Notes from the Facilitation Session DAAG, 2000 May 18, 2000 1:005:00 p.m. Calgary, Alberta, Canada

1
Notes from the Facilitation Session - DAAG,
2000May 18, 2000 100-500 p.m.Calgary,
Alberta, Canada

• 100 - 245 Panel Discussion led by
• Anil Khosla - Strategy
• Ellen Coopersmith - Implementation of DA in a
  Business
• Andrew Burton - Portfolio Management
• David Skinner - Systems
• Christine Clark - Straight Facilitation

2
A Map is not the Continent Making Decision
Analysis More Powerful Through Systems Thinking
www.decisionstrategies.com
UNITED STATES
Decision Strategies, Inc.
P.O. Box 219246
Houston, TX 77218
713-465-1110
David C. Skinner DAAG 2000 - Calgary May 18,
2000
Decision Strategies, Inc.
1879 Old Dominion Dr.
Atlanta, GA 30350
770-392-1155
CANADA
Decision Strategies Canada, Inc.
Suite 300 400 5th Ave. S.W.
Calgary, Alberta T2P 0L6
403-303-2886
3
Gurdjieff said A map is not the continent

• While a map may be a useful tool for navigation,
  it is not the three dimensional representation of
  the actual area
• It is also not a dynamic representation
• A common concern expressed about decision
  analysis is that it assumes a static decision
  context
• For decision analysis to really take hold in an
  organization it must become dynamic

4
The seven barriers to Learning and Systems
Thinking

• 1) Dynamic Complexity ... time delays, and many
  variables
• 2) Limited Information ... our mental models
  determine what we measure
• 3) Confounding Variables and Ambiguity ... we
  are overwhelmed
• 4) Judgmental Errors and Biases ... people are
  poor intuitive scientists, and seek confirming
  evidence for our biases
• 5) Defensive Routines ... to save face or assert
  dominance
• 6) Implementation failure ... the decision was
  good, but the implementation was bad
• 7) Misperceptions of Feedback ... we
  oversimplify causal relationships, and can only
  think linearly

5
There are three key elements for learning

• 1. A Network of Coaches/Facilitators
• 2. "Learning Labs" where learning and work can be
  safely integrated, experiments can be tried, and
  learning happens
• 3. Deployment/Transfer through "Learning
  Histories" ... very little work is done on this
  by most organizations

6
We are more creative when we are asking questions
than when we are providing answers. Our questions
determine the answers.

• Newtonian "Scientific" Mgmt stresses
  "Quantum" Mgmt stresses ...
• Certainty Uncertainty
• Predictability Rapid change /
  unpredictability
• Hierarchy Non-hierarchy
• Division of labor, or functional fragmentation
  Multi-functional, holistic, integration
• Power emanates from the top or center Many
  interacting centers of power
• Employees are passive units of production
  Employees are co-creators and partners
• Single point of view, one best way Many points
  of view many paths
• Competition Cooperation
• Inflexible heavily bureaucratic control
  Responsive and flexible hands off
• Efficiency Relationship,
  meaning, and service
• Top-down, "reactive" Bottom-up
  "experimentation"

Danah Zohar (author of "The Quantum Self" and
"The Quantum Society")
7
Organizational Defensive Routines (Argyris
Schon)

• 1) Craft inconsistent messages.
• 2) Act as if the messages are not inconsistent.
• 3) Make the inconsistency undiscussable.
• 4) Make the undiscussability undiscussable.

8
Decision Board Teams

• Actual Work Product and Summaries

9
(No Transcript)
10
Role Play Group - Actual Product

• Facilitator Says Defining problem was weak
  wishy-washy on real issue of project
• DB member responds Framing is a facilitation
  problem. Problem is too complex to be framed.
  Wishy-Washy caused by competing values.
• Facilitator Says Bringing in obstacles, new
  issues , new strategy at the last meeting in the
  project
• DB member responds choices given by
  facilitators were not good alternatives. No
  consultation between framing DB meeting and final
  DB meeting. Poor communication between
  meetings.DB member missed DB mtg.
• Root Cause - Poor Communication (Possible
  Solutions)
• Define roles
• Define expectations
• Strong project sponsor/mgr. leader

11
Role Play Group - Actual Product (page 2)

• Root Cause - DB member too busy (Possible
  solutions)
• Short DB meetings
• Replace/remove DB member
• Ask for a back-up
• Facilitator says Pulling rank and experience to
  sway rest of DB towards his favourite alternative
• DB members says I make good decisions based on
  my experience and position in this company
• Root Cause - How to address Power Struggle
  (Possible Solutions)
• Pre-condition other DB members (identify problem
  early)
• Highlight consequences of pulling rank
  behaviour
• Right Decision Board
• Decision already made?

12
Role Play Group - Actual Product (page 3)

• Root Cause - How to address Process angst and
  process opposition
• Possible Solutions
• Make results/recommendations transparent and
  simple
• Use same format as much as possible (patterns)
• Ask DB how they would like to see results
  presented
• Encircle opponent with supporters
• Walk away from this project

13
(No Transcript)
14
Decision Boards - Use of Force Field Analysis

• Driving Forces
• Trust among board members
• Breadth of inclusion of participants
• Boss believes in process
• Mandate to act
• Educational /Dev. Aspect to board
• Facilitator is driving force
• Strategic Knowledge responsibility
• No obvious intuitive answer
• Good, reliable, credible, information and common
• Simple presentation

• Resisting Forces
• True decision makers absent
• Lack of training/understanding
• Contradictory motivations
• Question of empowerment
• Multiple org power levels
• Mind already made up
• Question of objectivity
• Sufficient domain knowledge
• Lack of engagement
• Political influence on steering committee

15
Summary of Three Decision Board Groups

• Force Field - lot of issues raised, equal amount
  of positives and negatives discussed, good
  problem surfacing tool
• Role Play - few issues raised, issues discussed
  in depth, could work well to address a specific
  problem/issue
• Function vs. Element Contingency Fan -
  stimulated creative thinking, good for getting
  unstuck
• Favorite Tool - Problem Dependent

16
Learning Teams

• Work Product and Summaries

17
DA Learning - Contingency Diagram
Organizational Learning
18
DA Learning - Contingency Diagram(page 2)

• Rewards
• Comfortable place to practice
• Reasonable problems and good support
• Support group that includes peers, experts etc.
• Have Good Quality Delivery Instructor
• Try-outs
• Check reference
• Design technical course with adult learning
  styles in mind
• Use good course planning techniques
• Learn by doing
• Just in time training

19
DA Learning - Contingency Diagram(page 3)

• Organizational Issues
• Competition .years
• First manager to pass some hurdle gets a big
  reward
• Play managers against each other so they compete
  for best DA visibility
• Offer course for free
• Ensure there is something in it for them
• Set up 2 to 3 groups that bid against each other
• Redesign organization to have expertise available
  - CDO
• Mandates
• Mar let arrangement - bid for service

20
DA Learning - Contingency Diagram (page 4)

• Worked Well
• include everything
• writing fast
• reverse idea
• fun
• we all had a common objective - learning
• comfortable
• flexible
• no stickiness
• fast

• Do Better
• writing better
• process objective

21
DA Learning - Contingency Diagram(page 5)
Knowledge Transfer
Quality Training
Support Integration
Marketing Advertising Communication Success
Management Commitment Support
22
Learning Communities

• Purpose - To illustrate the use of facilitation
  tools via exploration of the definition of a
  learning community and developing ideas around
  building and sustaining such an organization
• Desired Outcomes
• An understanding of new facilitation tool that
  can be further researched by participants after
  the DAAG meeting
• Agreement on how we define a learning community
  within our organizations
• Identify ways to build that community into a
  learning community
• Identify ways to sustain or even grow the
  learning community within the organization
• (Time permitting) Agree on top 3-5 ways to build
  and sustain a learning community

23
Learning Communities

• IS
• open minded
• risk taking
• sharing
• group
• Easily accessible
• common purpose
• systematic

• Is-Not
• not fossilized
• not autocratic
• not externally focused
• not command control
• not adventurous

24
How to build a Learning Community

• Have some Wins - 1 vote
• Establish a forum for communication - 7 votes
• Reward/Recognize participants - 6 votes
• Utilize corporate resources for logistics - 1
  vote
• High profile champion 8 votes
• Celebrate decisions not outcomes - 6 votes
• Communicate about risk
• Convince others that there is a better way
• Have proper tool-kit - 4 votes
• Formal Training - 5 votes
• Show potential value
• Convince Upper Management - 1 vote
• Expose decision traps
• Communicate availability
• Define/Develop common purpose

25
How to sustain the Learning Community

• Promotional compensation (advancement)
  opportunites for D.A. staff - 5 votes
• Allow external conferences and education - 4
  choices
• Benchmark
• Update methodologies - dont stagnate - 1 vote
• Infect the corporation
• Re-inforce education, publicity, celebrate wins,
  rewards - 7 votes
• Organize for success - organizational structure
• Reduce turn-over of whole org.
• Consistent decision making behaviour - 5 votes
• Supply variety of D.A. problems for analysts - 1
  vote

26
"Learning Community /deltaTools used-6 Hats,
Agenda /Objectives, scribe, timekeeper

• Delta
• Better frame for learning community
• too eager to act rather than lay groundwork
• crunch at end

• Plus
• Ideas without analysis
• Agenda (inc. times)
• Process before hand
• Lots of hitch-hiking
• let votes draw the line

27
Integration of DA with other Tools

• Work Products and Summaries

28
Integration of DA with other Tools Team

• Objectives - Develop new ideas on how we, as DA
  practitioners, can integrate decision analysis
  with other business tools (e.g. Value Management,
  systems analysis) effectively. Gain experience
  with a new process tool which can be used for
  framing while considering Objective No. 1.
• Tool Flowscape
• This tool is useful in the first meeting with a
  group to help discover different perspectives
  about a situation, gain insight, and clarify
  thinking about framing. It is useful in complex
  situations and to integrate multiple
  perspectives. It also provides a visual map of
  the situation.
• Brainstorm thoughts, ideas, opinions, issues
  individually besides letters of the alphabet.
• Identify, one at a time, what impacts each item
  the most.
• Map circled letters and arrows, reflecting
  relationships in the list.
• Loops indicate fundamental relationships or root
  issues.
• Collector points indicate possible points of
  action.
• Link individuals flowscapes to forma broad map.
• Tool Contingency Diagram
• This tool is used to stimulate both positive and
  negative thinking about a concept. It is useful
  in the discovery and framing stages of a project.
  It can be useful stimulating creative thinking,
  get new ideas, energize the group, and help shift
  energy if a group is overly optimistic or
  pessimistic.
• Split your chart pad down the middle with a line
  vertically. In the right half list ways to
  answer the question - How could we be sure that
  we fail?
• On the left half, list ways to answer the
  question - how can we be sure that we succeed?
  The half you start on depends on the group and
  where the energy is.

29
Flowscape - Integration with other business
processes (page 2)
M
J
L
I

• A. Many stakeholders and champions
• B. How many systems? Too many different?
• C. Effect of dilution
• D. Conflicting goals , unclear goals
• E. Terminology Standardization
• F. Political Turf and personal investment,
  ownership
• G. Each Approach has strengths
• H. Why integrate?
• I. Too much change
• J. Weakness in each
• K. Compensation
• L. Silver Bullet
• M. Higher level decision science
• N. Tools!, Best Practice

G
A
B
H
C
E
F
D
N
K
E-L Loop E for some feeding, for others
collection point FAD Loop B collector point
30
Integration of Tools Graph
Aware
Learning
Impact of DA Process low to high
Org Challenge
Tech
Behav.
Tech
Resistance to Integration within Organization -
low to high
31
Integration of Decision Tools

• Different fac. Techniques - same place
• Brought out people - process - tech
• Flowscape Diagram - useful for highlighting
  relations
• Resistance to change a critical issue
• Does inclusion of many stakeholders/champions
  decrease this?
• Or does it actually increase this?
• Or ownership influence?
• Focus on tools overshadows insights gained from
  consideration of big picture
• DS vs. Tools
• Ideas for success

32
Integration of Decision Tools

• Methods
• 1. Flowscape
• 2. Affinity Diagram/Qual. Portfolio
• 3. Rapid Scenario
• Worked
• 1. Visualization of Linkages
• 2. Categorizing
• 3. Headlining
• Didnt
• 1. Time constraint
• 2. Lack of question clarity

33
Strategic Intent

• Integrate DA with other business processes
• DA provides value
• Enhance value of business processes
• Business Processes
• Strategic Planning
• Budgeting cycle
• Portfolio selection
• Evaluation of individual projects
• Implementation of projects
• HR planning process
• Financial Risk-Assessment
• Six Sigma

34
Integration of Tools - Uncertainties

• P - tools available to assist in integration
• P skills to run the integrated business
  processes
• P buy-in/commitment
• S Implementation Timing
• S Cost (initial maintenance)
• T Focus Areas (which processes will be
  important)
• P Benefit/Competitive edge?
• S No. integrated tool providers
• Trend Prediction
• Organization structure,impact on organization

35
Integrating the Tools (continued)
Circle denotes the Scenario Outcomes
36
Integration - The Affinity Diagram

• Technology
• Tornado
• Sensistivity Analysis
• Schematic trees to show future decisions
• Nested strategy tables
• Simplified output (alternatives to probabilistic
  distribution)
• Brainstorming what keeps you up at night
• Influence Diagrams as knowledge maps
• Decision Hierarchy
• Mental maps precursor to IDS
• Common analytical tools

• Organizational Challenges
• Top down commitment to a tool
• Too integrated a process prevents innovative
  ideas to get to the end
• Well define, frequently used process

• Learning
• Training within organization
• Desgnitize Terminalage
• Lack of understanding of use of tools

• Organizational Dynamics/Behavioural
• Crowd control/siren
• One functional group owns tool in
  multi-disciplinary team
• Stakeholder distribution - are they are present
  in right numbers
• Lack of commitment of team members prevents
  cross-pollination
• Be aware of biases
• Scenario call back and likelihood
• Overcoming Overconfidence biasessimple exercises
• Need to get to the answer (model) prevented by
  letting tools get there

• Awareness
• Pictures over words
• Dont get bogged down in IT solution
• Tool less important than process (communication)
• Conceptual vs. Operational Tools(e.g. SA vs.
  tornado)
• Tieback to goals, objectives at all times
• Separation of output(gains) and inputs (costs)

37
Value of Decision AnalysisMeasurement/Metrics

• Work Product and Summaries

38
Value of DA - Summary of groups

• 1. Financial Measure
• Dollars Added
• Outcomes or Delta
• Actual business results
• Potential business results
• 2. Decision Quality
• No. of new alternatives
• No. of recommendations chosen
• DM employee satisfaction
• 3. Quantity
• Frequency/ No. of Projects
• Awareness level - No. people who understand
  DA

A three legged stool
39
Value of DA (page 2)

• Tools Used
• Pareto Chart, Multi Voting, Fishbone,
  Introduction, Argument/Conflict, Brainstorming,
  /Delta

Group helped provide clarity Sense of
humor Respectful All engaged Nick
markers Comfortable chairs Good scheduling
(active session) Fairly relaxed Talk to new
people Recognized minorities
Delta Quieter Room Clear Definition of
exercise Bigger Chart Wall Space No more fire
hazard Solution to financial measurement
conflict Large task for time given Different
distribution (people choose) Better understanding
of why we are doing
40
Metrics/Measurement

• Awareness

3 Types - What are measurements we are
using? How do know good job Measurement of
awareness of D.A.
41
Pareto Diagram
42
Measurement/Metrics (Continued)

• What were talking about
• Metrics/Measurements as it relates to determining
  decision quality
• 1. Outcome metrics
• Should there be any?
• Issues of good decision vs. outcome
• But is that a cop out?
• No good outcomes go out of business!
• 2. Process metrics
• Feedback
• Awareness

43
Measurement/Metrics (Continued)

• Issues
• Managerial support (buy-in) in process
• Awareness competency
• 3rd party feedback
• Quality (Cost,Quality, Speed)
• Discuss on metrics - How are we doing?
• Quantity
• Feedback questionnaires (5 pts of quality,
  framing, alternative, logic , commit. To action,
  info.)
• Adoption of tool kit
• Repeated requests for use (precludes mandatory
  use!!)
• How are we doing the process as results focused
  companies?
• How to blend?

44
Measurement/Metrics Batbone

• Speed
• Forced to take time
• Consistency Structure
• Process Improvements
• Start to finish time
• Best Practice Generation
• Patterns
• Templates
• Number of Recycle Times
• No recycle
• Facilitator
• Hi Pot Career Track

• Communication
• Number of people involved
• Wider exposure
• Usage
• Teams
• Non-parochial

• Monetary
• Highest EMV
• Profit
• Type I and II errors
• Momentum/Chosen alternative delta

Hoe to measure DA value

• Better Choices
• Explicit Steps
• No. of times momentum case not chosen
• Creativity
• No. of new alternatives
• Stimulii
• Visibility
• Wider audiences

• Understanding general knowledge Insight
• structured
• good data
• post audit
• comprehensive process
• learning
• mentoring
• lessons learned

• Commitment/Consensus
• Visible DM
• Buy-in
• DM satisfaction
• Clarity
• Org. alignment
• Follow-through
• People know why
• Employee satisfaction (feedback)

Bold, italic choices are top 5
45
Parking Lot Opportunities

• Project Team members offer own tools
• Dont be too picky about the tool as long as it
  works
• Dont insist on same tool for every problem
• Fit the tool to the problem