Executives\u2014using one method or another\u2014somehow manage to make decisions. But only a small percentage of decision-makers know how to proceed when a decision goes wrong. And remember, even the most carefully considered, well-planned decision can turn sour. Five positive moves may save the day:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
his move is a “must” prelude to all the others.\nClear-headed, honest recognition of the fact that, on this particular decision,\nyou have come up with a clinker. It may not be your fault at all. Other people,\nother forces, other events may be wholly or partially responsible. But whatever\nthe cause, there is nothing to be gained by clinging to a losing situation.\nExecutives who don’t\u2014or won’t\u2014recognize the inevitable, who are determined to\nmake a decision work, to stick it out come what may, are only compounding\nwrong. Your lead: to accept the losses, analyse the causes, try to recoup what\nyou can.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Many a decision is the result of a multi-step process. From\nStep A to Step B to Step C … and on and on till the final stage is reached.\nSomewhere along the line you may have tripped. Can you, after thinking things\nout, retrace your steps to the point where the misstep occurred? Backtrack from\nE to B, for instance? Then revising B, begin a subsequent series of steps, this\ntime in the right direction? If so, you’re halfway home.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There will be times when you have a decision that looks\ngreat\u2014on paper. You’ve followed all the proper procedures, made all the right\nmoves, said all the right things. Then, in execution, up pops a weak link. And\ntrouble. Does this mean that your idea is not workable? Not at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Take the case of the executive who decides to set up a\npermanent team to handle the selling of a new product, Tom, Seth, and Gene, his\nthree best producers. But it turns out that their sales go down, not up. Why?\nAnalysis of the situation shows that Seth is the culprit, missing orders that\nhe should land. Does the executive scrap the team idea? Indeed not. His original\ndecision is still a good one; only the weak link needs replacing. Seth goes\nback to his old selling assignment. Jack joins the team on the new.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Revising. In some instances, of course, a\ndecision-turned-bad can’t be remedied by simply replacing or retracing.\nAccordingly, major surgery is called for, a complete revision of the original\nplan. Now’s the time to ask yourself, “Do I have an alternative? is there\na workable Plan B that I can substitute for unworkable Plan A?” Undoubtedly,\nin arriving at Plan A you had considered other ways, other means of achieving\nyour objective. Can one, or a combination of these, with additions,\nsubtractions, amendments, successfully serve your purpose? Possibly it can.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This stage, incidentally, may call for consultations up,\ndown, and along the line.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Reviewing. Results are the proof of the decision-making\npudding. When they go wrong, analyzing when, why, how can teach you a great\ndeal. About your own decision-making ability. About techniques that need\nsharpening. About pitfalls to be avoided. About planning, performance, people.\nFailure often triggers more knowledge than success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Is it possible to “make a decision” without making\none? In a sense, yes. Company president William Mott is fed up with his\nassistant. The young man seems to have lost the interest he originally had in\nhis job. His performance is sloppy, even careless.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Repeatedly, Mott has tried to face up to the situation and\nmake the decision to fire his subordinate; but somehow, although he has marched\nup to the hurdle repeatedly, he can’t bring himself to take the jump.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then one day his subordinate comes in late; he fails to do\nan important job that Mott has assigned, and takes a coffee break that\nstretches to a full hour. When the young man reappears, Mott, carefully\nrestraining his irritation, calls the young man and suggests that he find a job\nbetter suited to his abilities and interests. After it is all over, Mott feels\ngreatly relieved. Actually, the young man takes the firing so agreeably, the\ncompany president realizes the assistant also was in favour of the move.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Why didn’t I make that decision months ago?” Mott\nasks himself. Under the pressures of the moment, he had acted without the considered\nthinking we call decision-making.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Mott case indicates an interesting aspect of\ndecision-making. Essentially, a decision is a resolve to take action, and from\ntime to time situations may arise where the executive takes decisive action\nwithout necessarily thinking of the move as a decision. However, such actions\nobviously are decisions, or rather are prompted by a decision made\nunconsciously and spontaneously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, it seems that in some situations you can “decide” without consciously making a decision. Just beware of the pitfall to such executive action: sometimes the spontaneous decision can kick-back. For example, executives have fired subordinates on the spur of a moment’s anger or irritation\u2014and regretted the act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Your personal attitude can help build a strong approach to\ndealing with problems. Here are the key elements that make for\neffectiveness:<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is more to this concept than meets the eye. Psychologists have proved again and again that the individual who is optimistic about his ability to solve problems has a much greater chance of doing so than his pessimistic opposite number. In the area of practical problem-solving, the manager who goes on the assumption that a problem can and will be solved, is halfway to his goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It has been proved repeatedly: we all have unplumbed depths of imagination and ingenuity. Develop the practice of posing challenging assignments and problems to your people to stimulate their creativity. They’re not likely to let you down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Most of us respond favourably to the excitement of a\nchallenge. Many of us will work our fingers to the bone to come up with an\nanswer to a difficult problem because we hunger for the feeling of self-esteem\nand the increased respect of colleagues and co-workers when we score a\nbreakthrough. Your subordinates’ “need to achieve” can supplement\nyour own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some work situations cannot be coped with because they’re too vast or complex. For example, one manager was told by his boss, “In the next year, we’re going to be replacing every piece of equipment in your department. Your em\u00acployees are all going to have to relearn their jobs, develop new skills.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem of retraining about 40 people in a dozen\ndifferent skills, and still keep things running on a regular basis is clearly\ntre\u00acmendous. But the department head made his first step an effective one. He\ngot down to cases. He spelled out what each employee needed in order to handle\nnew assignments. Once he had done this he was able to set up schedules that\npermitted each employee to get the training that was needed to make the\ntransition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some of the problems executives face can be solved over a long period of time. When the problem you face is of this character, a policy of “gradualism”\u2014that is, piecemeal and consistent planning\u2014gets you off the hook.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, some management problems are “emergency”\nor “rush.” Here’s where you’re under deadline pressure and simply\ncan’t stretch out your thinking about the problem, or take your time developing\nsolutions to fit problem situations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You strengthen your approach by using “crash”\ntactics. Whether you use a brain-trust or maintain close contacts up the line\nand with staff experts, give yourself the advantage of multiple brainpower.\nDon’t hesitate to draw on the mental resources and experience of other people\nin your company\u2014subordinates, specialists, colleagues, and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It has been said that a problem identified is half solved.\nAn incident in an engineering class makes the point:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Only one student is on the right track.” He reads\nfrom the win\u00acning paper: “No solution is possible unless we know more\nabout t!\u2022e problem.” Some of the missing elements: how wide a channel must\nbe allowed for navigation? How high must the span be above the channel? How\nmuch traffic is the bridge to bear?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Each one of these factors is a part of the problem. Each one\nmust play a part in the solution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In thinking about a problem situation, these steps keep you\non track:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many executives like to strike di\u00acrectly at the heart of the matter. In some cases that’s commendable. But in dealing with problems it may lead to “solutions” that solve nothing. Particularly, when dealing with a difficult problem, make sure you know the one-eighth that shows above the surface, with as much as possible of the seven-eighths that may not readily meet the eye. The importance of identifying a problem is that you force your\u00acself to consider its different aspects and details.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A comedian once boasted that he discovered a cure for a\ndisease that didn’t even exist. It happens in executive suites every day\u2014we\nsolve problems that don’t exist, because we haven’t properly identified them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You sometimes tackle a problem to which you can find no\nanswer. Should you go on plugging away seeking the key? Or, should you give up?\nWhen you face this dilemma-<\/p>\n\n\n\n Stick with it if it’s a major obstacle. There’s no point, for example, in conducting business as usual if a bottleneck is obviously going to wreck the chances of filling a major commitment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n On the other hand, don’t tie yourself up over a minor matter\nwhile regular operations go to pot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You can’t get away from sound arithmetic: two heads are better than one. And three are better than two. Take up the prob\u00aclem with your boss, the people in your group who are directly con\u00accerned, specialists in your staff departments who might be able to help.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They may or may not be able to provide immediate assistance.\nBut it’s not unusual for your own thoughts and ideas to become clarified in the\nprocess of discussion. Even if you draw blanks, you have at least multiplied\nyour chances of success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you have a little elbow room in terms of time, let the teaser rest a while. Give your mind a chance to cool off. Relaxation can renew your mental vigor, may give you a new ap\u00acproach and new understanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In some cases, time may work for you. For example, an\nexecutive found himself with the standard problem of two subordinates who\ncouldn’t get along. They were both key people; shifting either would have meant\nfurther complications. After days of futile thinking, he decided there was\nnothing he could do. Six months later, he observed the problem no longer\nexisted. The two individuals had little by little ironed out their own\ndifferences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If the problem is important, you’ll probably be forced to reconsider it from time to time. Do so in the light of changes that have taken place since you last considered the matter. A change may suggest a solution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Occasionally a problem presents itself in which all the\n“right” solutions have failed to work. In such a situation, the\n“wrong” way may prove effective. In a sense, Solomon’s dealing with\nthe Case of the Disputing Mothers applied a “wrong” solution. When he\nsuggested that the child both women claimed be cut in two, it clearly was not a\ngood solution. But it caused one woman to agree to give up the child; the other\nperfectly willing to abide the ruling made it easy to decide who the real\nmother was.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Here are some situations in which you might want to consider doing the “wrong” thing:<\/p>\n\n\n\nA Decision less Decision<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
A general approach to handling problems<\/strong>\ufeff
<\/h3>\n\n\n\n1. Develop a “can-do” attitude.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
2. Mobilize the creativity of your people.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
3. Break problems down to bite-size.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
4. Make the distinction between “gradual” and “crash” solutions.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Identifying The Problem<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
1. Don’t assume you know the problem.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
2. Avoid the brass-tacks urge.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
Practical Tips On Solving Problems<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
When There’s No Solution<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
1. Assess the importance of the problem.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
2. Consult.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
3.\u00a0 Can you ease up?<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
4. Review.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
When It’s Right To Be Wrong<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n