Saturday, January 26, 2013

A632.2.3.RB_RuggerioSteven


Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

The Jim Carrey movie, The Truman Show seems more fact than fiction.  I beleive it was Shakespeare who said, "All the world's a stage and men and women are merely players." Like minimum wage actors reciting scripted lines, we move through life trying to keep from being devoured by a school of marketing and media piranhas. Whether it’s strewn across highways on LED billboards or blasting from the bass of a car stereo, the song remains the same: Buy me. You need me to be happy. Don’t be left out. Enough is enough already.

Sheeny Iyengar—though blind—can see better than most of us.  In a world of darkness, she sees clearly. Rather than allow her impairment to limit her, she pushes against the tide of consumerism, and offers a gift of marketing genius overflowing with awareness and insight.

Sheena said choice overload causes consumers (yes, that’s you and me) to disengage in the buying process; it results in a lack of decision quality; and diminishes our purchasing satisfaction. Think about it; who’s happier: The Indonesian couple able to purchase enough food for a three-course meal or the American family pushing through the overcrowded Wal-Mart superstore with a cart full of groceries?

In her video called How to Make Choosing Easier Sheena Iyengar identified four techniques designed to help us make better decisions.
Cut – the principle of “less is more.” Consumers get lost in variety.
Concretization – make your product real and specific. Simplify your advertising.
Categorization – create more categories than choices. People like to group products together. Make it easy to find and understand.
Condition for Complexity – gradually increase the complexity of an advertisement.

Sheena’s first suggestion—cut (less is more)—describes my favorite hangout perfectly. In his book Onward, Howard Schultz said, “I have never embraced traditional advertising for Starbucks. Unlike most consumer brands that are built with hundreds of millions of dollars spent on marketing, our success had been won with millions of daily interactions." Schultz doesn’t flood televisions or radios with commercial after ridiculous commercial. His “less is more” strategy toward advertising has won my business—and the bold flavor of Arabica beans doesn’t hurt either. 

Though many are lost in the latte verbiage, a simple “house bold” gets it right every time. As a coffee consumer, Starbucks’ decision to avoid investing large sums of money in television advertising inspires me. Once in the store you can select a simple cup of coffee or an extravagant drink. On hot days, my wife and I indulge in grande-double blended-no whip-mocha-Frappuccino! But more often than not, it’s a strong house blend that starts my day.

Sheena’s observation toward categorization is a life-saver for a logistician. Each day, my work is filled with ordering, tracking, managing, and shipping hundreds and thousands of aircraft parts. One of the key functions of asset management is separating the parts by system, function, and repairability. For instance, Lockheed Martin categorizes their parts based on system: avionics, engines, flight controls, landing gear, etc. Within each category, items are further disseminated based on useability and functional life cycle. Ms. Iyengar’s principle of categorization streamlines the ordering process and aids buyers and consumers in selecting the right part quickly and easily.

Whether it’s a hot cup of coffee or an F-22 canopy seal, enabling consumers to seamlessly identify and order items while avoiding the inundation of choices makes life easier and much less frustrating.

In addition to the cut and categorization strategy identified by Ms. Iyengar, another helpful element toward improving one’s ability to decide is the mental preparation done beforehand. Wile spending time browsing and mulling about within a mall or a Wal-Mart may seem like a great way to pass the time, it also results in unnecessary purchases.  Knowing what you need exactly prior to going to the store and sticking with the original intent can help a person focus their decision.  It’s much easier to decide at home what you need rather than stand in the midst of hundreds of different products and in your indecision, buy one of each.

Legacy chooses wisely.

Steve

Sunday, January 20, 2013

A632.1.4.RB_RuggerioSteven


Multistage Decision Making

It’s interesting; outside of large purchases, career changes, and significant relationship mêlées, the bulk of my decision-making was reflexive. Like blinking. Something needed done—give it a moment of though (if that) and then act. This current course, Decision-Making for Leaders has challenged me to mine my motivations. Nearing only the end of the first week and I feel like I’m embarking on a Lewis and Clark expedition into unknown territory. The old axiom is true: Nothing is as simple as it seems.
Hoch & Kunreuther (2001) identified dynamic programming as the process for solving multistage decision problems widely credited to a RAND employee—Richard Bellman—in the 1950s.  They said, “Dynamic programming exploits the idea that even though a decision problem may involve a large number of stages, one need not enumerate and take expectancies of all possible contingent future realizations to arrive at an optimal decision policy” (p. 42). 
My personal decision-making matrix filters all possibilities through what I refer to as the 3Fs: Faith, Family, and the Future. As a man of strong faith, important decisions are decided after a time of prayer and reflection. Once I’ve prayed, time is then allotted discussing possible options, requirements, and results with my wife. Lastly, I review the decision on its future impact on others in light of the legacy I leave behind. Hence my blog title, A Leader’s Legacy.
My decision process varies from Hoch and Kunreuther in its simplicity. While it is a personal model and lacks the depth and detail of the dynamic programming model, it has proved effective and yet has plenty of room for improvement. Implementing the models identified in the textbook Wharton on Decision Making will strengthen my ability to make decisions across a myriad of circumstances. For instance, Hoch & Kunreuther (2001) identify three specific principles that, when taken together, have led to high performance decision making (p. 50-51):
1.     Optimal answers are often obvious
2.     Task environments are forgiving of mistakes
3.     One can learn by trial and error
By being aware of the obvious answers and recognizing mistakes as essential parts of decision-making, I look forward to understanding how a heuristic approach can craft a more defined and structured plan toward all my decisions whether personal or professional.
            In his best-selling book Good to Great, Jim Collins said, “One of the dominant themes from our research is that breakthrough results come about by a series of good decisions, diligently executed and accumulated one on top of another” (p. 69). My goal toward decision-making is consistency. By establishing an effective framework and understanding all aspects and potential results of my decisions, both my and my follower’s abilities will improve.
            Finally, in response to the question, “How would you apply optimal dynamic decision analysis to predict future impact of today's decision?” At this point, it’s too early to tell. Before submitting my professional and personal decisions to dynamic programming or backward induction philosophies, my knowledge of available tools must increase. For the time being, I will continue to apply intuitive knowledge aligned with my 3F principles while exploring the available decision support models currently within reach.

Legacy thinks before it acts...
Steve

References:
Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great. New York, N.Y. HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H.C., & Gunther, R.E. (2001). Wharton on Making Decisions. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.