2. - Purpose: Chris intends to know whether or not she sells the
Delta division to Etmex.
- Scope: the boundary for the situation is primarily the Delta
division.
- Perspective: the context of the decision is comprised of Chris
as CEO, Steve as CFO, the key people from the Delta division, and
the board.
- General note: Chris’s frame is flawed with emotional bias
(attachment to Delta), comfort zone stigmata (satisfied with the
current situation and not really considering this proposal), as well
as a too instinctive and borderline individualistic approach (her
first thought-out decision is the one she wants to defend to the
board, without properly studying the alternative and
acknowledging other stakeholder views).

3. From the perspective of a board member overhearing the conversation between Chris and Steve,
he/she wouldn’t view Chris’ current recommendations favorably in regard to the six elements of
DQ.
- Appropriate Frame: 50%
Rather clear purpose (whether or not selling Delta division of Zyrtex), but flawed scope and
perspective, Chris is too centered on Delta and not on the impact on Gamma, Etmex proposal, and
she isn’t taking into account others’ insight.
- Creative, Doable Alternatives: 30%
Chris is more or less dismissing the Delta division purchase alternative from the start, and isn’t
generating other “middle ground” options between this, and keeping Delta: splitting of the Delta
division in fewer entities from which one could be sold; the planned consolidation of ZyrTex
activities in the months/year to come to sell Delta once the Gamma division and the overall core
assets of the company are secure, etc.
- Meaningful, Reliable Information 30%
The usefulness of the information available is limited as a result of its vagueness. We don’t know
how much Etmex want to buy Delta, we don’t know what kind of relationships (partnership?
licensing? etc.) may link the newly independent Delta as a company, and Zyrtex (then constituted
of Gamma), and other important points.

4. - Clear Values and Tradeoffs: 50%
Rather clear values and tradeoffs for the overall discussion between Chris and Steve, but lackluster if
we focus on what Chris is saying. The alternative “sell Delta for increased cash flow for Zyrtex +
greater pay-off and short-time satisfaction of the shareholders + possible re-focus on a more
narrowed business through Gamma and its innovative/new market approach” is expressed by Steve,
not her. The other alternative “keep Delta as a reliable source of income in addition to an already
healthy financial situation, which will preserve key human resource that proved efficient in this
division and help in the mid to long term for Gamma development” is representing her comfort zone
and she nearly already made up her mind in favor of it. She is failing to contemplate the stakeholder
view, and even suspect that it’s competitive intelligence rather than an opportunity.
- Logically Correct Reasoning: 30%
Chris seems to rely heavily on instinct and emotional bias, such as her attachment to Delta, the fact
that she started there, that she promoted Cindy as division head just recently, and that she “likes the
management over there”. A shareholder overhearing this could say “that’s good for her, but what
about us and the performance of the company overall?”. Key considerations such as the value and
implications of this hypothetic selling of Delta, or its ties to Zyrtex once it’s done aren’t addressed.
- Commitment to Action: 30%
Chris adopts a passive stance, she will « try to convince to pass on this » potential acquisition, rather
than either being committed to sell Delta, or strategically further reinforce its place amongst Zyrtex
for potentially more advantageous acquisitions later. Moreover, she isn’t engaging the other
stakeholders (board, members of Delta, key people from Etmex) behind her decision process.

5. - Refine the decision frame, by at least considering the Delta division purchase
alternative rather than being dismissive about it.
- Brainstorm new doable alternatives other than those proposed. It can be “sell Delta
now”, “keep Delta”, or “keep it for now with the aim to sell it later”. Each alternative must
be analyzed, with forecasts, simulations, etc.
- Gather more information (from the board member in question here, from Etmex, but
also from analysts/competitive intelligence, as well as Delta heads), to better grasp the
implications of selling this division or not.
- In conjunction with the collection of more precise information, re-draw the values and
tradeoffs, to gain a greater understanding of Zyrtex benefits and risks of selling
Delta, keeping it indefinitely, or planning to sell it in the mid to long term.
- Correct the reasoning, be less attached to emotional considerations, and rely more on
concrete metrics of the company performance, especially forecasts (NPV, ROI, etc.) of
the relevance to sell Delta or not
- Re-motivate the stakeholder to not have a passive stance, but a proactive one. She has
to take her decision based on a serious evaluation of these alternatives now improved by
the DQ process. She also has to engage her staff in the decision and commitment to
action stage.