surprising but true: half the decisions in organizations fail 期刊論文 - 第四篇...

Surprising but True:Half the Decisions in Organizations Fail

期刊論文 -第四篇

交通大學管理科學系企管碩士學分班指導教授：王耀德教授　第四組：溫子欣賀邦寧何蕙萍報告日期： 2004 年 10 月 28 日

Executive Overview

Half the decisions in organizations fail. Studies in US and Canada reveal that these failures can be traced to managers who :

1. Impose solutions.

(強迫採納 /接納解決方法 )

2. Limit the search for alternatives.

(限制替代方案的搜尋 )

3. Use power to implement their plans.

(用職權來履行計畫 )

Executive Overview continued

Managers who are more apt to be successful:

1. Make the need for action clear at the outset. (一開始就點明行動的必要性 )

2. Set objectives. (明定目標 )

3. Carry out an unrestricted search for solutions.

(對於尋找解決方法不做限制 )

4. Get key people to participate.

(讓關鍵人員來參與 )

Some say…

1. Draconian regulations imposed by government.(Regulation run up costs)

2. Unexpected budget cuts by higher ups.(Budget flexibility is lost)

3. Loss of market share because of fickle customers.(Customer preferences shift and wreck a marketing plan)

Why Decisions Fail

However, the tactics managers use are more important!

NotNot

Not

Why are tactics prone to fail used so often?

1. Some tactics with a good track record are commonly known, but uncommonly practiced.

(明知好用卻少用 )

2. Decision makers take short cuts when they feel time pressure.

(一旦有時間壓力就走捷徑 )

3. Subtleties.

(細微的差別 ;微妙之處 )

• Objective(目的 ):– To associate tactics with outcome.– Therefore, increase your chance of making succ

essful decisions.• Cases studied(樣本 ):

– 356 real decision from real organization with real people (Senior managers).

– Medium to large organization• 1/4 public agencies—government agencies founded by tax dollar

s• 1/2 private sector profit-making companies—for-profit firms that

offer product& service paid by customers.• 1/4 third-sector organizations—private, not-for-profit organization.

STUDY : Systematic analysis of decision failure

• Tactics classification(分類方式 ):

– Set directions– Find solutions– Implement the solution 執行方案

• Success measures(成功的衡量方式 ):

– Primary indicator - whether a decision was put to use

– Follow up: (A) long-term use - decisions sustained for two year

s

(B) degree of use - still in full use after two years.– Time required to carry it out is also obtained

STUDY : Systematic analysis of decision failure continued

Process of Decision Making

Questions about organizational effectiveness

ActionRequired

Findings

What's wanted

Some ideas Alternatives

A solution

Performance realized(e.g., use)

Motivating concerns

StopNo

Yes

Diagnosis

Action

Signals

Information Gathering

Establish Direction

Identify Options

Plan Development

Implementation

Evaluation

Process Type (程序進行的形式 )

• Imposition process type (強迫採納 )– Less successful, uncovers a solution early

on and does not consider any other solution ideas.

• Discovery process type (發現探索 )– More effective, establishes directions and i

dentifies options as separate activities.

Tactics Used to Set Direction

• Generating Ideas (Imposition)

• Problem Solving (Imposition)

• Setting Objectives (Discovery)

• Intervening in the process (Discovery)

Generating Ideas

• Frequency of occurrence: The most common way. Used in 37% of the cases.

• Key Features: Impose a ready-made solution on the decision-making effort.

• Illustration: A company attempted to develop a solar heat pump devised by another firm.

• Success Rate:– Sustained Use Rate 56%– Full Use Rate 42%

Set DirectionSet Direction

Set Direction

Problem Solving

• Frequency of occurrence: Used in more than 26% of the cases.

• Key Features: Infer a solution by problem analysis.

• Illustration: The Ohio Department of Claims analyzed its claim backlog to find reasons for its growth.



Set Direction

Setting Objectives

• Frequency of occurrence: Used in 30% of the cases.

• Key Features: Set objectives to guide solution development.

• Illustration: A hospital identified a cost reduction target and let departments determine how to make the cuts to meet the target.



Set Direction

Intervening in the process


• Key Features: Find new norms that dramatize the need for action. Suggest needs and opportunities to guide solution development.

• Illustration: 董事會負責太多工作• Success Rate:

– Sustained Use Rate 96%– Full Use Rate 92%


Set Direction

Tactics Used to Identify Options

• Existing solution (Imposition)

• Benchmarking the Best Practice of Others (Discovery)

• Searching for Solutions (Discovery)

• Designing Options (Discovery)

Benchmarking: Single


• Key Features: Adapting the ideas of others – Single source.

• Illustration: A material management system was obtained by hiring someone who had developed such a system.


Identify OptionsIdentify Options

Identify Options

Benchmarking: Integrated


• Key Features: Adapting the ideas of others – Amalgamate ideas from multiple sources

• Illustration: Visit several organizations before purchasing equipment.



Identify Options

Searching: Single


• Key Features: Aggressive and overt search – One search cycle.

• Illustration: Using of RFP.• Success Rate:



Identify Options

Searching: Multiple


• Key Features: Aggressive and overt search – Learning from sequential searches.

• Illustration: Using what was learned in a past search to identify requirements for the next search cycle.



Identify Options

Designing Options


• Key Features: Custom-made solutions are sought.

• Illustration: A new system was designed for the records, scheduling and billing patients in a university hospital without reference to existing system.



Identify Options

Tactics Used to Implement Decision Stages

• Intervention 已提過

• Participation

• Persuasion

• Edict

Intervention


• Key Features: Show stakeholders that performance has improved and that performance now meets agreed upon norms.

• Illustration: Hospital trustees were shown that the high cost of burn care had been covered by endowments, reimbursements, and cheap resident manpower.


Implement Decision Stages

Participation - Token


• Key Features: Solution framing with partial participation.

• Illustration: A committee made up of departmental representatives was formed to identify concerns.



Participation - Delegated


• Key Features: Solution specification with partial participation.

• Illustration: A committee made up of departmental representatives was formed to uncover concerns and recommend solutions.



Participation- Complete


• Key Features: Solution framing with full participation.

• Illustration: Survey of people near a proposed prison site were conducted to identify their concerns.



Participation - Comprehensive


• Key Features: Solution specification with full participation

• Illustration: (not observed)• Success Rate:



Persuasion


• Key Features: Attempt to sell a solution by demonstrating its benefits.

• Illustration: A CEO asked the head of an EDP department to make recommendations for a new computer and used the arguments to make a presentation to the board of directors.



Edict


• Key Features: Issue a directive.• Illustration: A material management

department head issued a memo indicating new responsibilities for people who were affected by the plan or must carry it out.



Successful Decision Making1. Personally manage your decision-making process.

- The prospects of success improve when you take charge.

2. Search for understanding.- Signals that capture your attention can be symptoms of other concern. Do not ignore.

3. Establish your direction with an intervention and an objective

- Intervention establishes the rationale for action.

Conclusion

Successful Decision Making4. Stress idea creation and implementation.

- A decision-making process should guide thinking about action and taking action.

5. Identify more than one option.- The consideration of several competing options improves decision results..

6. Deal with barriers to action.

- Implementation tactics must address social and political barriers to action to be successful.

Conclusion

Our Question• Are the tactics suggested in the article

applicable in the real world? Considerable resources and time will be spend on decision-making.

If…using good tactics, 100 decisions can be made in a year within an organization with a success rate of 100% 100 x 100%=100 of successful decision.

While… practicing poor tactics, 250 decisions can be made in a

year within an organization with a success rate of 50% 250 x 50%=125 of successful decision.

In your opinion, which case is more productive?

Question

surprising but true: half the decisions in organizations fail 期刊論文 - 第四篇...

Documents