Some time back your editor was talking with a marketing person about their company’s fortunes. Sales were very slow and everyone was looking for answers to turn things around. Your editor suggested that he get a team of diverse people together from his company, who could make valuable contributions to a discussion about this issue. The more these participants were representative of different chains (sections of the company), the more likely they would come up with an optimum solution. Your editor then challenged him to have a crack at the issue beforehand using Option Solving, such that he could intelligently lead a group discussion when the moment came.
So, without further ado, he talked through the option solving approach and then set about producing a rational question to challenge his intuitive mind. This question proved to be: “What company chain will give us the most rapid leverage for sales re-alignment and growth: considering 1) some chains are better than others, 2) everything has become rather bureaucratic, 3) need to win senior executive support, and 4) will need a lot of focus, commit-ment and perspiration?” There were other considerations, too, but he was happy to go with the four listed, so that his decision didn’t become too complicated.
Now your editor challenged him to produce two “bookends,” which would function as his yin and yang extreme possibilities. Such bookends would then force his intuitive mind to focus on his company’s most realistic set of options. Without these bookends his fertile intuitive capability would tend to wander over all sorts of red-herrings.
Hence, the bookends he selected were: “Don’t interfere with current chains” and “Completely re-align all chains,” both of which he felt were his company’s least likely options – see our Latest Worked Example.
He was then encouraged to produce at least five realistic options to potentially stretch his choices as much as possible, although, when he comes to such an exercise with his own representative group, he should side with their options first, otherwise they are unlikely to play ball. You will notice he came up with six. Look at our Latest Example and you can view his six options, one of those proposed was: “Option D – Map-out, re-align and fire-up technical support and service chains.”
With his “pictogram” now in place, indicating his range of six options, it was now time for him to engage in some emotional distancing. Emotional distancing would allow his intuitive mind to sub-consciously ponder his array of options, now they were evident. Your editor encouraged him to set his pictogram aside for a couple hours and focus on something else, while his intuitive mind subconsciously reviewed his possibilities. By doing this, he would directly see the benefits of doing the same with any “brains trust” he put together to weigh this important issue.
When he subsequently returned to his face-down “pictogram,” he turned it face-up, studied it for a few moments refresher, and then made his intuitive choice. Which one would you have chosen? He was now ready to try the same option solving approach with any group that he put together.
If you have an example of your own, please share it with this blogger, through the COMMENTS area. Thanks Option Solving. (NOTE: Next posting will be in two week’s time: “What would be the most valuable approach our Internet marketing organization could take today to increase its performance effectiveness?” Let’s have your COMMENTS or go to peter@ileadershipsolutions.com to connect with the blogger. Also consider buying the book: “Smart Decisions: Goodbye Problems, Hello Options” through amazon.com)
Filed under: Business Decision Making, Critical Thinking, Decision Dilemmas, Handling Marketing Issues, Personal Decision Making, Renewed Company Growth, Uncategorized | Leave a comment »
Option Solving Blog 