This document provides an overview of a presentation on systems thinking and complexity as applied to policing. It discusses how policing deals with "wicked problems" and complexity on a daily basis. It encourages shifting from a problem-solution mindset to understanding the system as a whole before determining solutions. The document presents various concepts including systems thinking, bias, heuristics, limits, and case studies to illustrate how visualizing systems and understanding all influencing factors can provide a richer perspective for determining effective strategies and solutions. The key messages are to seek diverse perspectives, think critically, be aware of biases, and welcome exploring problems as complex systems rather than isolated issues.
34. Address:
915 SW Rimrock Way;
Ste 201-403
Redmond, OR 97756
Contact Number:
(+01) 503.707.5107
Email Address:
johnblack@aragonnational.com
ThankYou
39
āIn the emerging paradigmā¦something new is
happeningā¦
in place of individual efforts, the problem-solving process
is now clearly social; in place of basing decisions on
(just) facts, we base them on stories that give us a more
coherent sense of meaning.
In place of finding the āright answerā, we seek to gain a
shared understanding of possible solutions (Christensen,
2009).ā
35. References Used or Consulted
Aveni, T. J. (2008). A Critical Analysis of Police Shootings Under Ambiguous
Circumstances The MMRMA Deadly Force Project (pp. 44). Spofford, NH: The
Police Policy Studies Council.
Azar, O. H. (2014). The default heuristic in strategic decision making: When is it
optimal to choose the default without investing in information search? Journal of
Business Research, 67(8), 1744-1748.
Barabasi, A.-L. (2014). Linked : how everything is connected to everything else and
what it means for business, science, and everyday life. New York City, NY:
Basic Books.
Benson, B. (2016, 2019-04-23). Cognitive bias cheat sheet. Retrieved June 09, 2017,
from https://medium.com/better-humans/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-
55a472476b18
Berger, W. (2014). A more beautiful question : the power of inquiry to spark
breakthrough ideas. New York, NY: Bloomsbury USA.
Black, J. (2018). The relationship between data visualization and insight: An
examination through the lens of critical thinking. (Doctoral dissertation), Capella
University, Minneapolis, MN. Available from ProQuest Dissertation & Theses
Global
Black, J. R. (2016). Suicidal/Barricade Response Considerations. Graphic Aid. WCSO.
Washington County Sheriff's Office. Oregon, USA.
Bryant, D. J. (2006). Rethinking OODA: toward a modern cognitive framework of
command decision making... Observe-Orient-Decide-Act. Military Psychology,
18(3), 183-206.
Camillus, J. C. (2011). Strategy as a wicked problem. HARVARD BUSINESS
REVIEW, 86(5), 98-+.
Christensen, K. (2009). Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. Rotman,
17-20.
De Fiore, A. (2014). The Insight-Driven Organization. Rotman Management(Fall 2014).
De Martino, B. (2006). Frames, Biases, and Rational Decision-Making in the Human
Brain. Science, 313(5787), 684-687. doi: 10.1126/science.1128356
40
Eppler, M. J. & Andreas Pfister, R. (2014). Best of both worlds: hybrid knowledge
visualization in police crime fighting and military operations. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 18(4), 824-840. doi: 10.1108/JKM-11-2013-0462
Fiedler, K. (2010). How to study cognitive decision algorithms: The case of the priority
heuristic. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(1), 21-32.
Fridell, L. A. (2017). Producing Bias-Free Policing; A Science-Based Approach.
Tampa, FL: Springer.
Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic Decision Making. Annual Review of
Psychology, 62(1), 451-482. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346
Gordon Cone, J. (2019). Cultivating and unstuck mind: Four steps to new insights.
Rotman Management(Fall 2019), 81-85.
Gregory, R. W., & Muntermann, J. (2014). Heuristic Theorizing: Proactively Generating
Design Theories. Information Systems Research, 25(3), 639.
Hilbig, B. E. (2008). One-reason decision making in risky choice? A closer look at the
priority heuristic. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(6), 457-462.
Holt, R., & Cornelissen, J. (2014). Sensemaking revisited. Management Learning,
45(5), 525-539. doi: 10.1177/1350507613486422
Johnson, D. D. P., Blumstein, D. T., Fowler, J. H., & Haselton, M. G. (2013). The
evolution of error: error management, cognitive constraints, and adaptive
decision-making biases. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28(8), 474-481. doi:
10.1016/j.tree.2013.05.014
Klein, G. (1997). Developing Expertise in Decision Making. Thinking & Reasoning,
3(4), 337-352. doi: 10.1080/135467897394329
Klein, G. A. (2013). Seeing what others don't : the remarkable ways we gain insights
(First edition. ed.). New York: PublicAffairs.
Kudesia, R. S. (2017). Organizational Sensemaking Oxford Research Encyclopedia of
Psychology. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/36443274/Organizational_Sensemaking. doi:
10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.78
36. References Used or Consulted
Lejarraga, T., & Hertwig, R. (2017). How the threat of losses makes people explore
more than the promise of gains. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(3), 708-
720. doi: 10.3758/sl 3423-016-1158-7
Lima, M. (2011). Visual complexity : mapping patterns of information. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press.
Lima, M. (2015). Manuel Lima: A visual history of human knowledge. Retrieved
March, 2015, from
https://www.ted.com/talks/manuel_lima_a_visual_history_of_human_knowle
dge#t-371736
Martin Garcia, J. (2019). Feedbacks; From Causal Loop Diagrams to System
Thinking Methodology (pp. 92).
Meadows, D. H., & Wright, D. (2008). Thinking in systems : a primer. White River
Junction, Vt.: Chelsea Green Pub.
Moore, T. (2011). Critical thinking: seven definitions in search of a concept. Studies
in Higher Education, 38(4), 1-17. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2011.586995
Mousavi, S., & Gigerenzer, G. (2014). Risk, uncertainty, and heuristics. Journal of
Business Research, 67(8), 1671-1678.
Ockie, B., Nam, N., & Daowei, S. (2013). Addressing the Critical Need for āNew
Ways of Thinkingā in Managing Complex Issues in a Socially Responsible
Way. Business Systems Review, 2(2), 48-70. doi: 10.7350/BSR.V05.2013
Orquin, J. L., Perkovic, S., & Grunert, K. G. (2018). Visual Biases in Decision
Making. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 40(4), 523-537.
Oosthuizen, R., & Pretorius, L. (2016). Assessing the impact of new technology on
complex sociotechnical systems. South African Journal of Industrial
Engineering, 27(2). doi: 10.7166/27-2-1144
Palmberg, K. (2009). Complex adaptive systems as metaphors for organizational
management. The Learning Organization, 16(6), 483-498. doi:
10.1108/09696470910993954
Police Executive Research Forum. (2019). ICAT Module 2. Retrieved September
12, 2019, from https://www.policeforum.org/icat-module-2
41
Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.
Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169.
Ross, K. G., Klein, G. A., Thunholm, P., Schmitt, J. F., & Baxter, H. C. (2004).
The Recognition-Primed Decision Model. Miltary Review(July-August), 5.
Sacha, D., Stoffel, A., Stoffel, F., Kwon, B. C., Ellis, G., & Keim, D. A. (2014).
Knowledge Generation Model for Visual Analytics. IEEE Transactions on
Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20(12), 1604-1613. doi:
10.1109/TVCG.2014.2346481
Skarzauskiene, A. (2010). Managing complexity: systems thinking as a catalyst
of the organization performance. Measuring Business Excellence, 14(4),
49-64. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13683041011093758
Soll, J., Milkman, K., & Payne, J. (2013). A User's Guide to Debiasing.
Strough, J., Karns, T. E., & Schlosnagle, L. (2011). Decision-making heuristics
and biases across the life span. Annals of the New York Academy of
Sciences, 1235(1), 57-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06208.x
The Systems Thinker. (2011, 2015-11-11). Systems Archetypes at a Glance -
The Systems Thinker. Retrieved March 3, 2018, from
https://thesystemsthinker.com/systems-archetypes-at-a-glance/
Waddell, S. (2016). Societal Change Systems: A Framework to Address Wicked
Problems. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 52(4), 422-449.
doi: 10.1177/0021886316666374
Weisberg, R. W. (2015). Toward an integrated theory of insight in problem
solving. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(1), 5-39. doi:
10.1080/13546783.2014.886625
Editor's Notes
Intro;
Thank you, I know what is like and for those in the field, you have my thanks, appreciation and ongoing support.
I can appreciate it because I spent 23 yrs. in LE and also 30 years in the military (unconventional warfare/special operations), often living in both worlds at the same time. Went up the ranks in both arenas, became an expert witnessā¦and kept seeing the same thingā¦
What I saw was a world of its interconnections and the ripple effects of actions/consequencesā¦
That understanding a situation is often more important then how we act on itā¦
And that we often underestimate the effects and influence of the connections and intertwined effects in a problem we are dealing with, the ripples..
So, I went back to school and got my doctorate, focusing on research in how insight (understanding) shifts to decision making, and how we might become better at this thing called insightļ decision. What I found was that a systems approach is needed for many of the problems you are dealing withā¦
Some housekeeping,
this will go quick-I am available to discuss any/all
Some slides will be slightly differentāthis was to allow for a better presentation. 95% are the same, the concept and ideas are still there.
3MIN
Our current and past thinking is primarily from a linear perspective and dealt with what was, referred to as tame problems. Yet, today we are more interconnected than ever and we live in an ecosystem of systems within systems. Because of this our thinking must change and evolve.
I served 30 years in the military, all of which was with in the special operations community, and was continuously involved in different cultures, the interrelationships of decisions as well as how one moves from tactical to strategic thought. I was a senior instructor the military as well as taught leadership in these areas. Additionally, and law enforcement are started in patrol, and evolve my way through training, operations, made in executive management, corrections, as well as currently am a recognized expert witness in both federal and state courts on police practices, officer involved shootings, and training.
Yet throughout all of these experiences, Iāve come to recognize that the way humans make decisions, is that we are more like than we are different and we must evolve our thought processes and framing in order to adapt future changes.
Take a moment to think about the effect of an incident in a limited geographical area now as compared to 20 years agoā¦ Everything affects and is connected to everything else. We are a world of complexity, connections and are better represented visually by the idea of a web that we are of the old hierarchal or linear view of the world. As shown by Lima, we are now a web of belief and knowledge as compared to hierarchal tree of knowledge and constantly forming new connections and finding the similarity in patterns versus the older model of step down in linear connections.
The human systems, the sociological aspects, now present us with problems that are managed but not solved. We prescribed treatments, similar to medicine, to the problem and observe the effects and then modify the treatment/solutionā¦ if this is the evolution should not the idea of understanding become the primary focus and similar to medicine the idea of first do no harm versus a constant focus on the one solution.
For those martial artists in the audience, a similar analogy would be the choice between trying to achieve the best possible position knowing ultimately that it will result in an advantage and a potential win on the mat as compared to simply looking for the finishing moveā¦ often a strategy that results in a loss.
If all things are interconnected, and if you push on one and it ripples out throughout the system, the search for a single thing to fix to cure the ills of the system will most likely fail. Yet, it is not uncommon for management to seek the single reductionist item to solve in the illusion of fixing the problems within the system. Policing is never ending, under resourced, time pressured, and rewards the immediate and tactical thinker while often punishing the strategic thinker/critical thinker. Yet system problems require understanding first (which means slowing down, taking additional time, and critically and brutally examining ones own leanings) prior to the decision whenever possible.
Ultimately, a systems approach is a question of focusā¦. If the getting to the solution (the ends) is first as the goal (Solution-centric, hierarchal, linear, end state, explore only to the minimum needed), then only the min understanding necessary. Creates..
Defensiveness vs shared ownership *caution collaboration is not consensus
This can causes another set of problems because the understanding aspect or exploration aspect is then over/door shut and instead the focus rapidly shifts into solutions. This mindset can cause defensiveness.
Exploration & Learning VS Elimination/Solve/Move on
Additionally, once decision-makers think they have understood the problem they often shift into the problem-solving, too soon and it limits the possibilities for understanding and solutions.
STAY and SWIM in the problem understanding space a little longerā¦
Ultimately, the goal is to give you an alternative perspectiveā¦ A different way of looking at things, and the permission to not be immediate in your solution. Research has shown (Doerner) that when a human imposes their solution on a complex system they have it best of 50/50 chance of making it better. Our goal should be to build the mindset and team that is ready to solve the next problem knowing that today solution will always evolve into the next problem. This is not a 1/0 ultimatumā¦
The construction of a model is a long and costly process. It canāt be justified if there are other more simple ways of obtaining the same results. There are essentially two other ways - statistics and intuition. ā
Intuition has got you where you are today, so donāt underestimate it. For many problems, intuition provides the right answers, drawing on our experience and knowledge. Intuition is cheap and fast. Keep using it as often as possible.
MartĆn GarcĆa PhD, Juan. System Dynamics Fast Guide: A basic tutorial with examples for modeling, analysis and simulate the complexity of business and environmental systems. (System Thinking Book 2019) (Page 17). INNOVA BOOKS. Kindle Edition.
Think of a swimming pool, pipes and valves, inflows out flows, what is effecting the rate of flow (external) what can we do about it (adjust valves, pipe sizes, build a new pipe, circumvent the pipes, how do we know (feedback loops, gauges, etc.) are feedback lops accurate, do they measure reality, is there an unseen loop or one we donāt want to see/admitā¦
EBO handbook, 2006 (Give a real example from COP world next
A systems thinking or approach is now accepted practice in such fields as management/decision-making, medicine, and engineering. It is also found in the after action reviews or āmurder boardsā in the same industries.
It is interconnected, therefore it often cannot be reduced to a single cause but instead a series of interrelated causes and effects that constantly interact with each other. Interconnected systems, especially social systems such as criminal justice, mental health, or things that involve people naturally have weird, and unanticipated things occur within themā¦ This is the idea of emergence and part of complexity theory.
As a solution is applied against the system, the system adaptsā¦ Think of the human body and modifying medications over time, or how criminal tactics react to police interventionā¦ In short the system is always dynamic and the problem is always changing therefore one must always monitor their last perspective the problem as well as ask the question what is my current perspective of the situation of today's problem.
EBO handbook, 2006 (Give a real example from COP world next
A systems thinking or approach is now accepted practice in such fields as management/decision-making, medicine, and engineering. It is also found in the after action reviews or āmurder boardsā in the same industries.
It is interconnected, therefore it often cannot be reduced to a single cause but instead a series of interrelated causes and effects that constantly interact with each other. Interconnected systems, especially social systems such as criminal justice, mental health, or things that involve people naturally have weird, and unanticipated things occur within themā¦ This is the idea of emergence and part of complexity theory.
As a solution is applied against the system, the system adaptsā¦ Think of the human body and modifying medications over time, or how criminal tactics react to police interventionā¦ In short the system is always dynamic and the problem is always changing therefore one must always monitor their last perspective the problem as well as ask the question what is my current perspective of the situation of today's problem.
1 There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem. Itās not possible to write a well-defined statement of the problem, as can be done with an ordinary problem.
2 Wicked problems have no stopping rule. You can tell when cornucopia youāve reached a solution with an ordinary problem. With a wicked problem, the search for solutions never stops.
3 Solutions to wicked problems are not true or false, but good or bad. Ordinary problems have solutions that can be objectively evaluated as right or wrong. Choosing a solution to a wicked problem is largely a matter of judgment.
4 There is no immediate and no ultimate test of a solution to a wicked problem. Itās possible to determine right away if a solution to an ordinary problem is working. But solutions to wicked problems generate unexpected consequences over time, making it difficult to measure their effectiveness.
5 Every solution to a wicked problem is a āone-shotā operation; because there is no opportunity to learn by trial and error, every attempt counts significantly. Solutions to ordinary problems can be easily tried and abandoned. With wicked problems, every implemented solution has consequences that cannot be undone.
6 Wicked problems do not have an exhaustively describable set of potential solutions, nor is there a well-described set of permissible operations that may be incorporated into the plan. Ordinary problems come with a limited set of potential solutions, by contrast.
7 Every wicked problem is essentially unique. An ordinary problem belongs to a class of similar problems that are all solved in the same way. A wicked problem is substantially without precedent; experience does not help you address it.
8 Every wicked problem can be considered to be a symptom of another problem. While an ordinary problem is self-contained, a wicked problem is entwined with other problems. However, those problems donāt have one root cause.
9 The existence of a discrepancy representing a wicked problem can be explained in numerous ways. A wicked problem involves many stakeholders, who all will have different ideas about what the problem really is and what its causes are.
10 The planner has no right to be wrong. Problem solvers dealing with a wicked issue are held liable for the consequences of any actions they take, because those actions will have such a large impact and are hard to justify.
Heuristics/Biases are often made/created from:
Experience ā reality (and often has the bias of hindsight or anchoring)
May be created from another story (culture of the workplace, urban legend, poor training, etc. and also not a true picture of reality
Locked in time ā and yet things may have changed ( subject to the concept of fossilization)
Biases can be managed by awareness, elimination of bias is unrealistic and not necessarily desirableā¦
Heuristics/Biases are often made/created from:
Experience ā reality (and often has the bias of hindsight or anchoring)
May be created from another story (culture of the workplace, urban legend, poor training, etc. and also not a true picture of reality
Locked in time ā and yet things may have changed ( subject to the concept of fossilization)
Example is the concept of controlā¦can we control/influence without the need for domination? Do we need to evolve what we mean by control?
Heuristics/Biases are often made/created from:
Experience ā reality (and often has the bias of hindsight or anchoring)
May be created from another story (culture of the workplace, urban legend, poor training, etc. and also not a true picture of reality
Locked in time ā and yet things may have changed ( subject to the concept of fossilization)
Social = BHL will be present
Action bias:Ā when faced with ambiguity (creative fuzzy-front-end) favoring doing something or anything without any prior analysis even if it is counterproductive: āI have to do something, even if I donāt know what to doā. Team members can feel that they need to take action regardless of whether it is a good idea or not. This can be an issue when under time pressure in strictĀ design sprint workshopsĀ for example.
Actor Observer Bias The way we perceive others and how we attribute their actions hinges on a variety of variables, but it can be heavily influenced by whether we are the actor or the observer in a situation. When it comes to our own actions, we are often far too likely to attribute things to external influences. You might complain that you botched an important meeting because you had jet lag or that you failed an exam because the teacher posed too many trick questions. When it comes to explaining other peopleās actions, however, we are far more likely to attribute their behaviors to internal causes.
Ā
Ambiguity bias:Ā favoring options where the outcome is more knowable over those which it is not. This bias has dire impacts innovation outcomes because the process is fundamentally risky and unknown process.
Anchoring Bias We also tend to be overly influenced by the first piece of information that we hear, a phenomenon referred to as the anchoring bias or anchoring effect.
Ā
Authority bias:Ā favoring authority figure opinions ideas within innovation teams. This means that innovative ideas coming from senior team members trump or better all others, even if other concepts, ideas, and inputs could be more creative and relevant to problem-solving.
Ā
Availability Heuristic After seeing several news reports of car thefts in your neighborhood, you might start to believe that such crimes are more common than they are. This tendency to estimate the probability of something happening based on how many examples readily come to mind is known as the availability heuristic.
Ā
Baader-MeinhofĀ Phenomenon is the phenomenon where something you recently learned suddenly appears 'everywhere'. Also called FrequencyĀ BiasĀ (or Illusion), theĀ Baader-MeinhofĀ Phenomenon is the seeming appearance of a newly-learned (or paid attention to) concept in unexpected places. Confirmation BiasĀ The confirmation bias is based on finding that people tend to listen more often to information that confirms the beliefs they already have. Through this bias, people tend to favor information that confirms their previously held beliefs.
Conformity bias:Ā choices of mass populations influence how we think, even if against independent personal judgments. This can result in poor decision making and lead to groupthink which is particularly detrimental to creativity as outside opinions can become suppressed leading to self-censorship and loss of independent thought.
Ā
The Dunning-Kruger Effect: This is when people believe that they are smarter and more capable than they really are when they can't recognize their own incompetence.
Ā
False-Consensus Effect People also have a surprising tendency to overestimate how much other people agree with their own beliefs, behaviors, attitudes, and values, an inclination known as the false consensus effect. This can lead people not only to incorrectly think that everyone else agrees with themāit can sometimes lead them to overvalue their own opinions.
Ā
Framing bias:Ā being influenced by the way in which information is presented rather than the information itself. People will avoid risk if presented well and seek risk if presented poorly meaning that decision making logic can easily be skewed.
Halo Effect Researchers have found that students tend to rate good-looking teachers as smarter, kinder, and funnier than less attractive instructors. This tendency for our initial impression of a person to influence what we think of them overall is known as the halo effect.
Ā
Hindsight Bias The hindsight bias is a common cognitive bias that involved the tendency of people to see events, even random ones, as more predictable than they are.
Ā
Loss-aversion bias:Ā once a decision has been made, sticking to it rather than taking risks due to the fear of losing what you gained in starting something and wishing to see it finished. We also attach more value to something once we have made an emotional investment in it. A consequence of effort, time and energy put into creative thinking, team members can become biased and become emotionally attached to their outcomes. To remedy this, the 11th commandment: āthou shalt not fall in love with thy solutionsā.
Misinformation Effect Our memories of particular events also tend to be heavily influenced by things that happened after the actual event itself, a phenomenon known as the misinformation effect. A person who witnesses a car accident or crime might believe that their recollection is crystal clear, but researchers have found that memory is surprisingly susceptible to even very subtle influences.
Ā
Optimism Bias Another cognitive bias that has its roots in the availability heuristic is known as the optimism bias. Essentially, we tend to be too optimistic for our own good. We overestimate the likelihood that good things will happen to us while underestimating the probability that negative events will impact our lives.
Ā
Self-Serving Bias Another tricky cognitive bias that distorts your thinking is known as the self-serving bias. Basically, people tend to give themselves credit for successes but lay the blame for failures on outside causes.
Ā
Loss-aversion bias:Ā once a decision has been made, sticking to it rather than taking risks due to the fear of losing what you gained in starting something and wishing to see it finished. We also attach more value to something once we have made an emotional investment in it. A consequence of effort, time and anybody that moved energy, put into creative thinking, team members can become biased and become emotionally attached to their outcomes. To remedy this, the 11th commandment: āthou shalt not fall in love with thy solutionsā.
Approach 1 = looking inwards; awareness
Approach 2 = Expand the context; change the frame = expand ones awareness
Bullet twoā¦from the Bias class on Mondayā¦
Procedure/Process
(+) A linear process is a proven way to move from point A to point B and get things doneā¦ In short it offers a blueprint.
(-) Linear processes tend to close one aspect and then move to the next; not designed to evolve an understanding but instead focus on getting to the end of the process.
(+/-) Adherence to a process can help to ensure objectivity and completeness. Conversely, adherence to a process may inaccurately address the inherent uniqueness of each situation.
People
Management has a blueprint to accomplish a task which helps to ensure the task is completed to a standard. Conversely, management can easily become more focused on adherence to the blueprint and deadlines then understanding and creating insight.
Line officers may simply become part of the process, implying that the process is more important than the people involved or the actual event attempting to be understood and investigated.
The media has a blueprint which is often beneficial when it comes to āfeeding the beastā. Conversely, the media may attempt to shoehorn in each and every event, even if the blueprint does not fit.
The public and the community have a standard/procedure that may evolve into an expectation.
Yet, loss of confidence, especially from the public, is often facilitated by a lack of understanding.
Suggested, is that taking additional time in gaining insight and then communicating it, as compared to executing the linear blueprint, might result in greater empathy from both sides.
Relate all the above statements to an officer involved shooting, police culture, and the investigation of the officer involved shooting.
Link and go to Vensim
Often the worst thing you can do with a difficult question is to try to answer it too quickly. When the mind is coming up with What If possibilities, these fresh, new ideas can take time to percolate and form. They often result from connecting existing ideas in unusual and interesting ways. Einstein was an early believer in this form of ācombinatorial thinkingā; today it is widely accepted as one of the primary sources of creativity. Since this type of thinking involves both connections and questions,
Go to ScB aid
Add Joubert, donāt take away the idea that ā¦
debating a question being better than not in many instances ā but not all.Ā Ā There are many questions that come up in everyday management that are not mission critical and the consequences of a wrong decision are not serious.Ā In those cases, a quick decision is useful and appropriate so that the mission can be carried out.Ā Everyone has limited time and resources, and it is important to recognize that not everything is a wicked problem deserving of this level of analysis.Ā Sometimes you just have to make a snap decision about whether to have the chicken or shredded beef ā in either case lunch is unlikely to be a catastrophe.