Personal understanding: Decision-making is a choice, but not a simple choice. It is a painful choice in the face of dilemma.
Decision-making always requires scientific judgment: adding more and better pre-plans; taking the time to figure out the pros and cons of each plan; thinking long-term rather than just looking at the short-term benefits; ready to deal with any possible mistakes.
There are two types of management decisions. From top to bottom, the pressure from the top to the bottom suggests that there is something missing: communication, effective communication. Reach a consensus through communication, empower everyone and continuously evolve.
What is scientific decision-making (optimization, research, long-term, mistakes), the three important dimensions behind high-quality decision-making (values, vision, logic), the three characteristics of good organization (empowerment, consensus, evolution)
Decision-making is not "lead-guide-draw-hook, subordinate-subordinate-execution-action "
http://www.sohu.com/a/297605805_183012?sec=wd&spm=smpc.author.fd-d.19.1552826967565Gu06ABg
Creating the desired future based on the present is the fundamental intention of the leader's decision. But the more important decisions are, the easier it is to fall into the dilemma of "maybe right" and "may be wrong".
This short article reminds us that since every decision cannot be made wise, where does the real courage come from? Three keys. 1. The scientific support system: ensure that no big mistakes are made; 2. The sufficient pattern and vision: see what ordinary people do not see; 3. Values: what is the original intention.
At the end of the year, I received reports submitted by various units, mainly on some proposals for the new year's operation. Some systematic report proposals are more detailed. Not only one set of proposals is proposed, but multiple sets are provided (such as how to suggest plan A and how to plan B), and finally let me choose. Similar to this situation will be more in daily work.
This caused me some thought. Most of the time, we will directly choose or agree to the A / B plan, including I sometimes do so, and then after the selection, each unit will be executed according to a certain plan approved, and the entire decision chain is over. Later, I thought over and over again that I think there will be problems with this. There are three main aspects:
First, the quality of decision-making is not high. Because the dimension considered by the subordinate or the proposal unit becomes the highest dimension of the entire decision. If some problems are not taken into account and are not reflected in the plan, and this plan is selected for implementation, then the quality of this decision must not be too high;
Second, it is simply a check. Without a deep and in-depth exchange, consensus cannot be formed. Without consensus, true execution cannot be formed;
Third, because the entire organization lacks consensus and the quality of decision-making is not high, it will cause the learning ability of the entire organization to stay on the spot, even lower, so there is no guarantee for the growth of the organization.
What is truly scientific decision
1 What is the real "decision"
Management master Herbert Simon said: "Management is decision-making" , decision-making is very important to management. And decision-making is not only important for management, but also very important for people's life. People's life has to go through countless decision-making chains and make continuous choices. Each choice of fork will affect the development of life in the future. But strictly speaking, most people can't make many major decisions in their lifetime. For example, the department leader will give you an important task, you complete the task, but in fact there is not much decision content; for example, to buy things, the price of two items is close, one good quality and one poor quality, we will definitely choose good quality, or The two items are of similar quality, one with a higher price and one with a lower price. We will definitely choose the one with a lower price. These simple daily behaviors are not strictly called decision-making. The real decision-making is how to make a decision when it is "difficult to make a judgment" or "a variety of programs have their own advantages and disadvantages, and they are not comparable." This is often a very tangled psychological process.
For example, a subordinate reported three schemes: A, B, and C. First of all, we will definitely analyze the pros and cons of the three schemes, but the pros and cons of many things are not obvious. The logic behind them is also complicated. Very few "1 + 1 is greater than 2 "This makes it easy for us to make mathematical judgments, and it is difficult to make perfect decisions easily.
When a strategy meeting was held, a consultant teacher said: "How can you be happy and relaxed when discussing strategies? All decisions involve choices, strategies involve major choices, and major choices are very It ’s painful, how can you happily and easily solve the strategic problem? ”From this perspective, making important and correct choices is not easy for each of us. Most people may follow the trend, follow the instructions step by step, or intuitively do whatever they want to do. It is rarely a scientific decision, or simply not a "decision."
2 The larger and more mature the enterprise, the more scientific "decision making" is required
Have we ever thought about a question, is the decision of all bosses a result of long-term thinking and thoughtful thinking? Based on my personal experience with actual operations, including consulting with some leaders and big bosses, this question should be viewed in two. It should be said that major companies generally have a certain scientific decision-making, but most entrepreneurial companies make decisions. Often driven by the founder's intuition, experience, and sense of mission , it is difficult to say whether science is non-science. Because in the start-up and entrepreneurial stage, companies must constantly adjust to changes and make micro-decisions, and if they are wrong, they should be changed or adjusted quickly. For example, in our "K Life Project", no one can give a top-level design and make a perfect execution path diagram to decide when to do what. It is an entrepreneurial project that may face new situations every day and make choices every day. After the selection, there will be a feedback, whether the feedback is right or wrong, good or bad, as an organization, there must be a response plan. If it is right, insist on digging; if not, how to adjust. So for the decision-making of entrepreneurial projects, it is much more important than the system architecture design. But when the enterprise reaches a mature stage, or makes a decision when the scale is relatively large, it must have a scientific content.
3 What is a truly scientific decision
Decision-making needs to have scientific content, but there is no standard answer to what is really scientific decision-making, including many books about management and decision-making, and there is no unified definition. We have all heard this sentence: " Listen to the opinions of most people, discuss with a few people, and finally make your own decisions ." This sentence only talks about the principle of decision-making. It is a process from wide to narrow information in the decision-making process. It is difficult to say that this is scientific decision-making.
Teacher Wan Weigang gave a case in "Elite Day Class". There is an English chemist named Joseph Priestley (the books "History of Electricity" and "History of Optics", which discovered more than ten kinds of gases such as oxygen and ammonia), which are very famous and have relatively high social status. He gave birth to eight children, his income was not high, and his economy was relatively tight. At this time, someone hired him as a tutor and consultant, the salary is 2.5 times the current, and the work place is in the employer's home. Priestley is now faced with a decision, whether or not to go, there are pros and cons. The benefits are obvious: high wages can reduce the financial pressure on the family. There are three concerns: first, the work place is far away and you have to leave home; second, the nature of the work is vague and the time uncertainty is large, which may affect your independent research work. Third, it is unclear whether they can get along with each other and what to do in the future if they get along badly. So this choice is really not easy. But Priestley did not choose one of the two, but changed the option. He consulted with the employer to increase two requirements: first, can I assign a teacher to your house, I still live in the country, remotely command, if I need to communicate face to face, I can go to London temporarily; second, if the two of us will The relationship is stiff and I ca n’t do my job. Can I guarantee that I will be given at least 150 pounds per year (the employer ’s previous offer was 250 pounds per year) and it will remain unchanged for life. Finally, the employer agreed. And seven years later, the two of them did "break up", but in the end they were also executed according to the contract.
The decision-making result in the case is actually not important, but the whole decision-making process has inspired me. There are four main points, which are also the four most important elements of scientific decision-making:
First, when we make a decision, it is not just a simple choice of two or one of three. If we think about the existing plan, is it already the best choice we can think of? Is there any better? Just like Priestley expanded some options on the original plan, which increased the scope of decision-making, it actually indirectly improved the quality of decision-making;
Second, it is necessary to do some basic investigations and be clear about the ins and outs. It takes time to make important decisions. It's not that we take a head for granted, but we do some basic research to evaluate and analyze the pros and cons of each item. For example, Priestley asked his friends about the basic situation of the employer and collected some opinions and opinions in order to have a relatively objective assessment of his prospects;
Third, we must consider from a longer-term perspective, not just short-term benefits;
Fourth, any decision may be wrong, the key is whether there is a response plan. For example, Priestley had agreed with the employer on a "breakup" contract beforehand. The facts also proved that this not only protected his own interests well, but also allowed him to maintain a good relationship with the employer. In general, the Chinese-style inertial thinking is that everyone is kind, and "ugly words" are reluctant to say in the front, but once a break occurs, the two parties will eventually become very stiff, maybe "old death does not communicate", or The whole situation will develop in a more out-of-control direction.
This four-point heuristic may seem simple, and sometimes we will use it, but often only use one or two of the four points, or use it unconsciously. If we consciously develop this scientific decision-making way of thinking in the face of major decision-making, or apply the scientific decision-making process, it will be of great help to improve the quality of decision-making and personal growth.
4 Leaders must have a sense of scientific decision-making
Three important dimensions behind high-quality "decision-making"
We usually pay more attention to the results of leadership decisions, and then immediately go to the implementation. From the perspective of their own growth and progress, it does not matter whether the leader chooses A or B. The key is to understand why he chose A or B, that is, what is the basis behind his decision and how to think behind the decision. Especially for the decisions made by some outstanding people and excellent entrepreneurs, we simulate thinking from the perspective of "protagonist", "why did he make this decision", "what was the situation at that time", "how did he think about it", "If I were him, what would I do" and so on, I think everyone can slowly develop this habit, which will be very helpful for our growth.
So what is the power behind high-quality decision-making? I think the most important are three dimensions: the first is values, the second is vision, and the third is logic .
1 Values
Values are very important for decision-making. Regardless of whether we usually perceive, we use the power of values in our subconscious mind to make decisions. In layman's terms, values are the ranking of the importance of all value preferences that can be stored in your mind. In other words, what do you think is more important in your mind? This is a very powerful force. For example, if you think the family is important, then a certain work arrangement conflicts with the family, then you will naturally choose the family first; for example, in the process of business management, you think that the interests of shareholders are more important, then you will subconsciously consider how to increase profits. As for It may not matter if the employee ’s salary is lower, the employee turnover rate is higher, and the user satisfaction is lower. Just give a small example. For example, at the end of the year, every company must hold an annual meeting, whether it is to open in the company or outside, whether it is a lavish or simple grand, some people may think that we should do a better job, and give employees the feeling of the New Year. Some people think that we have to save money, which is not helpful for the business. Different people may have different judgments about this. There is no right or wrong, but it can reveal that the values behind each person are different, which determines the "initial intention" of everyone's decision.
In daily work, there are many dimensions that we are unclear. Why learning is to expand cognition, sometimes some very important dimensions are never stored in our minds, and there will be a lack of values. At this time, when making a decision, an important variable will be ignored. The impact is very large. So the first dimension behind high-quality decision-making is "values".
2 Vision
The second dimension behind high-quality decision-making is "vision". The concept of "vision" is a bit empty. We know that "space is the pattern, and time is the field of vision." In fact, the vision is "frame + field of vision." . . . . . . . , This is "vision". At that time, if you listened to the opinions of most of the people around you and did not make a military decision, then it is likely to benefit the country in the short term, but it may be a major disaster in the long term. Including the case of Priestley, which we just mentioned, is actually a "vision". He must not know that he will "break up" after seven years before agreeing to the employer. If no compensation measures were agreed at that time, then these seven years The impact of work is very outweighed, so this can also be said to be farsighted. But many foresights not only rely on "spare tires", but also rely on the usual knowledge and insight of things. In plain language, "foresight" is the concept of counting other people's unclear accounts, or the concept of "calculating large accounts". For example, we submitted a report to the leader, thinking that this is a very clear conclusion, that is, 3 plus 2 is greater than 4, but the leader may not be greater than 4 when standing in a higher dimension to calculate the accounts, and the results may be completely different.
3 Logic
The third dimension behind high-quality decision-making is "logic". We often have some disputes and disagreements in decision-making seminars. In fact, many of them come from logical ambiguity or confusion. We sometimes describe someone as "no logic", but in fact he doesn't think so. "Rogue" has the logic of "rogue", the professor has the logic of the professor, the entrepreneur has the logic of the entrepreneur, but whether one thing is logical or not can be accurately judged, because logic itself is a very rigorous discipline, involving Concepts, judgments, reasoning, we have also read books in this area. For example, some people think that as long as we increase the scale of the enterprise, the profit is high, and the market value must be high, is this true? That involves the logic of market value and business performance, that is, is there a linear function between them? Is it a univariate or binary linear function? Many dimensions are involved here, and it is difficult to judge simply. As another example, some people say that other companies treat their employees well, so we should treat our employees well. So, if we treat our employees well, can the company manage well? Others said that they should not be too good for employees, but be harder and put pressure on employees, which can stimulate the potential of employees and make the entire enterprise more wolf and more combative. Which logic is right? Hard to say. Whether these logics can justify themselves is an important criterion for testing the quality of our decisions.
The above are the three dimensions behind high-quality decision-making, namely values, vision, and logic. We can consciously do some deliberate exercises, and pay more attention to our usual work.
The impact of "decision making" on the organization
What is a good organization? I think three points are very important:
- First, empower each other. It ’s not just the platform we often talk about empowering business units, leaders empowering employees, good organizations should empower each other from top to bottom;
- Second, a high degree of consensus (high degree of coordination). Mutual empowerment will promote a high degree of consensus;
- Third, the overall evolution. Achieving a high degree of consensus will also promote the organization to continuously evolve and evolve from the whole.
1 Three challenges to bridge the scale gap: business models, competitive strategies, and organizational capabilities
Going back to the previous case, a unit gave me a report and provided me with two sets of options for me to make decisions. According to the traditional low-quality decision, I agreed with A, and then went to implement it. Then there will be three problems in this low-quality decision:
First, the subordinates only tossed questions to the leaders, but did not give answers and suggestions. There is a book called "Don't let monkeys jump back on their backs". The book mentions "Do you want to put the monkey on your back or the leader's back". Sometimes leaders often receive questions from their subordinates. If they "carry all the monkeys on their backs", then not only will the subordinates fail to grow, but in the end the leaders will be "tired". Second, leaders do not understand their subordinates, nor do they enlighten or think about them. Leaders do not know what their subordinates think, what their subordinates ’thinking patterns are, what values are reflected in their subordinates’ plans, whether they have self-contained logic, and whether they consider short-term, medium-term and long-term factors. Because of the lack of communication and interaction, the leader does not understand this subordinate. Third, subordinates do not understand leadership and cannot progress and grow. The leader agrees to the A plan, a good subordinate may think about why the leader chose A, and if the subordinate does not think, even just wrote two plans randomly, the leader chooses one of them, and then mechanically implements, such a plan is not only a possibility of success Very low, it is difficult for subordinates to progress and grow.
In the above interaction process of "leading the hook and subordinates executing", the boundaries of the upper and lower capabilities of the entire organization were not opened. So what is the correct approach?
In my opinion, when a subordinate needs to make a decision when making a report, the leader must ask four questions:
First, what are your plans? You ca n’t just provide a plan, it ’s not a decision;
Second, is there any better solution?
Third, if you make a decision, which option would you choose?
Fourth, why did you choose this plan?
These four sentences must be asked or discussed together. On the one hand, this will force his subordinates to do a solid job in the early stage, and will also present the thinking model, value judgment model, and logic behind his entire plan . On the other hand, the leader should also explain clearly to his subordinates "Why do you choose this way?", "How exactly are you thinking about it?" And so on. In addition, in the process of joint discussion, the leader may disagree with the two options, but chose the third one. At this time, as a subordinate, you must actively ask, actively discuss with the leader, or at least think about, "Why did the leader choose the third plan", "What kind of value preference is reflected behind the leader", "What is the logic of leadership", "Is there some points that I didn't consider behind the leadership decision-making" and so on.
The above series of interactions can be understood as a process of mutual empowerment. At the same time, mutual empowerment will also promote a high degree of consensus.
2 High consensus within the organization makes collaboration and management simple
The reason why big companies are powerful is because they have a strong culture. This powerful culture actually comes from a high level of consensus across the organization, and the high consensus needs to be achieved by doing things, because doing things can cultivate tacit understanding, both leaders and subordinates Observing how the other party is doing, and why it is done, will also discuss together. This is also the mutual empowerment we mentioned earlier, and it has promoted the consensus reached over time.
For example, when the leader adheres to the principle of "customer first" and implements this principle in everything, subordinates will gradually form a consensus with their superiors through observation and practice, together with their own internal identification, and also adhere to the "user Supremacy ", then it will be very simple to make similar decisions in the future.
Therefore, a good consensus makes synergy simple and management simple. Without consensus, there will be conflict of thinking, but conflict itself is not an unresolvable problem. The emergence of conflict is also a process of interactive dialogue between the two parties, and it is also a process of reaching a high consensus.
3 The process of reaching a high consensus across the organization will also promote the overall evolution of the organization
Every day, every employee in the organization has to make many small decisions, and each interaction will affect the future. These small decisions may not be important in a single view, but the ideas behind them, especially the ideas behind the entire organization, are very important, including us Understanding the strategic direction of leadership does not depend on what he says or how he slogans, but on some small decision-making events. Small decision-making events in the entire organization will determine the direction of the organization's overall evolution. Evolution is happening all the time. For example, a general manager consults with the following human resources director to recruit a "bullman". Perhaps this "bullman" will affect the future development of the entire enterprise. Of course, there is a prerequisite for evolution, that is, all internal decision-making chains (including small decisions) must be interactive. If there is no interaction, they are all bosses. The following mechanical execution, there is no room for evolution, and there is no vitality and organization ability Can't grow.
To understand the meaning of decision-making is to understand three things: what is scientific decision-making, the three important dimensions behind high-quality decision-making , and the three characteristics of good organization , and these three characteristics are all related to decision-making. Understanding these three things has inspired us a lot:
First of all, this will have some inspiration for the growth of our employees. For subordinates, it is not only possible to provide leaders with a choice of options, but also to give their own opinions and judgments. They cannot get the mechanical choice of the leader ’s choice. They must fully think about why the leaders choose this way, and what basis and reasons Judgment, etc.
Secondly, this will also have some inspiration for the improvement of leadership decision-making quality. For the superiors, not only should the subordinates propose a clear plan, but also to explain his thoughts and judgments. If your judgment is different from your subordinates, you must clearly tell him how you chose and why you chose it in this way. What are the values, foresight, and logic behind it?
Through such continuous interaction and empowerment, we believe that: first, subordinates will grow, and leaders will grow; second, the organization's consensus will be more and more; third, organizational capabilities will grow faster and faster, and will Very healthy and benign directions continue to evolve.
Author: Li Dong, the president of Gu Co., Ltd. home
Source: Huaxia Cornerstone e Insight (ID: chnstonewx)
Introduction: Song Luming, Convenor of Leading Workshop
