Hi all,
Pl read various decision making tech.. in detail
Pareto Analysis
Selecting the Most Important Changes To Make
Pareto analysis is a very simple technique that helps you to choose the most effective changes to make.
It uses the Pareto principle - the idea that by doing 20% of work you can generate 80% of the advantage of doing the entire job*. Pareto analysis is a formal technique for finding the changes that will give the biggest benefits. It is useful where many possible courses of action are competing for your attention.
How to use tool:
To start using the tool, write out a list of the changes you could make. If you have a long list, group it into related changes.
Then score the items or groups. The scoring method you use depends on the sort of problem you are trying to solve. For example, if you are trying to improve profitability, you would score options on the basis of the profit each group might generate. If you are trying to improve customer satisfaction, you might score on the basis of the number of complaints eliminated by each change.
The first change to tackle is the one that has the highest score. This one will give you the biggest benefit if you solve it.
The options with the lowest scores will probably not even be worth bothering with - solving these problems may cost you more than the solutions are worth.
Example:
A manager has taken over a failing service center He commissions research to find out why customers think that service is poor.
He gets the following comments back from the customers:
1. Phones are only answered after many rings.
2. Staff seem distracted and under pressure.
3. Engineers do not appear to be well organized. They need second visits to bring extra parts. This means that customers have to take more holiday to be there a second time.
4. They do not know what time they will arrive. This means that customers may have to be in all day for an engineer to visit.
5. Staff members do not always seem to know what they are doing.
6. Sometimes when staff members arrive, the customer finds that the problem could have been solved over the phone.
The manager groups these problems together. He then scores each group by the number of complaints, and orders the list:
* Lack of staff training: items 5 and 6: 51 complaints
* Too few staff: items 1, 2 and 4: 21 complaints
* Poor organization and preparation: item 3: 2 complaints
By doing the Pareto analysis above, the manager can better see that the vast majority of problems (69%) can be solved by improving staff skills.
Once this is done, it may be worth looking at increasing the number of staff members. Alternatively, as staff members become more able to solve problems over the phone, maybe the need for new staff members may decline.
It looks as if comments on poor organization and preparation may be rare, and could be caused by problems beyond the manager's control.
By carrying out a Pareto Analysis, the manager is able to focus on training as an issue, rather than spreading effort over training, taking on new staff members, and possibly installing a new computer system.
Key points:
Pareto Analysis is a simple technique that helps you to identify the most important problem to solve.
To use it:
* List the problems you face, or the options you have available
* Group options where they are facets of the same larger problem
* Apply an appropriate score to each group
* Work on the group with the highest score
Pareto analysis not only shows you the most important problem to solve, it also gives you a score showing how severe the problem is.
______________________________________________
Paired Comparison Analysis
Working Out the Relative Importance of Different Options
Paired Comparison Analysis helps you to work out the importance of a number of options relative to each other. It is particularly useful where you do not have objective data to base this on.
This makes it easy to choose the most important problem to solve, or select the solution that will give you the greatest advantage. Paired Comparison Analysis helps you to set priorities where there are conflicting demands on your resources.
How to use tool:
To use the technique, first of all list your options. Then draw up a grid with each option as both a row and a column header.
Use this grid to compare each option with each other option, one-by-one. For each comparison, decide which of the two options is most important, and then assign a score to show how much more important it is.
You can then consolidate these comparisons so that each option is given a percentage importance.
Follow these steps to use the technique:
1. List the options you will compare. Assign a letter to each option.
2. Set up a table with these options as row and column headings.
3. Block out cells on the table where you will be comparing an option with itself - there will never be a difference in these cells! These will normally be on the diagonal running from the top left to the bottom right.
4. Also block out cells on the table where you will be duplicating a comparison. Normally these will be the cells below the diagonal.
5. Within the remaining cells compare the option in the row with the one in the column. For each cell, decide which of the two options is more important. Write down the letter of the more important option in the cell, and score the difference in importance from 0 (no difference) to 3 (major difference).
6. Finally, consolidate the results by adding up the total of all the values for each of the options. You may want to convert these values into a percentage of the total score.
Key points:
Paired Comparison Analysis is a good way of weighing up the relative importance of different courses of action. It is useful where priorities are not clear, or are competing in importance.
The tool provides a framework for comparing each course of action against all others, and helps to show the difference in importance between factors.
___________________________________
Grid Analysis
- Making a Choice Where Many Factors Must be Balanced
How to use tool:
Grid Analysis is a useful technique to use for making a decision. It is most effective where you have a number of good alternatives and many factors to take into account.
The first step is to list your options and then the factors that are important for making the decision. Lay these out in a table, with options as the row labels, and factors as the column headings.
Next work out the relative importance of the factors in your decision. Show these as numbers. We will use these to weight your preferences by the importance of the factor. These values may be obvious. If they are not, then use a technique such as Paired Comparison Analysis to estimate them.
The next step is to work your way across your table, scoring each option for each of the important factors in your decision. Score each option from 0 (poor) to 3 (very good). Note that you do not have to have a different score for each option - if none of them are good for a particular factor in your decision, then all options should score 0.
Now multiply each of your scores by the values for your relative importance. This will give them the correct overall weight in your decision.
Finally add up these weighted scores for your options. The option that scores the highest wins!
Key points:
Grid Analysis helps you to decide between several options, while taking many different factors into account.
To use the tool, lay out your options as rows on a table. Set up the columns to show your factors. Allocate weights to show the importance of each of these factors.
Score each choice for each factor using numbers from 0 (poor) to 3 (very good). Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, to show its contribution to the overall selection.
to be continued......
From India, Madras
11Pl read various decision making tech.. in detail
Pareto Analysis
Selecting the Most Important Changes To Make
Pareto analysis is a very simple technique that helps you to choose the most effective changes to make.
It uses the Pareto principle - the idea that by doing 20% of work you can generate 80% of the advantage of doing the entire job*. Pareto analysis is a formal technique for finding the changes that will give the biggest benefits. It is useful where many possible courses of action are competing for your attention.
How to use tool:
To start using the tool, write out a list of the changes you could make. If you have a long list, group it into related changes.
Then score the items or groups. The scoring method you use depends on the sort of problem you are trying to solve. For example, if you are trying to improve profitability, you would score options on the basis of the profit each group might generate. If you are trying to improve customer satisfaction, you might score on the basis of the number of complaints eliminated by each change.
The first change to tackle is the one that has the highest score. This one will give you the biggest benefit if you solve it.
The options with the lowest scores will probably not even be worth bothering with - solving these problems may cost you more than the solutions are worth.
Example:
A manager has taken over a failing service center He commissions research to find out why customers think that service is poor.
He gets the following comments back from the customers:
1. Phones are only answered after many rings.
2. Staff seem distracted and under pressure.
3. Engineers do not appear to be well organized. They need second visits to bring extra parts. This means that customers have to take more holiday to be there a second time.
4. They do not know what time they will arrive. This means that customers may have to be in all day for an engineer to visit.
5. Staff members do not always seem to know what they are doing.
6. Sometimes when staff members arrive, the customer finds that the problem could have been solved over the phone.
The manager groups these problems together. He then scores each group by the number of complaints, and orders the list:
* Lack of staff training: items 5 and 6: 51 complaints
* Too few staff: items 1, 2 and 4: 21 complaints
* Poor organization and preparation: item 3: 2 complaints
By doing the Pareto analysis above, the manager can better see that the vast majority of problems (69%) can be solved by improving staff skills.
Once this is done, it may be worth looking at increasing the number of staff members. Alternatively, as staff members become more able to solve problems over the phone, maybe the need for new staff members may decline.
It looks as if comments on poor organization and preparation may be rare, and could be caused by problems beyond the manager's control.
By carrying out a Pareto Analysis, the manager is able to focus on training as an issue, rather than spreading effort over training, taking on new staff members, and possibly installing a new computer system.
Key points:
Pareto Analysis is a simple technique that helps you to identify the most important problem to solve.
To use it:
* List the problems you face, or the options you have available
* Group options where they are facets of the same larger problem
* Apply an appropriate score to each group
* Work on the group with the highest score
Pareto analysis not only shows you the most important problem to solve, it also gives you a score showing how severe the problem is.
______________________________________________
Paired Comparison Analysis
Working Out the Relative Importance of Different Options
Paired Comparison Analysis helps you to work out the importance of a number of options relative to each other. It is particularly useful where you do not have objective data to base this on.
This makes it easy to choose the most important problem to solve, or select the solution that will give you the greatest advantage. Paired Comparison Analysis helps you to set priorities where there are conflicting demands on your resources.
How to use tool:
To use the technique, first of all list your options. Then draw up a grid with each option as both a row and a column header.
Use this grid to compare each option with each other option, one-by-one. For each comparison, decide which of the two options is most important, and then assign a score to show how much more important it is.
You can then consolidate these comparisons so that each option is given a percentage importance.
Follow these steps to use the technique:
1. List the options you will compare. Assign a letter to each option.
2. Set up a table with these options as row and column headings.
3. Block out cells on the table where you will be comparing an option with itself - there will never be a difference in these cells! These will normally be on the diagonal running from the top left to the bottom right.
4. Also block out cells on the table where you will be duplicating a comparison. Normally these will be the cells below the diagonal.
5. Within the remaining cells compare the option in the row with the one in the column. For each cell, decide which of the two options is more important. Write down the letter of the more important option in the cell, and score the difference in importance from 0 (no difference) to 3 (major difference).
6. Finally, consolidate the results by adding up the total of all the values for each of the options. You may want to convert these values into a percentage of the total score.
Key points:
Paired Comparison Analysis is a good way of weighing up the relative importance of different courses of action. It is useful where priorities are not clear, or are competing in importance.
The tool provides a framework for comparing each course of action against all others, and helps to show the difference in importance between factors.
___________________________________
Grid Analysis
- Making a Choice Where Many Factors Must be Balanced
How to use tool:
Grid Analysis is a useful technique to use for making a decision. It is most effective where you have a number of good alternatives and many factors to take into account.
The first step is to list your options and then the factors that are important for making the decision. Lay these out in a table, with options as the row labels, and factors as the column headings.
Next work out the relative importance of the factors in your decision. Show these as numbers. We will use these to weight your preferences by the importance of the factor. These values may be obvious. If they are not, then use a technique such as Paired Comparison Analysis to estimate them.
The next step is to work your way across your table, scoring each option for each of the important factors in your decision. Score each option from 0 (poor) to 3 (very good). Note that you do not have to have a different score for each option - if none of them are good for a particular factor in your decision, then all options should score 0.
Now multiply each of your scores by the values for your relative importance. This will give them the correct overall weight in your decision.
Finally add up these weighted scores for your options. The option that scores the highest wins!
Key points:
Grid Analysis helps you to decide between several options, while taking many different factors into account.
To use the tool, lay out your options as rows on a table. Set up the columns to show your factors. Allocate weights to show the importance of each of these factors.
Score each choice for each factor using numbers from 0 (poor) to 3 (very good). Multiply each score by the weight of the factor, to show its contribution to the overall selection.
to be continued......
From India, Madras
Hi,
I had gone through these techniques in the six sigma training. Adding to what you have said,
1. We should ensure that we do not have a solution and to find it we need to go through some analysis. For example, if you have a statistics to tell you that your output is consistently prone to errors and if you know that you have not followed the process, it is good to start following the process than to spend time in knowing the cause.
2. Basis of measurement. The criteria and the instrument for measurement should be unbiased and if not the results might not take you to the right solution.
3. Intention to solve the problem : Above all, there should be a true intention to solve the problem and the efforts have to be put in to solving it.
When faced with problems, I was able to find the solutions even before I could go in for analysis. Some thing to do with brain storming and genuine intention and keeping the people together? .....
Correct me if I am wrong...
Thanks
Hema
From India,
I had gone through these techniques in the six sigma training. Adding to what you have said,
1. We should ensure that we do not have a solution and to find it we need to go through some analysis. For example, if you have a statistics to tell you that your output is consistently prone to errors and if you know that you have not followed the process, it is good to start following the process than to spend time in knowing the cause.
2. Basis of measurement. The criteria and the instrument for measurement should be unbiased and if not the results might not take you to the right solution.
3. Intention to solve the problem : Above all, there should be a true intention to solve the problem and the efforts have to be put in to solving it.
When faced with problems, I was able to find the solutions even before I could go in for analysis. Some thing to do with brain storming and genuine intention and keeping the people together? .....
Correct me if I am wrong...
Thanks
Hema
From India,
Hi Hema,
You r correct indeed.. :) I totally agree with u....If viewed generally,Niether you r wrong nor me... the fact here is i have pointed out the options and you are into the point.
ur views r practical...
Thank u Hema for your suggestion... really appreciate
:) :) :)
Regards
From India, Madras
You r correct indeed.. :) I totally agree with u....If viewed generally,Niether you r wrong nor me... the fact here is i have pointed out the options and you are into the point.
ur views r practical...
Thank u Hema for your suggestion... really appreciate
:) :) :)
Regards
From India, Madras
Hema, Your view point are practical. I have come across lot of senior Management persons, who preach all these, but in practical less done. I always believe that problems are opportunities. Sivap
From India, Palakkad
From India, Palakkad
Hi Sivap,
I know it is very tough and this is where HR should play a crucial role. If you analyse carefully, if these issues are not sorted out, you might end up with a wrong diagnosis of the problem and waste time in finding solution to a problem that does not exist.
Let me share my experience with you:
On a particular account, one of the teams had lot of escalations from the client side and the management decided to re-look at the process and this was communicated to the concerned team manager.
The team manager immediately drew up excellent process charts and adherence checklists and also made the members to act the same way, when questions are asked.
The quality team came in and verified all these checks and wondered how can there be lapses when the process is strongly adhered.
The quality team decided to throw the ball on the client's court and I finally stopped them and requested quality to observe without the knowledge of the team when the process is running the next time.
Surprisingly, the modus operandi was entirely different from what was documented and this became a rude shock for them.
Finally, it was found out that the Team Manager is not a person who accepts mistakes and does not have any intentions to correct it. For him, document is something to satisfy the ISO standards and not for operations.
Now, it is HR's responsibility to change the attitude of the person.
Imagine, if quality had gone to the client with a different version, the company might have lost a valuable account.
Even to diagnose a problem, we need these base parameters. I know it is difficult, but that is human relations.... is it not?
From India,
I know it is very tough and this is where HR should play a crucial role. If you analyse carefully, if these issues are not sorted out, you might end up with a wrong diagnosis of the problem and waste time in finding solution to a problem that does not exist.
Let me share my experience with you:
On a particular account, one of the teams had lot of escalations from the client side and the management decided to re-look at the process and this was communicated to the concerned team manager.
The team manager immediately drew up excellent process charts and adherence checklists and also made the members to act the same way, when questions are asked.
The quality team came in and verified all these checks and wondered how can there be lapses when the process is strongly adhered.
The quality team decided to throw the ball on the client's court and I finally stopped them and requested quality to observe without the knowledge of the team when the process is running the next time.
Surprisingly, the modus operandi was entirely different from what was documented and this became a rude shock for them.
Finally, it was found out that the Team Manager is not a person who accepts mistakes and does not have any intentions to correct it. For him, document is something to satisfy the ISO standards and not for operations.
Now, it is HR's responsibility to change the attitude of the person.
Imagine, if quality had gone to the client with a different version, the company might have lost a valuable account.
Even to diagnose a problem, we need these base parameters. I know it is difficult, but that is human relations.... is it not?
From India,
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
EFFICIENT DECISION MAKING technic.pdf
Decision-Making .zip
COST INPUTS IN DECISION MAKING.ppt