A520.3.1.RB_RuggerioSteven

Decisions:  Principles, Paths, and Payments

Brothers Chip and Dan Heath are Stanford and Duke alumni and authors of the best-selling books Switch and Made to Stick.  In their 2013 release Decisive they said, “If you study the kinds of decisions people make and the outcomes of those decisions, you’ll find that humanity does not have particularly impressive track record” (p. 3).  For the first three and a half decades of my life, my track record is a train wreck of bad decisions. Some were misguided but rightly motivated; but most were terribly selfish and hurtful.  Fortunately, today is considerably different.  Call it age, maturity, experience, or personal transformation, I live by rooted values and filter all my decisions through a matrix of three principles: Faith, Family, and Friends.  Each decision guided by conviction and strengthened with character.

With a strong framework for making decisions, one still requires a path to follow.  The path I pursue is akin to what Whetten & Cameron (2011) describe in Developing Management Skills.  Their four-step process of (1) define the problem, (2) generate alternative solutions, (3) evaluate and select an alternative, and (4) implement and follow-up on the solution are key characteristics of my decision-making formula.  With a framework and a process, I’ve come to recognize some key elements of my decision-making abilities and attributes.  Some words that would describe my decision-making would be cautious (I am not very impulsive), intuitive (I place great weight on an inner sense of peace and/or anxiety), self-motivated (I am incredibly disciplined and aggressive toward self-improvement), active (believe in doing, not simply talking), and lastly, assertive (in a manner of motivation and perseverance).

Hoch & Kunreuther (2001) said, “We think we are making excellent decisions, and as long as the results are good, we don’t look to closely at our decision process.  It is usually only when we look at our failures, that we actually improve our decision-making” (p. 2).  As stated earlier, I have a history of bad decisions and looking at the words that would describe my current decision-making philosophy requires me to look at the opposite of those attributes and how they used to be part of my past.  Some of those words would be: impulsive, logical or calculated, lazy or unmotivated, passive, and unsure.

Although some of these “opposite” characteristics do not seem to define my decision-making philosophy, there are elements within my process at various times.  For instance, though I have a strong intuitive nature, I highly regard the importance and efficiency of logical and calculated decision-making.  For instance, we are considering purchasing a new home.  We visited the new house yesterday and everyone really liked it (even though it needs a few minor repairs).  Buying a new home can feel like an out-of-body experience with life-altering consequences.  With this decision, I am using both intuition and logic.  I am following my heart and inner conviction while using a calculated and measured approach toward finances, logistics, relocation, and taking into consideration all the input of each family member.

While there is certainly room to utilize both intuition and logic, there is little room for laziness and dubiousness.  If I take too much time, the house will get sold underneath us.  If I were too unsure, then it wouldn’t be wise to move forward with such a large purchase.  We have been in our current residence for over sixteen years.  We do not want to walk away from a home where our children were raised and in which we have nearly two decades of memories without being sure of our decision.  We want to follow our heart, use caution, be motivated to take the necessary action, and take steps in a direction that we all feel is right for our family.

With all that said, our decision-making video mention that we should “get comfortable with uncertainty.”  Most decisions carry a degree of uncertainty.  Buying a house will always have uncertainty.  Tonight my wife said, “I don’t want to leave a house we’ve been in for almost twenty years to move into a house that has “hidden” problems.”  Therein lies the uncertainty.  We do the best we can with the information available.  At the end of the day, after I follow the four-step process stated above, I have to move forward believing I made the right decision.  It would be very easy to fall prey to analysis paralysis and avoid making a decision. 

When all said and done, I lean into doing the heavy lifting up front and then praying and believing that God will lead me to make course corrections if and when necessary.  Yes, I expect some of my decisions may be wrong, however, if I’ve done the necessary research and evaluation, then I will be better prepared to make changes later.

Steve

References:

Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2013). Decisive. New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group.

Hoch, S.J., & Kunreuther, H.C. (2001). Wharton on making decisions. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Whetten, D.A., & Cameron, K. S. (2011). Developing management skill. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

A634.2.4.RB_RuggerioSteven

Balancing Ethical Theories: Discussing Consequentialism and Deontology

Labels are constricting.  Whether at work, church, family gatherings, or relaxing at home with my family, labeling myself as either a Republican or a Democrat, a northerner or a southerner, or one who likes American cars or foreign cars seems to fence me in.  I like to think of myself as an independent thinker who approaches issues while embracing the best of both worlds.  In similar fashion, studying the two primary approaches to ethical decision making—consequentialism and deontology—have exposed me to both the strengths and weaknesses inherent in each.  Like my political, geographical, and automotive affiliation, I find myself operating in both wheelhouses.

When moral theorizing, individuals either lean toward a consequentialist view that focuses primarily on the consequences of our actions or a deontological view that focuses on adhering to rules and principles independent of consequences.   These views have shaped much of the world of ethics today.  In The Practice of Ethics, LaFollette (2007) defines the two as, “Consequentialism states we should choose the available actions with the best overall consequences, while deontology states that we should act in ways circumscribed by moral rules or rights, and that these rules or rights are at least partly independent of consequences” (p. 23).

As leaders, understanding these theories is critical to one’s convictions, perspectives, and leadership influence.  Gary Yukl (2010) said, “Higher levels of management have a greater number and variety of activities to be coordinated, the complexity of relationships that need to be understood and managed is greater, and the problems that need to be solved are more unique and ill-defined” (p. 216).  Ethical issues permeate every facet of an organization.  To develop one’s leadership style, it is important to examine whether one makes decisions based on potential consequences or whether they follow a strict rule-based philosophy.  Knowing one’s perspective toward an ethical dilemma can improve how organizational decisions are made.

Leaders operating at a higher level of development are usually regarded as more ethical than those at a lower level of development.  Those with a strong moral self-identity are normally motivated to act in ways that are consistent with ethical values and beliefs (Yukl, 2010).  In order to make the best decision possible when confronted with an ethical dilemma, leaders should have a basic understanding of the two theories.  The following explanations are found in LaFollette’s textbook, The Practice of Ethics.

First, let’s look at consequentialism.  These folks believe that we are morally obligated to act in ways that produce the best consequences.  This motivation is common throughout all aspects of leadership.  Whether creating a business plan, a church program, or devising a parenting strategy, leaders consider the end result when formulating possible decisions.  The consequentialist approach directs leaders to choose paths with the best overall consequences for all interested parties.

When determining which consequences are most important, the consequentialist must consider three questions.  First, which consequences are morally relevant?  In other words, there are often innumerable consequences surrounding a decision; some are trivial whereas others are significant.  Leaders must consider only those consequences relevant to the outcome and the people involved.  Secondly, how much weight should each consequence be given?  The weight is the product of the nature of the interests it affect, the number of interests affected, and their respective probabilities.  And thirdly, how should they use these considerations when deliberating?  For each action, the leader must decide which alternative has the best overall consequence. 

Another aspect of consequentialism is utilitarianism.  In this theory, the sole consequence that is sought is happiness.  These folks make decisions based on what will provide the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.  LaFollete (2007) said, “The tendency to see consequences narrowly, especially when our interest is at stake, are a factor any clear thinking consequentialist must acknowledge and seek to counter” (p. 27).

Along with LaFollete’s explanation of the theory of consequentialism, Yukl (2010) highlighted, “Judgments about the ethics of a particular decision or action usually take into account the purpose (ends), the extent to which behavior is consistent with moral standards (means), and the consequences for self and others (outcomes).  These three criteria are usually considered in relation to each other, and a common issue is the extent to which the ends justify the means” (p. 409).

The second theory of ethical decision making is known as deontology.  This is the theory that focuses primarily on following rules.  Growing up, we were regularly taught what to do and what not to do.  In fact, most of our developmental stages of life were filled with “do’s and don’t” and that is what we remembered—especially when it was reinforced with pain!

Though “rule-following” resonates with all of us, it can cause problems as well.  Focusing solely on the rules without taking the consequences into consideration can cause additional problems down the road.  The deontologist must learn to give consequences the appropriate moral weight when considering what path to choose or what decision to make.

One of the key points of the deontologist is that “morality is a set of moral rules, some of which are weightier than others” (p. 31).  The goal is to know which are weightier and by how much.  In these situations, leaders must have core principles prioritized within their thought process.  For example, “Domestic animals are very important and should be cared for exceptionally well.  However, they are not as important as humans.”  While that sounds elementary, there are many people who consider their pets equal to people.  True, your pets are important, however they should not be held in higher esteem than a human life.  Yet, many people in our society would rebuff this claim with great intensity.  Case in point: Wealthy people investing thousands of dollars in dog houses, dog food, and even doggy diamonds.  All the while, homeless people shuffle outside their gated community.

One of the key voices of the deontological theory is Immanuel Kant.  He stresses the important of the “good will” in which he refers to as “doing one’s duty because it is one’s duty.”  Kant is famous for his categorical imperative as well.  In this he believes the weight of what we do lies on the antecedent “if.”  In other words, certain imperatives are binding only on those who want to achieve the goal specified in the phrase.

Like ethics, there are numerous theories on leadership.  One of the most prominent is known as situational leadership.  Meaning, the best style of leadership is what the situation calls for.  In many ways, this is true of the consequentialist and deontological theories of ethics as well.  Simply focusing on producing the best consequences causes decision makers to miss the relevant factors of the moment.  Not every decision can be made to produce a “sunny” consequence.  Also, blindly following a set of rules can be misguided as well.  Evaluating the situation in light of an individual’s core values and principles is the most effective way to deal with ethical dilemmas.  Moreover, the most opportune time to develop one’s values is not “in the moment” of an ethical decision; but rather, beforehand when there is time to discuss and identify why you believe what you believe.  Ethical dilemmas should never dictate what you believe. Rather, they should confirm what you’ve already professed to believe. 

Balancing the tension between rules and consequences is an art leaders must learn.  Lastly, John Maxwell (2003) said, “Decisions, not conditions, determine your ethics” (p. 47).  He explained, “People of poor character tend to blame their choices on circumstances.  Ethical people make good choices regardless of circumstances.  If they make enough good choices, they begin to create better conditions for themselves” (p. 47).

Steve

References:

LaFollette, H. (2007). The practice of ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Maxwell, J. (2003). Ethics 101. New York, NY: Center Street.

Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

A500.7.3.RB_RuggerioSteven

Title: Logic and Leadership: A View on Quantitative Research

Two weeks ago my daughter sent me a humorous anecdote that summed up much of my experience and accompanying anxiety perpetuated by mathematical word problems.  

It went like this:

Question: “If you have 4 pencils and I have 7 apples, how many pancakes will fit on the roof?

Answer: “Purple, because aliens don’t wear hats.”

The reason we all laugh is because we all relate.  We remember the number two pencil sliding through our sweaty hands, the increased heart rate, and tightly closing our eyes while trying to envision a train leaving Chicago going 60 mph meeting another train in New York going 70 mph…it’s brutal. What train will arrive first? But, there is hope. Welcome to math science, operations research, decision making modeling, and for the purpose of this blog, quantitative research.

Every day each one of us is bombarded with decisions. What to wear? Who to marry? Where to work? How much to invest? Life is, in itself and by definition, a conglomeration of individual decisions. Making the right decision can feel like walking through a minefield. Make the right decision and you survive to take another step. Make the wrong decision and everything changes; sometimes painfully and oftentimes with collateral damage. As a leader of an organization, we face daily decisions that either add value or cause damage to the organization’s goals and possibly, its members as well.

Tero Mamia helps explain the basis of quantitative research when he said, “quantitative research aims at (causal) explanations. It answers primarily to why? – questions.” His slide presentation helps define how research capabilities empower people to prove and disprove various theories through the delicate balance of theoretical and empirical research methods.  Quantitative research is a methodology that aids in decision making by demonstrating relationships between different variables. It offers insight into present and future possibilities through the use of regression analysis, linear regression, and other analytical methods that arm leaders with the information necessary to make better decisions.

John Kros (2009) in his book Spreadsheet Modeling for Business Decisions defined quantitative business decision making as, “The application of a scientific approach to solving management problems in order to help managers make better decisions” (p. 4).  He also added, “It is a process-driven modeling approach that forces one to think logically about the problem at hand” (p. 39).  Making decisions and solving problems are synonymous with leadership.  Quantitative research helps us do both more efficiently.

With seven billion people in the world and over three million of them living in the US, leaders understand—and Mamia points out—that conducting surveys and tests on a few folks will help reveal what’s going on with most folks. One of the best ways to accomplish this task is by utilizing sampling methods. He stated, “We study a sample of the group (population) which represents the larger whole.”  Statistics at its best.

As leaders, we’re expected to be aware of what is happening around us and what may happen in the future.  While we can’t predict the future with absolutes (short of death), there is enough data available to help us improve the decisions we must make. It is a wonderful tool. However, we must not fall prey to analysis paralysis—spending all our time reviewing statistical data. I went to see the movie Lincoln over the Thanksgiving holiday. Throughout the movie, President Lincoln—one of our nation’s most respected leaders—knew the decision of abolishing slavery was a national imperative.  He needed no analytical model to break down his decision. He only needed truth driven by passion.  Part of being a great leader is knowing when to analyze and when to act. Lincoln analyzed the consequences of the war; he acted on the amendment.  

Legacy acts.

Steve

References:

Kros, J. (2009). Spreadsheet Modeling for Business Decisions. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company.