Chapter 5

Report
Chapter 6
Problem Definition,
Teams & Tools
by
Dr. Larry W. Long
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
1
Problem Definition Models
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reflective thinking
Koehler’s RPIM
Koehler’s PAIM
Brainstorming
Synectics
Intertia Activation
Larson’s Questions
Hierarchical
Elaborated Hierarchical
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
2
Dewey’s Reflective Thinking
• Problem-solving
–
–
–
–
–
–
experience difficulty
isolate and define difficulty
suggest possible solutions
examine solutions
choose solution / implement
evaluate situation
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
3
Dewey’s Reflective Thinking
• Assumption:
– All information is available
• Strength:
– Logical, time-tested
approach
• Weakness:
– Assumes everyone has
access to all information
necessary to define and
solve problem
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
4
Koehler’s RPIM-Model
• Reactive Problem Identification - Model
• A Cause and Effect
Strategy
– Identify undesirable condition
– Identify cause of condition
– Identify ways to remove or
alter the cause
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
5
Koehler’s RPIM-Model
• Define desirable
outcomes
• Describe what
occurred
• Explore effects
• Identify negative
effects
• Define cause of
negative effects
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
6
Koehler’s RPIM-Model
• Assumption:
– Identify cause,
remove cause, solve
problem
• Strength:
– Identifies negative
effects; enables
specific action
• Weakness:
– Problems rarely have
one cause
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
7
Koehler’s PAIM or Goal
Achievement
• ProActive problem Identification - Model
• Three Questions:
– What is the goal or object
– What blocks goal achievement
– How can the barriers be removed
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
8
Koehler’s PAIM
• Assumption:
– Assumes barriers to
goals are problems
that need to be
identified and
removed
• Weakness:
– Requires clear, mutual,
understanding of long
and short-term goals
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
9
Brainstorming
• Free expression
without evaluation
• Everyone
participates fully
• Evaluation begins
after all ideas are
expressed
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
10
Brainstorming
• Assumption:
– An open environment creates
high quality solutions
• Strength:
– Multi-purpose approach
– High-quality decisions
– Encourages creativity
• Weakness:
– Time-consuming and vague
– Norms can impede creative
ideas
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
11
Synectics Strategies
• Begin with solutions
– Identify solutions by
Fantasizing
– Evaluate solutions
– Repeat fantasize evaluation sequence
– Develop consensus
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
12
Synectics Strategies
• Assumption:
– Employees are
obstacles to
identifying problems
and solutions
• Strength:
– Freedom to generate
creative solutions
• Weakness:
– Dependent on
worker’s ability to be
uninhibited and on
support of the
organization
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
13
Inertia-Activation Strategies
• Group with the
same values or
opposite values
• Activate their
values
• Frustration, inertia,
release of energy
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
14
Inertia-Activation Strategies
• Assumption:
– Forced inertia
results in activity;
produces results
• Strength:
– Problem/solution
identified readily
and effectively
• Weakness:
– People become
anxious and
uncomfortable
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
15
Larson’s Single Questions
• What is the problem
• Subdivide question
into sub-questions
• Gather information;
assess solutions
• Similar to outlining
speech
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
16
Hierarchical Strategies
• Structure the
problem into parts
or chunks
• Order from most to
least important
• Select solution that
matches
importance of the
problem
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
17
Hierarchical Strategies
• Assumption:
– Assumes there are
degrees of information
• Strength:
– Recognizes the
complexity of
organizational
problems
– Provides equal
emphasis on selecting
solution
• Weakness:
– Problems are often too
complex for one simple
solution
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
18
Elaborated Hierarchical
Identify
Problem
•
•
•
•
•
Locate
Context
Order
Subproblem
Identify
Solutions
Assess
Consequences
Chunk problem / identify complexity
Intraorganizational vs. interorganizational
Internal vs. external / work vs. person
Determine and rank solutions
Solutions often create new problems
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
19
Elaborated Hierarchical
• Assumption:
– Problems consists of
multiple, overlapping
causes
• Strength:
– Systematic attempt to
subdivide and prioritize
problems
– Defines problem more
completely
• Weakness:
– Complex process
requiring time and skilled
personal
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
20
PSID Models & Complexity
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Most complex
Elaborated hierarchial
Hierarchical
Inertia-activation
Synectics
Brainstorming
Goal achievement - PAIM
Cause-Effect - RPIM Least Complex
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
21
Using teams
•
•
•
•
•
Team vs. committee
When to use teams
Team advantages
Team purpose
Team composition
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
22
Team vs. committee
•
•
•
•
•
•
size (6 to 8) vs. larger group
not necessarily representative vs.
representative
consensus vs. directed or majority rule
responsible for outcome vs. advisory
use of tools vs. dialogue
use of data vs. conjecture
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
23
When is a TEAM needed?
 Sponsor has identified a critical
process to be improved
 Desirable to enhance productive
efficiency
 Desirable to maximize
PARTICIPANT satisfaction
 Desirable to gain participant “buy-in!”
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
24
TEAM advantages
 Reduces job role isolation
 Process vs. individual action
 Focus on team vs. individual rewards
 Reduces interpersonal competition &
enhances cooperation
 Overcomes vested interests
 Identifies process bottlenecks
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
25
TEAM Purpose
 Improve effectiveness & efficiency of
process, by
 acquisition, transformation, disposal of
 physical, capital, human, information
resources to benefit all participants
input
throughput
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
output
26
Who should be in a PAT?
 Non-management and management
employees who are experienced, expert
in the process
 Suppliers (input providers)
 Customers (output users)
 Process operators (input transformers)
 Facilitator (objective 3rd party)
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
27
Team Decision Tools – purpose & application
(derived from Brassard & Ritter, Fisher, Cragan & Wright)
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
28
Decision Tools – Typical Flow (MJII)
Flowchart
Brainstorming
Interrelationship
Digraph
Aspect Grouping
Fishbone
Task & Objective
Plan
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
29
Facilitation Tools & Uses
FLOWCHART
Map the process
BRAINSTORMING
Discover ideas
ASPECT Grouping
Group ideas
INTERRELATIONSHIP
Find main influence
FISHBONE
Identify causes
Task & Objective Plan
Map/implement
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
30
Flowcharting
1. Define boundaries
2. List steps (brainstorm)
3. Sequence steps
Input/begin
(materials,
information or action)
Task or
Activity
#1
Decision
Task or
Activity
#2
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
Task or
Activity
#3
Output/End
31
Brainstorming
1. State issue
2. Write down ideas and display
3. Review/generate more ideas
T1
T2
T3
T6
T7
T10
T5
T4
T11
T9
T8
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
32
Aspect Grouping
1. Phrase issue in a full
sentence
2. Simultaneously sort
all ideas into related
groupings
3. Assign aspect label
for each group
Issue
Aspect 1
Aspect 2
T1
T6
T5
T8
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
33
Interrelationship Digraph
1. List aspects from aspect
grouping session
2. For each possible pair
(#aspects-1) determine
A4
which primarily
I = 2.5
influences outcomes
O =.5
from the other
3. Tally outgoing and
incoming arrows for each
issue to determine
primary influencers
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
A1
I=0
O= 3
A2
I=1
O=2
A3
I = 2.5
O =.5
34
Fish Bone
1. Select main influencer
from interrelationship
digraph, then brainstorm
& aspect group to -2. Generate main causes
3. Generate sub-causes
4. Sub-sub causes, etc.
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
#1
Influence
35
Task & objective plan
1. Based on digraph/fishbone
outcomes, write goal; determine
completion date
2. List measurable objectives required
to reach goal
3. Brainstorm actions needed to
achieve each objective -- break
each into steps
4. Determine time needed to do step
5. Develop schedule
6. Implement & monitor
GOAL
(to be completed by . . .)
OBJ 1
20 days
S1a
S1b
S2a
S2b
OBJ 2
90 days
S1c
OBJ 3
60 days
S1d
S1d
S2c
S3a
Copyright 2000, Dr, Larry W. Long
36

similar documents