Leaders sometimes think putting all the facts and data on the table will clarify the problem and make an obvious decision clear. It doesn’t. It sometimes makes it worse. When it comes to the intersection of decision-making and information, more is not necessarily better. Considering the
Signal from the noise. Richards Heuer, in “Psychology of Intelligence Analysis” contends better analysis, not more data/intelligence is what matters to improve decision making. A key component of his approach is doing exactly what this field note states (identify what the important info, ignore the rest)- I believe it is under the chapter heading “do you really need more information?” I work with a team of research analysts and saw the tendency of analysis paralysis which stems not being clear on what analysis/factors matter. Also saw wildly inconsistent decision process. We implemented the practice of making explicit the factor that matter/dont and our decision quality improved.
This can be so hard to accomplish in education because everything seems important. We are talking about human lives rather than products or services. A subgroup can never be irrelevant. Any thoughts?
I don’t want to come across flippant, but I think this shows up in education all the time. My son was rejected from a program of study in his sophomore year because he didn’t meet the performance standards to move on. I’m not saying he was treated unkindly, while still heartbreaking, but his results in the program put him on the list of irrelevants.
I’m sorry that happened to your son. Question: did you find the performance standards irrelevant? I am thinking about effective decision-making on the part of those educators and leaders. Did they have the full picture or focus on the right stuff? For example, some schools may institute policies because of one incident on one day by one kid. They don’t disregard this data point when making school wide decisions. Does that make sense?
Signal from the noise. Richards Heuer, in “Psychology of Intelligence Analysis” contends better analysis, not more data/intelligence is what matters to improve decision making. A key component of his approach is doing exactly what this field note states (identify what the important info, ignore the rest)- I believe it is under the chapter heading “do you really need more information?” I work with a team of research analysts and saw the tendency of analysis paralysis which stems not being clear on what analysis/factors matter. Also saw wildly inconsistent decision process. We implemented the practice of making explicit the factor that matter/dont and our decision quality improved.
Thanks for the long form reference, Scott!
This can be so hard to accomplish in education because everything seems important. We are talking about human lives rather than products or services. A subgroup can never be irrelevant. Any thoughts?
Hi Jo Lein, thanks for the question.
Can you say a bit more about the context of certian decisions you are referencing?
I don’t want to come across flippant, but I think this shows up in education all the time. My son was rejected from a program of study in his sophomore year because he didn’t meet the performance standards to move on. I’m not saying he was treated unkindly, while still heartbreaking, but his results in the program put him on the list of irrelevants.
I’m sorry that happened to your son. Question: did you find the performance standards irrelevant? I am thinking about effective decision-making on the part of those educators and leaders. Did they have the full picture or focus on the right stuff? For example, some schools may institute policies because of one incident on one day by one kid. They don’t disregard this data point when making school wide decisions. Does that make sense?