ILM - Ambiguity

Word Count: 3298
1
Leading through Ambiguity by David Adkins
Making decisions and thriving without all the information.
Introduction
Ambiguity is increasing in our ever-changing World. The pace of change is
exponential and although we have more resources at our fingertips, there is less
confidence in the information and fewer tangible rocks to hold on to in our ethically
changing society. Leaders in have to make decisions without all the knowledge, and
to stay ahead of competition decisions need to be made faster and with more
conviction than ever. Ambiguity drives the need for good leadership (Williams, 2013)
as intuitively, the less defined, ambiguous tasks naturally rise up organisations
(Cook, n.d.). Indeed, where there is no uncertainty there is no need for leadership.
Post the Cold War the US military began to describe the more Volatile, Uncertain,
Complex and Ambiguous world using the VUCA model (Stiehm, 2010), since
brought into business leadership training. Ambiguity is different to uncertainty,
although they are commonly used interchangeably. Ambiguity being where little is
known about the situation nor the potential effect of your actions, where uncertainty
is where your knowledge of the situation is much higher, but the effect of your
potential actions is still unpredictable (see Figure 1).
Definition of Ambiguity: ‘‘perceived insufficiency of information
regarding a particular stimulus or decision context” (McLain, 1993)
Much research has been undertaken into leader’s tolerance for ambiguity, frequently
finding an increased tolerance for ambiguity positively inﬂuences leadership
performance (Herman, et al., 2010). Through further primary research undertaken
with 124 respondents across all organisational levels, this paper looks to understand
what affects tolerance for ambiguity, providing advice on how future leaders can
improve in this vital skill and lead teams through Ambiguity using a five-step model.
Tolerance for Ambiguity (TA), being ‘the tendency to perceive
ambiguous situations as desirable’’ (Budner, 1962)
Research has shown that knowing you are loved and having certainty in relationship
drastically increases Human’s ability to cope with traumas. Jesus provides Christians
with the deepest love and the most important relationship, creating certainty and
giving Christians security in times of ambiguity.
This paper showcases the results of primary research and provides a five stage
model to deal with, and thrive in, ambiguity developed from the findings.

Independent Learning Module: “Leading through Ambiguity”
David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
2
Figure 1: “What VUCA Means for you”
Courtesy of Harvard Business Review (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014)

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
3
Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1
Contents ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Figures ........................................................................................................................................... 3
Research: Tolerance of Ambiguity ............................................................................................... 4
Impact of Ambiguity ............................................................................................................................... 4
Research Findings ................................................................................................................................... 4
Education ........................................................................................................................................... 5
Age and Gender ................................................................................................................................. 6
Job Sector ........................................................................................................................................... 7
Level of Seniority ................................................................................................................................ 8
5 Step Model for Ambiguity ......................................................................................................... 9
Step 1: Discern ..................................................................................................................................... 10
Step 2: Decide Strategy ........................................................................................................................ 12
Step 3: Conduct Experiments ............................................................................................................... 13
Step 4: Assess and Adapt ..................................................................................................................... 14
Step 5: Celebrate Dividends ................................................................................................................. 15
Repeat the Cycle .................................................................................................................................. 15
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 16
Appendix A: Survey Details ......................................................................................................... 19
Figures
Figure 1: “What VUCA Means for you” ........................................................................................ 2
Figure 2: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Level of Education ................................................ 5
Figure 3: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Age ........................................................................ 6
Figure 4: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research – Age and Gender ................................................... 6
Figure 5: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Job Sector ............................................................. 7
Figure 6: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Level of Seniority .................................................. 8
Figure 7: Five Step Model for Dealing with Ambiguity ................................................................ 9
Figure 8: Knowns and Unknowns Analysis Template ................................................................. 10
Figure 9: The Ricardo dos Santos Value of Business Experiments Formula .............................. 13

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
4
Research: Tolerance of Ambiguity
Understanding the impact of ambiguity and how it affects the decisions you make.
Impact of Ambiguity
Ambiguity drives our Amygdala into fight or flight mode, this primal part of the brain’s
response is regularly triggered in modern business. A Neuroeconomist researched
the decision making of subjects as they made increasingly uncertain bets, the less
information they had to go on, the more irrational and erratic their decisions became
(Bradberry, 2015).
Employees, “will do what they are most comfortable doing in order to feel as if they
are contributing something appropriate” (Kail, 2011). Ambiguity in teams can create
hesitation as even a familiar path doesn’t feel like it will create meaningful output.
Leaders need to build the boundaries for problem solving, providing clear direction,
synchronising the team’s efforts while continually communicating adjustments.
Leaders are susceptible to either over-generalising in their communication, providing
a distinct lack of clarity, or over-compensating by ‘faking it’ and making others feel
confident, even if there’s no strong basis for their judgement.
Research Findings
Education level has a small but causal impact on our ability to tolerate ambiguity
(Figure 2), Men generally have a higher tolerance for ambiguous situations than
Women and Age significantly affects our ability to tolerate ambiguity (Figure 3).
These are the summarized results of a survey of 124 cross-industry respondents.
The assessment undertaken provides a score for each respondent’s tolerance of
ambiguity (TA) using the methodology updated by Herman (Herman, et al., 2010)
and based on Budner’s original research (Budner, 1962). Results have been
averaged and analysed below. The average score over all respondents was 30.49,
with lower scores showing a higher tolerance (please note graphs are inverted).

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
5
Education
A small increase in tolerance for ambiguity with increased education is found, with
PhD level qualifications or above providing a significant increase. Education is
designed to drive the student into greater independence in their learning at each
level, culminating in academia where students are independently driving research
into previously un-examined areas. This has however driven an estimated 53% of
postgraduates to have Mental health issues (Wilcox, 2014). “I felt unsupported,
isolated and adrift in uncertainty.” (Walker, 2015). The 72.9% of students that
successfully complete PhDs (Jump, 2013) therefore have potentially suffered
immensely, but significantly learnt from their experience and expanded their ability to
tolerate ambiguity.
To safely increase tolerance for ambiguity, Leaders should expose themselves to
uncertain and ambiguous issues and actively choose to undertake exploratory
projects, but with mentorship, support, and following a structured process such as
this papers 5-step process.
Liberal Arts degrees tend to generate an increased tolerance of ambiguity compared
to STEM subjects, in fact a third of all Fortune 500 CEOs have liberal arts degrees
(Ray, 2013), (Green, 2015).
Figure 2: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Level of Education
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
GCSE or equivalent A-Level or equivalent Bachelors Degree or
equivalent
Masters Degree or
equivalent
PhD or equivalent
Tolerance for Ambiguity: Impact of Education
Lower scores indicate a higher tolerance

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
6
Age and Gender
On average Men (28.8) have a higher tolerance of ambiguity than Women (30.5).
Both genders see a notable reduction in tolerance at age 31-35, slowly building back
toward the late-forties. Caring for children typically affects parent’s attitude to risk-
taking, strongly linked to uncertainty, and therefore operating in ambiguous situations
becomes less tolerable when their children are young. The average age of Mothers
is now 30.2yrs and Fathers 33.1yrs, aligning strongly with this theory (Office for
National Statistics, 2014). Other emotional tags, such as previous dealings with a
country/ person etc going badly in a previous role/ project, can similarly taint ability to
make decisions in ambiguity. Young leaders need to be aware of emotional drivers,
responding by being honest with their team and placing more value on their team’s
input, mentors and respected expert’s opinions before making decisions.
Figure 3: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Age
Figure 4: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research – Age and Gender
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
18-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65
Tolerance for Ambiguity - Effect of Age
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
18-25 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56+
Tolerance of Ambiguity - Effect of Age and Gender
Female Male

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
7
Job Sector
Business, Consulting and Management had the highest tolerance for ambiguity.
Mainly driven by consultants, this result is expected due to continually changing
engagements where they are contracted to provide clarity on ambiguous initiatives.
Engineering and Manufacturing, shows a strong tolerance level, typically a risk-
averse sector, tolerance can be explained due to the inherent ambiguity in
overcoming design challenges being dealt with by risk-averse solutions.
Surprisingly the lowest scoring profession was Teaching and Education, further
research is required to understand the drivers for this, but a first theory is that
primary and secondary education is procedurally (syllabus) driven, and pace of
change is slower in this environment.
Figure 5: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Job Sector
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
Healthcare
Teaching and education
Retail
Accountancy, banking and
finance
Transport and logistics
Charity and voluntary work
Science and Pharmaceuticals
Energy and utilities
Engineering and
manufacturing
Business, consulting and
management
Tolerance of Ambiguity by Job Sector
Sectors with only one respondent removed

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
8
Level of Seniority
The ability to tolerate ambiguity generally increases from Students through entry
level Graduate positions to Senior Staff grades. This trend is reversed in
management positions, where the ability to tolerate ambiguity slightly decreases at
all levels in organisations except for Directors or equivalent. Therefore, averse to
traditional thinking, organisations should not “protect” their staff from ambiguity, yet
involve staff in ambiguous situations to leverage their abilities. Importantly however
Leaders must continue to take ultimate responsibility for decisions and direction.
Figure 6: Tolerance of Ambiguity Research - Level of Seniority
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
Tolerance of Ambiguity - Level of Seniority

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
9
5 Step Model for Ambiguity
How to overcome ambiguous situations, cope without having all the information and
thrive in this uncertain world.
If you regularly find yourself in an ambiguous situation you are in good company,
nearly all biblical leaders were led in ambiguity. It is an element of the free will
allowed by God, providing the space for faith to exist. Abraham was left in deep
ambiguity when told by God to leave his country, leave his relatives and go to a land
which he will be shown (Genesis 12). Great Christian leaders tolerate not knowing
the future, because they know that the promised land awaits them (Rice, 2011).
35% of CFOs named strategic ambiguity as one of their top three
career stresses (Deloitte, 2012).
This paper proposes a continuous five step process to deal with and thrive in
ambiguity (Figure 7). Discernment, where relevant information is gathered,
analysed and interpreted, then Strategy is developed by Decision making.
Decisions are tested and ambiguity clarified through Experiments, with performance
continually Assessed and strategy Adapted to the findings. Teams should then
pause to Celebrate the incremental dividends (outputs in product or knowledge)
before continuing round the cycle. This leadership model was developed from
primary research, supported by biblical, academic and business insight into
ambiguity, strategy and psychology.
Figure 7: Five Step Model for Dealing with Ambiguity
Discern
Decide
Strategy
Conduct
Experiments
Assess and
Adapt
Celebrate
Dividends

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
10
Step 1: Discern
The aim of this step is to reduce the ambiguity in the situation to the minimum
possible in the time frame available before decisions on strategic direction in step 2.
Listening is the key leadership skill required in this step, leaders should engage with
all sources of information possible, including their own knowledge and intuition. At
the outset of any vision, a Christian leader is called to pray and listen to God,
otherwise "the work of the builders is wasted" (Psalm 127:1 NLT).
A key realization for leaders is that not everything is uncertain by analysing what is
known, the known-unknowns and to acknowledge the unknown-unknowns of a truly
ambiguous problem. (Bradberry, 2015) The team’s knowledge of similar situations is
a key source of information here.
Knowns Known Unknowns Unknown Unknowns
Areas you have
information about and/or
can control
Information you can
perceive or predict being
part of delivering the
vision but currently do not
have
This will be blank to begin
with! The aim is to reveal
as many of these items as
possible through
discernment and move
them into one of the other
two lists.
Figure 8: Knowns and Unknowns Analysis Template
This analysis will drive you into breaking the seemingly overwhelming issue into
smaller parts, allowing you to delegate clear tasks to the project team to fill in known
knowledge gaps, asking “what can we do to fix this?” (Rockwell 2013).
“leadership is not about making decisions on your own, it is about
owning them once they are made” (Stanley, 2003)
God speaks to us through the Bible and also through wise counsel. Jesus said,
"what king would go to war against another king without first sitting down with his
counsellors to discuss whether his army of 10,000 could defeat the 20,000 soldiers
marching against him?" (Luke 14:31 NLT). Connect with others who have faced
similar uncertainties and challenges (Rockwell, 2013). It is important to avoid “group-
think” during this process by keeping external judgements independent and tracing
the source of information, e.g. is it all regurgitated from one source in different ways?
(Kahneman & Klein, 2010). These views may not give the leader all the information
required, but the key is that they provide confidence in the direction of travel.
Discern
Decide
Strategy
Conduct
Experiments
Assess and
Adapt
Celebrate
Dividends

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
11
Carrying out a “Pre-Mortem” (Klein, 2007) or “Hard-Truth” (Rockwell, 2013) analysis
of potential project failure modes and risks allows you as a leader to explore worst
case scenarios, fears and doubts of the project team in a safe environment before
they occur, without being held back by solutions. Leaders should aim to contain
analysis to specific meetings, as continually asking “What If…?” can have emotional
health impacts on the team and scupper the positive environment required to
overcome ambiguity.
The final voice to listen to is internal. Trusting your intuition (or Gut-feeling) was
found to be a key trait from the survey. Your internal voice is “your subconscious
looking at inputs ‘offline’ ” (Shaw, 2013). To have confidence in intuition, leaders
should recognise influences on it (such as personal emotions and influential
stakeholder’s opinions) and give their intuition space and time to develop answers
(Bradberry, 2015).
Over-reliance on Gut-feel, without carrying out and utilising the data gathering stages
and discussions with stakeholders, is a major factor in project failure. Build a track
record with smaller decisions to develop trust in your gut on the big decisions.

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
12
Step 2: Decide Strategy
The aim of this step is to be confident as possible in the decisions made in order to
provide clarity to the team and outside stakeholders.
Leaders should understand that some of their decisions will be wrong (Shaw, 2013)
but importantly leaders will “survive a few bad decisions, you will not survive a lack of
clarity” (Stanley, 2003). Time is an important factor in the decision making process.
Understand how much time you have to make decisions, setting out a preliminary
timeline to show the impact of delay on the business.
"we cannot play it safe and please God" (Hebrews 11:6)
Leaders should be confident and clear in their direction (Shaw, 2013), but not fake.
When leaders pretend; they close themselves off from the input of others and they
expose their insecurity to the very people they have asked to follow them. Language
is key by using phrases such as “I don't know right now, but I am confident we can
figure it out." (Stanley, 2003). Inform the team that your confidence is due to the
process being followed and the people involved, not your perfect knowledge.
In order to make the key decisions for the project, top performing respondents in the
survey create a framework/ assumptions that decisions can be based on and agree
these with key stakeholders. This framework is based on the known/ unknowns and
should reflect personal/ organisational values, supporting explanation of your
decision process with senior stakeholders.
“We may make our plans, but God has the last word” (Proverbs 16:1
TEV).
In developing strategy, task your team with developing imperfect solutions which can
move the project forward. The search for perfect solutions eats time and creates
uncertainty in itself (Rockwell 2013). Rather, creating multiple solution options and
designing experiments that will provide knowledge across multiple options provides a
greater chance of success and inherently builds contingency plans.
Finally, a key trait of a successful leader in the eyes of team-members is that once a
decision is made, collectively or not, they are the one to stand up, answer for, and
deal with the consequences.
Discern
Decide
Strategy
Conduct
Experiments
Assess and
Adapt
Celebrate
Dividends

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
13
Step 3: Conduct Experiments
The aim of this step is to further reduce ambiguity, supporting the strategic decisions
or providing evidence to change the direction of the project as early as possible (step
4). Experiments can be undertaken at any stage and if practical, select experiments
could be undertaken prior to the original project “go” decision at step 2.
“Test the Water” was a phrase continually brought up in this paper’s survey.
Experiments allow the team to undertake pre-determined tests to explore the
unknown-unknowns from step 1. Experiments are key to revealing more certainty in
the project at low cost and allow the project team to gain rapid feedback on their
direction and correct their course prior to the main project failing.
“Ambiguity can reveal facts at any time that are going to affect your
best decision. Be willing to accept these gifts and incorporate them
into your direction and make the necessary changes.” (Shaw, 2013)
Utilising the “Time-Box” technique (Furr & Dyer, 2014), where experiments are
undertaken in short, defined timescales, provides a structure to project team
members in ambiguity, reducing the perception of lost effort if the experiment is
unsuccessful.
Setting expectations early with your team and all stakeholders that it will take time
and experimentation to work through this ambiguous situation is the role of the
leader (Cook, n.d.). The Ricardo dos Santos Formula can support these discussions,
as shown in Figure 9, showing the breadth of value gained from experiments.
Figure 9: The Ricardo dos Santos Value of Business Experiments Formula
Discern
Decide
Strategy
Conduct
Experiments
Assess and
Adapt
Celebrate
Dividends
Insight Value
•Reducing
Uncertainty
Option Value
•Go, Change, use
knowledge
elsewhere or
Stop decision
Strategic Value
•Relationships
built, knowledge
gained for other
projects etc
Value of
Business
Experiments

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
14
Step 4: Assess and Adapt
The aim of this step is to deliver an updated strategy by assessing and adapting it
based on the experiments and work undertaken so far. Changing plans as early as
possible based on an enhanced level of certainty since the start of the project.
A common theme of the top respondents to this paper’s research was “continual re-
assessment” or “frequent re-evaluation of progress”, instilling a rhythm of checking
and acting. Now further knowledge has been gained by the project, the team and
leader set about enacting contingency plans created in step 2, or problem solving
with the team, generating ideas and re-writing the plan from the new information.
It takes a strong leader to agree to change quickly however. The need for change
may be perceived as a failing of the project by senior stakeholders or affect the
team’s morale. Leaders tend to get more general in their communications or lag in
decision making when further ambiguity hits, transferring the uncertainty to their
teams and greatly increasing chances of failure.
It is the leader’s responsibility to speak hard truths, but the key is to do so
optimistically (Rockwell, 2013) and to recognise the hard-work and knowledge
gained towards the vision (see step 5). Pretending everything is OK does not instil
confidence, but acknowledging setbacks and re-phrasing as knowledge gained and
future challenges to overcome shows strong leadership.
“Openness to new ideas is a leadership characteristic highly
correlated with effectiveness.” (Kail, 2011)
Challenging the team to think divergently (Kail 2011) is the next step. Prior to
challenges arising, leaders need to have set up a culture accepting of risk. When
experiments and information show a new path is needed, leaders must free the time
and space for the team to explore all options and support open-thinking.
Being present is a key leadership success trait during this step of the cycle (Allen,
2009-16), sensing and feeling the current environment for new inputs without
permanently “macro-leading” in the future or at too high a level. Jesus said “Give
your entire attention to what God is doing right now, and don't get worked up about
what may or may not happen tomorrow. God will help you deal with whatever hard
things come up when the time comes” (Matthew 6:34 MSG). Decisions are being
made for tomorrow, but as a leader you only have the information in front of you,
assess and adapt your plans and be decisive with the new path.
Discern
Decide
Strategy
Conduct
Experiments
Assess and
Adapt
Celebrate
Dividends

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
15
Step 5: Celebrate Dividends
The aim of this step is to keep a relentless positive focus on the project, by allowing
the team time to celebrate the output of the previous development round, underlining
the benefits of the work undertaken so far, even if the knowledge gained showcases
a new direction is required.
Ambiguity is an inherently stressful environment to be operating in for the team and
the leader (Shaw, 2013). When decisions turn out to be incorrect, teams can feel as
if their efforts were misplaced and have resulted in little or even backwards progress.
This step challenges team leaders to set up a culture of celebrating incremental
dividends (Kail, 2011) at regular intervals, milestones or after key decisions, focusing
the team that generation of knowledge is key to enabling early sight of issues in
ambiguous projects and something to be celebrated. Of course celebrating major
progress or success is also advised! Dan Rockwell sums it up by saying “Celebrate
small wins. Enjoy how far you’ve come. Momentarily forget how far you must go.”
(Rockwell, 2013)
In sport, playing to the playbook is not the goal (a fixed strategy), winning the game
is the goal, but each play (cycle of the 5 step process) delivers knowledge about the
other team (business environment), their strengths and weaknesses, allowing for
more confidence in the next decision and ultimately an increased chance of winning
the overall game. “Measure success by the scoreboard, not by (adherence to) the
playbook” (Stanley, 2003).
“Knowing that ultimately happiness comes from making the best of
everything instead of having the best of everything.”
Survey Respondent
Repeat the Cycle
Continuing the 5 step process cycle by
discerning further information, making more
informed strategic decisions, experimenting and
testing to remove more ambiguity, assessing
progress and adapting the strategy as soon as
reasonable evidence is found provides a strong
feedback loop for dealing and thriving in
ambiguity whilst minimising the stress of your
team by celebrating the small wins, major
successes and/or major advances in knowledge
gained.
Discern
Decide
Strategy
Conduct
Experiments
Assess and
Adapt
Celebrate
Dividends
Discern
Decide
Strategy
Conduct
Experiments
Assess and
Adapt
Celebrate
Dividends

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
16
Conclusion
Tolerance for ambiguity changes through a career and is influenced by age,
seniority, education and gender. Understanding tolerance and its effect on leaders
and members of teams is key to delivering vision. Importantly, Senior Staff grades
were found to have high tolerance to ambiguity, a skill that organisations should
leverage in the boundaries of a strong decision framework process.
Utilising the five step process enables leaders to structure their approach to
ambiguous situations, providing tools to discern, decide, experiment, analyse/adapt
and celebrate with their team to maximise the chances of success. The aim is to
reduce the process cycle time to generate the fastest response to new knowledge,
allowing for clear changes of course, reducing uncertainty for team members.
Ultimately allowing leaders to not just deal with, but thrive in ambiguity, working in
this space effectively and seeing it as a competitive advantage.
Bibliography and References
Anthony, S., 2010. Grooming Leaders to Handle Ambiguity. [Online]
Available at: https://hbr.org/2010/07/grooming-leaders-to-handle-ambiguity
[Accessed 11 Apr 2016].
Arthur, W. & Bennett, W., 2006. THE INTERNATIONAL ASSIGNEE: THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF
FACTORS PERCEIVED TO CONTRIBUTE TO SUCCESS. Personnel Psychology, Dec, 48(1), pp. 99 - 114.
BAŞÖZ, T., 2015. Exploring the relationship between tolerance of ambiguity of EFL learners and their
vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 11(2), pp. 53-66.
Bennett, N. & Lemoine, J. G., 2014. What VUCA Really Means for You. Harvard Business Review,
Jan/Feb.
Bossaerts, P., 2010. Ambiguity and unexpected uncertainty. [Online]
Available at: http://people.hss.caltech.edu/~pbs/cns102b/Readings/Ambiguity.pdf
[Accessed 13 Jun 2016].
Bradberry, T., 2015. 11 Ways Successful People Overcome Uncertainty. [Online]
Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/travisbradberry/2015/12/21/11-ways-successful-people-
overcome-uncertainty/
[Accessed 10 06 2016].
Bradberry, T. & Greaves, J., 2009. Emotional Intelligence 2.0. s.l.:TalentSmart.
Budner, S. N. Y., 1962. Intolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable. Journal of Personality, Mar,
30(1), pp. 29-50.
Burkeman, O., 2013. The Antidote: Happiness for people who can't stand positive thinking. s.l.:Faber
& Faber.
Campbell, A. &. W. J., 2010. How to test your decision-making instincts. McKinsey Quarterly, May.

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
17
Charness, G., Karni, E. & Levin, D., 2013. Ambiguity attitudes and social interactions: An
experimental investigation. Springer Science+Business Media.
Cook, M., n.d. 3 Tips To Deal With Ambiguity. [Online]
Available at: http://www.witi.com/wire/articles/250/3-Tips-To-Deal-With-Ambiguity/
[Accessed 20 May 2016].
Deloitte, 2012. Turning strategic ambiguity into strategic clarity. CFO Insights, May.
Dimmock, S. G., Kouwenberg, R. & Wakker, P. P., 2015. Ambiguity Attitudes in a Large
Representative Sample. Management Science, Nov.pp. 1363-1380.
Escotet, M. A., 2012. “Today there is a need to educate for uncertainty" [Interview] (Winter 2012).
Fields, J., 2011. Uncertainty: Turning Fear and Doubt into Fuel for Brilliance. s.l.:Portfolio.
Fisher, S., 2011. Teaching Millennials: The Challenge of Ambiguity, s.l.: Trinity College Digital
Repository.
Furr, N. & Dyer, J. H., 2014. Leading your team into the unknown. Harvard Business Review, Dec.
Green, P., 2015. The arts give students the ability to cope with uncertainty. [Online]
Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationopinion/12024316/The-arts-give-
students-the-ability-to-cope-with-uncertainty.html
Herman, J. L. et al., 2010. The Tolerance for Ambiguity Scale: Towards a more reﬁned measure for
international management research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Volume 34, pp.
58-65.
Hurst, W., 2015. Training Zone. [Online]
Available at: http://www.trainingzone.co.uk/lead/strategy/how-to-manage-ambiguity-and-
uncertainty-the-role-of-executive-education
Jokinen, T., 2005. Global leadership competencies: a review and discussion. Journal of European
Industrial Training, 29(3), pp. 199 - 216.
Jump, P., 2013. PhD completion rates, 2013. [Online]
Available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/phd-completion-rates-
2013/2006040.article
[Accessed 21 June 2016].
Kahneman, D. & Klein, G., 2010. Strategic Decisions: When can you trust your gut? [Interview] (Mar
2010).
Kail, C. E. G., 2011. Leading Effectively in a VUCA Environment: A is for Ambiguity. [Online]
Available at: https://hbr.org/2011/01/leading-effectively-in-a-vuca-1
Likert, R., 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes.. Archives of Psychology, Volume 22,
pp. 5-55.

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
18
LinkedIn, 2016. LinkedIn. [Online]
Available at: www.linkedin.co.uk
[Accessed 13th May 2016].
McLain, D. L., 1993. The MSTAT-I: A new measure of an individual’s tolerance for ambiguity.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, Volume 53, pp. 183 - 189.
Peppers, D., 2012. 6 Strategies For Dealing With Uncertainty In Business. [Online]
Available at: http://www.fastcompany.com/1824457/6-strategies-dealing-uncertainty-business
Popova, M., 2013. The Perils of Plans: Why Creativity Requires Leaping into the Unknown. [Online]
Available at: https://www.brainpickings.org/2013/11/11/dani-shapiro-still-writing-2/
Ray, E. J., 2013. The Value of a Liberal Arts Education in Today’s Global Marketplace. [Online]
Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edward-j-ray/the-value-of-a-liberal-arts-
education_b_3647765.html
Schawbel, D., 2011. Turn Fear and Doubt Into Fuel for Brilliance. [Online]
Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danschawbel/2011/09/30/turn-fear-and-doubt-into-fuel-
for-brilliance/#1b6085334b52
Shaw, C., 2013. Dealing with ambiguity: The new business Imperative. [Online]
Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20130829124922-284615-dealing-with-ambiguity-
the-new-business-imperative
[Accessed 27 April 2016].
Stanley, A., 2003. The Uncertain Leader. Leadership Journal, Summer, 24(3).
Stiehm, J., 2010. The U.S. Army War College: Military Education in a Democracy. s.l.:Temple
University Press.
Strongman, L., 2011. 'What on earth?’: Understanding ambiguity toleration in business
communication. Prism, 8(1).
TargetJobs, n.d. Managing ambiguity: the essential skill for career progression. [Online]
Available at: https://targetjobs.co.uk/careers-advice/skills-and-competencies/324419-managing-
ambiguity-the-essential-skill-for-career-progression
Walker, J., 2015. Quartz. [Online]
Available at: http://qz.com/547641/theres-an-awful-cost-to-getting-a-phd-that-no-one-talks-about/
Wilcox, C., 2014. Lighting the dark. New Scientist, 11 Oct, Volume 2990.
Williams, B. P., 2013. Church: You can't always be certain but you'd better be clear. London: HTB
Leadership Conference.
Zwick, R. & Rapoport, A., 2010. Experimental Business Research. s.l.:Springer.

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
19
Appendix A: Survey Details

Personal research was undertaken for this
paper through an Online survey using
Google Forms. The survey had 124
respondents at the time of publishing.
The main assessment for tolerance of
ambiguity (TA) was carried out using 21
questions based on original research
carried out by Budner (Budner, 1962). 12
were used as the basis for majority of the
analysis, based on the refined set of
questions from (Herman, et al., 2010) and
responses were collected using a Likert
scale (Likert, 1932) ranging from Strongly
Agree to Strong Disagree.
Further qualitative questions were asked and profiles collected of each of the
respondents. The full set of questions is shown below and the full data is available
on request if required for further research.
Tolerance of Ambiguity Assessment:
1. An expert who doesn't come up with a definite answer probably doesn't know too
much.
2. I would like to live in a foreign country for a while
3. There is really no such thing as a problem that can't be solved
4. People who fit their lives into a schedule probably miss most of the joy of living
5. A good job is one where it is always clear what is to be done and how it is to be
done
6. It is more fun to tackle a complicated problem than to solve a simple one
7. In the long run, it is possible to get more done by tackling small, simple problems
rather than large, complicated ones
8. Often the most interesting and stimulating people are those who don't mind being
different and original
9. What we are used to is always preferable to what is unfamiliar
10.People who insist on a yes or no answer just don't know how complicated things
really are
11.A person who leads an even, regular life in which few surprises or unexpected
happenings arise really has a lot to be grateful for
12.Many of our most important decisions are based on insufficient information
13.I like parties where I know most of the people more than ones where all or most
of the people are complete strangers

David Adkins, 27th
June 2016
20
14.Teachers or supervisors who hand out vague assignments give one a chance to
show initiative and originality
15.The sooner everyone acquires similar values and ideals, the better
16.A good teacher is one who makes you wonder about your way of looking at
things
17.I avoid settings where people don’t share my values
18.I can enjoy being with people whose values are very different from mine
19.I like to surround myself with things that are familiar to me
20.I can be comfortable with nearly all kinds of people
21.If given a choice, I will usually visit a foreign country rather than holiday at home
Profile Questions:
22.Gender
23.Age
24.Role (Short description)
25.Work Sector
26.Highest Education Level
27.Employment Status
28.Employment Level (previous highest level if retired/ out of work)
29.Do you make better decisions alone or as a group?
Qualitative Answer Section:
30.How do you make decisions when you don't have all the facts?
31.How do you overcome ambiguity? (Not knowing all the information or where the
path to take is unclear etc)

ILM - Ambiguity

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (7)

Similar to ILM - Ambiguity

Similar to ILM - Ambiguity (20)

ILM - Ambiguity