A4: DECISION HIERARCHY***

... with a clear purpose stated on the DECISION PROCESS CHARTER, or sometimes after ISSUE RAISING, we need to arrive at the decision that needs to be made with its context made clear. What we keep in the frame is as important as what we leave out of it.

* * *

Decision frames often have untested underlying assumptions around values and time. These assumptions are at the heart of a lack of clarity of purpose and leave decision-makers feeling overwhelmed and confused.

Thrown-in Frame

The thrown-in frame is the initial frame that comes to mind that usually proves to be the wrong one. Howard and Abbas (2015, p.343) point out to the issue of a thrown-in frame by giving an example from Freud, who used to distinguish between the presenting problem and the underlying problem. For instance, a presenting problem such as insomnia might be the result of an underlying problem such as a troubled relationship. In other words, the symptom might pose itself as the problem.

In a thrown-in frame, assumptions tend to show up as constraints. When challenged, they completely alter the frame of the decision. For instance, if a friend comes to you for your help on framing her decision of which Ph.D. program to choose, before diving into figuring out the possible programs she can join, you would ask your friend why she would like to join a Ph.D. program in the first place. If she wants to be an academic, then you can start evaluating different programs based on that information. If she tells you that she will receive more respect in the workplace with a Ph.D. title, then joining a Ph.D. program would be one of the alternatives that would help her receive that respect and "joining a Ph.D. program" will not be an assumption anymore, and will not be a "given" in the decision hierarchy.

Finding the proper frame and not being anchored by the initial frame presented by the decision maker is one of the essential capabilities of a decision analyst. As McNamee and Celona (2001, p.231) point out "nothing is quite as wasteful as finding an elegant solution to the wrong problem."

Timing of Decisions

Separating current decisions from future decisions allows simplification using time to disentangle a complicated decision. In the above example, decisions to be made now in the initial frame included which programs to apply to and how to create the application package. When the frame changes to "how to get more respect in the workplace," then the application package becomes a decision that your friend would tackle in the future. Another example is the decision of home modeling (See Abbas and Howard (2015, p.340)), where the scope of your decision can vary from how to remodel your kitchen to choosing a location to buy a new house.

Finding the right scope requires zooming in and out to find the appropriate frame and choosing a scope dictates what is in, meaning what you should decide now (a.k.a. strategic decisions), and what is out, meaning what you have already decided (a.k.a. policy) and what you will decide in the future (a.k.a. tactics).

The Givens and the Values

A decision hierarchy conversation, as well as any conversation related to your frame, will revolve around values, and mostly it will happen implicitly. For personal decisions, and for the ones that will have more impact on your life, you will need to think about "who you want to be." What sets of values define you as a person? It also applies to organizational decisions where the company should decide what kind of company it wants to be.

Of course, not all your values will be relevant for every decision. You are not going to think about who you want to be when you are buying a pair of shoes, as long as, of course, there was not any child labor used in producing that shoe and you do not want to be part of that. That would be a "given" on your decision hierarchy to buy a pair of shoes.

For organizations, things like "safety" and "environment" are usually givens that are not stated explicitly on a hierarchy as they do not sound like decisions. However, every one of your values, are, in fact, decisions that you made. For instance, you can say that you will not consider any alternative that results in increased carbon emissions. In other words, you decided not to follow any alternatives that resulted in increased carbon emissions.

Therefore:

• Identify commitments that have already been made so they can clarify the context of the decision and also allow for questioning of assumptions. It is a creative process that often reveals commitments that were not initially recognized but needed to be in order for the current decision question to make sense.
• Use time to separate past decisions, current decisions and future decisions in order to allow a manageable context. Breaking a complex decision into parts that can be decided in the future makes the current decision more manageable and sets a clear scope that will lead to focused conversations.
• Remember that "givens" are also about your values, and "who you want to be." Make sure that those values that are relevant your decision, such as "commit to no child labor in the production" or "commit to no increased carbon emissions," stated as decisions are included there. You cannot and need not include everything you care about, but you need to make explicit anything that you care about that is relevant to this decision.
• As the project progresses, the decision hierarchy will often be updated as the scope changes based on the decision conversation. Therefore, treat the decision hierarchy as a living document that depicts the current frame.

Also known as:

Givens is called Policy, Decide Now is called Strategic Decisions, and Decide Later is called Tactics.

* * *

Use SOCRATIC DIALOGUE to help the decision maker discover the real decision problem without introducing bias. Remember that a decision hierarchy is not only for documenting the frame but for facilitating a living inquiry into the frame so that it can be discovered.

In case of limited time , start from a NOTIONAL HIERARCHY to speed up the process.

Although the standard decision analysis consulting practice begins with an ISSUE RAISING session before building a decision hierarchy, we do not believe that there is a strict order, as with any other process in decision analysis. A decision hierarchy can be used as the first conversation tool where the decision maker could realize that the there is no decision to make or the decision might become clear. It is also helpful to make the values of the decision maker explicit initially with a conversation around the givens.

If the decision hierarchy is done before ISSUE RAISING, and it looks like there is a decision to make, then after the issue raising session, the hierarchy can be revisited and updated.

References:

McNamee, P., & Celona, J. (2001). Decision Analysis for the Professional. SmartOrg, Incorporated.

Abbas, A. E., & Howard, R. A. (2015). Foundations of Decision Analysis. Pearson Higher Ed.

Parnell, G. S., Terry Bresnick, M. B. A., Tani, S. N., & Johnson, E. R. (2013). Handbook of Decision Analysis (Vol. 6). John Wiley & Sons.