Multistage
Decision-Making
Multistage
is a dynamic decision-making itself. Multiple-stage decisions refer to decision
tasks that consist of a series of interdependent stages leading towards a final
resolution. The decision-maker must decide at each stage what action to take
next in order to optimize performance. (Johnson & Busemeyer, 2001).
Critically
thinking about my own decision-making process, I concluded that I am by far of
using dynamic program models, listed by Hoch (2001) or any other models at all.
I am often led by emotions and intuition, however, being aware of that and realizing
I am neglecting rational steps to make decisions, from the smallest and routinely
to the greater ones, I usually step back and try to think through it.
Even
though I do not use any specific formulas and calculations, or plan forward and
look at the far future, I reflect deeper of my decision, especially the ones
will have a greater impact, and I have time to think before making it. The 6
steps to make a better decision listed by Brodie (2007) are often the ones I
follow: (1)
problem definition, (2) assess the implications, (3) explore different
perspectives, (4) get clear on your ideal outcome, (5) weigh up pros and cons, (6)
decide and act. I believe I fail on a good definition of the problem and still
procrastinate on the decision to make, but I clearly can see a progression on
my decision-making skills along the years.
I think the best way I could apply optimal dynamic decision
analysis to predict the future impact of today's decision, is to check for
personal data (looking at the past, my mistakes, and learning outcomes) and
external data (researches) to benchmark for a better decision. Another factor I
believe is extremely important and I fail on it, is to look at the far future,
and all the long-term implications my decisions could bring along. Organizing all
the data and the outcomes of my critical thinking, in a structured written
record, could be an effective tool to optimize the process and the results.
Surviving without
dynamic programmers, as Hoch’s (2001) concluded, can be effective perhaps in
majority of the situations, however, can be drastic in higher stakes decisions,
as there is no ground base and parameter, therefore no reaction plan in case of
failure. Thinking this way, it improves my decision-making process since I
clearly can see, following my readings and not just obviousness, the importance
(although not absolute) of a dynamic programmer.
In my perspective, the
most important point Hoch (2001) made, is at the beginning of the book, when he
said:
We have an opportunity
to be more proactive. We need to make these decision processes conscious, to be
aware of when we are cutting corners and when we need more thorough analysis.
Building this awareness of the process-especially given the new complexities of
decision making in our modern age-is crucial to successful management. We
cannot always guarantee positive outcomes; many factors that affect these
outcomes are out of our control. This awareness, however, ensures that we
follow a coherent and conscious process that leads to better decisions.
References
Brodie, D. (2007) 6 Steps for Better Decision
Making. Retrieved from http://ezinearticles.com/?6-Steps-to-Better-Decision-Making&id=817450, on January 12, 2019.
Hoch, S., Gunther, R., Kunreuther, H. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. New York, NY: Wiley.
Johnson,
J.G. & Busemeyer, J.R. Theory and Decision (2001) 51: 217. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015507110940
No comments:
Post a Comment