On Decision Making and Problem Solving in a Crisis.
Recently finished a fascinating book on the murder of our 20th President - James Garfield and how it was not the assassins bullet that actually killed him - but the mistakes (preventable) in his medical treatment by the "reputed" doctors at the time.
It is a fascinating tale and I would highly recommend the book: Destiny of the Republic by Candice Millard. A tale of madness, medicine and the murder of the president.
There are a number of patterns in this tale : Vanity of key decision makers, Insanity and Delusions of the assassin ( A depressingly recurring pattern in US history of the killing or attempted killing of presidents) , fear and distrust of new technology and methods - when faced with a crisis.
The last pattern is the one I am interested in - as it is a common one occurring in management and decision making. The question is : How best to avoid the types of mistakes that the doctors made- that turned out to be ultimately fatal to the president.
I essence the outlines of the management situation are as follows : A crisis is thrust upon them. There are new methods and technologies that are likely to be useful in addressing the crisis -BUT - there is a considered belief and opinion among key decision makers that the new technology and methods are unproven.
In a sense the crisis is a classic problem solving situation. And at the very least -- there needs to be objective criteria as to what the end result of the proposed solution will be and objective "in-process" indicators whether the actions taken are improving the situation or not. Contrast the problem solving done in the Apollo13 situation many years later - with what happened in this story.
The lack of objective "in-process" milestones - results in egos getting in the way of recognizing deteriorating in-process indicators. In this story -- the doctors completely ignored all symptoms of infection and septicimia. In fact all their actions to probe and locate the bullet - worsened these symptoms - and yet they ignored and explained them away. Ego and Vanity - played a big part.
Once you have these agreed to in-process criteria - then acceptance of new untried methods becomes more acceptable. Indeed -- often the reason one is IN the crisis is that old methods did not work - forcing one to look at new ways to address the problem.
So next time you find yourself as a management team in this kind of predicament - make sure you follow the process of expressly delineating in process milestones. Especially important for the person who is the one in charge. Ask proponents of the new methods to indicate the benefits AND the indicators that would indicate the new method is not working! In this story - Alexander Graham Bell tried to use a metal detector to locate the bullet - but was unable to do so because of two main causes: a) Searching on only one side of the body and b) Presence of metal springs in the bed !! In hindsight - asking Mr Bell - what would cause the instrument to give a false positive -- may have been very useful.
In summary though - in a crisis - process helps remove egos and emotion and in-process positive and negative influences need to be explicitly identified. Oh for the use of fishbone diagrams in medicine!!
It is a fascinating tale and I would highly recommend the book: Destiny of the Republic by Candice Millard. A tale of madness, medicine and the murder of the president.
There are a number of patterns in this tale : Vanity of key decision makers, Insanity and Delusions of the assassin ( A depressingly recurring pattern in US history of the killing or attempted killing of presidents) , fear and distrust of new technology and methods - when faced with a crisis.
The last pattern is the one I am interested in - as it is a common one occurring in management and decision making. The question is : How best to avoid the types of mistakes that the doctors made- that turned out to be ultimately fatal to the president.
I essence the outlines of the management situation are as follows : A crisis is thrust upon them. There are new methods and technologies that are likely to be useful in addressing the crisis -BUT - there is a considered belief and opinion among key decision makers that the new technology and methods are unproven.
In a sense the crisis is a classic problem solving situation. And at the very least -- there needs to be objective criteria as to what the end result of the proposed solution will be and objective "in-process" indicators whether the actions taken are improving the situation or not. Contrast the problem solving done in the Apollo13 situation many years later - with what happened in this story.
The lack of objective "in-process" milestones - results in egos getting in the way of recognizing deteriorating in-process indicators. In this story -- the doctors completely ignored all symptoms of infection and septicimia. In fact all their actions to probe and locate the bullet - worsened these symptoms - and yet they ignored and explained them away. Ego and Vanity - played a big part.
Once you have these agreed to in-process criteria - then acceptance of new untried methods becomes more acceptable. Indeed -- often the reason one is IN the crisis is that old methods did not work - forcing one to look at new ways to address the problem.
So next time you find yourself as a management team in this kind of predicament - make sure you follow the process of expressly delineating in process milestones. Especially important for the person who is the one in charge. Ask proponents of the new methods to indicate the benefits AND the indicators that would indicate the new method is not working! In this story - Alexander Graham Bell tried to use a metal detector to locate the bullet - but was unable to do so because of two main causes: a) Searching on only one side of the body and b) Presence of metal springs in the bed !! In hindsight - asking Mr Bell - what would cause the instrument to give a false positive -- may have been very useful.
In summary though - in a crisis - process helps remove egos and emotion and in-process positive and negative influences need to be explicitly identified. Oh for the use of fishbone diagrams in medicine!!
Comments