. People are attuned to storytelling, and therefore, storytelling should be used to investigate corroboration of theories, values and SOs. Experts could also teach participents in their field of expertise.
All objects of the field of decision, should be put to falsification and corroboration (with the consideration of trust and safe feelings of the stakeholders).
When clashing theories are raised, a falsifiable synthesis or a new falsifiable theory that explains all corroborated evidences should be produced, otherwise a clashes of theories can emerge and brake the deliberative process. If no such theory can be produce, we can advise participants to hold their judgment until new theory will emerge or one of the theories will gain sufficient corroboration.
Usually, more some participants will have more difficulties basing their theories on evidence. their thories are usually based on inner feelings that the thories answer. The new theories, should address these feeling and elevate their well being. For instance, it is said that religion give meaning and produce better communities. although religion is based of faith rather then on hard evidence, it answer the need for community and meaning. In deliberation between seculars and religious people, a new corroborated theory that answer the above feelings should be produced.
What are our plans to achieve the vision?
We should try to set goals and milestones to create the vision. We should set options, and select them, by our ability to deliver them, by it's ROI and by their correspondence to our values. If the values are not homogeneous in the group, they should be discussed and explored to achieve better understanding and coordination.
Options
To achieve creativity we should start with free brainstorming, synthesis and the selecting. We should try to design from high level to low level. In each level we should use several options and select from them by using parmeters of theories (corroboration), values and ROI.
Synthesis
To try to make the process more knowledgeable and more effective, one might try to synthesize between different options. She might also try to find new solutions, when other options are been criticized.
Selection
According to the goals, the ROI, the corroboration of the theories, the exprience and the values, the group should select minmum set of options to put to the test.
Devlope and Test
To see if the solution works, develop it and test it. If it works, put it to decision makers to allocate resources, if it doesn't work, go back to development or choose another option.
Problems
If we are unable to achieve the goals or the vision we set to ourselves. Then we should ask ourselves what is the problem?
What is the story?
Ask people what is the problem, what they think is going wrong, what hearts them.
Define the problems
Try to define what are the problems that causes the inability to achieve the goals. Use criticism to select the most corroborated defenitions.
Select the most important Problems
From thus, select the ones that when solved will give the best advantage to the group.
Find solutions with OSSTD
Develop solutions with the Option, Synthesis, Selection, Test & Develop procesdure.