These are three different problems solved using the same decision modeling approach based on AHP (Analytical Hierarchy Process).

We've found/learned that the most important part of creating an AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) decision model is creating the basic framework or structure of the model.

What service can you buy that gets twice the results while reducing cost by 80%.

A management simulator... what to cut in order to achieve the maximum benefit from the remaining resources?

This is an example of applying Force-Field Analysis (FFA) to a cycle time reduction problem. The idea is that you remove resisting force to create change (i.e. movement), rather than working on the driving forces. Remove resistance rather than push harder.

In preparation for a meeting with the then new Mayor of Sacramento, Kevin Johnson, we developed the following decision-model example, responding to the question, "Which combination of initiatives generate the greatest value, in order to fulfill the goals of the new administration?" This is somewhat dated today, but the concepts are relevant to any policy decision making, regardless of the timing.

There's 3 "types" of decisions: (1) Go or No-Go...(2) choose among available alternatives....(3) create alternatives (through brainstorming or synectics)

I’ll discuss the idea of a “trade-off triangle,” involving three elements of a decision; a revenue source, what it is that you are trying to get done, and some form of value delivered to the customer.

I’ll use a simple example of selecting a new car. Here are my three choices, a Porsche, a Lamborghini, and an electric car called Tesla.

The core of any decision is the goal, or statement of the problem that you are trying to solve. A well articulated goal is rare and we often use the modeling process to refine it with the decision stakeholders.

Introduction to decision analysisis a basic discussion of the decision modeling framework we use to engage decision stakeholders and accelerate many different types of group decisions.

Sinek’s idea is that the “Why” defines the Purpose, Cause, and or Belief of what you are trying to achieve. Often we find that this is not clearly articulated or commonly understood by a group of people, yet without knowing the “why for” of something, it is very hard to define the steps to get there and it is hard to motivate people to extraordinary performance.

"And it comes from saying no to 1,000 things to make sure we don’t get on the wrong track or try to do too much. We’re always thinking about new markets we could enter, but it’s only by saying no that you can concentrate on the things that are really important."

The problem with "consensus management" involving many stakeholders, is that it takes a long time; and the quality of the decision is typically low due to the duration of the process, the unstructured nature of the process, and the necessary compromises that reduce things to the lowest common denominator.