THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO PROBLEM SOLVING AND DECISION MAKING Most people make decisions too quickly and fail

to systematically examine the problem or its alternatives for solution. Instead, most individuals rely on discrete, often unconscious process known as heuristics. Heuristics involve being able to recognize patterns and then being able to more rapidly solve a problem or come to a conclusion. Thus, it is a way of thinking and solving problems, quickly, efficiently, and maximizing what is already known. Heuristics also frequently refer to using a trial and error or rules of thumb approach to problem solving. Facione (2006) recognizes the value of heuristics in decision making but warns that heuristics are only shortcuts, not fail-safe rules, and that relying on heuristics may work most of the time but will not be all of the time. Formal process and structure can benefit the decision-making process, as they force decision makers to be specific about options and to separate probabilities from values. A structured approach to problem solving and decision making increases critical reasoning and is the best way to learn how to make quality decisions because it eliminates trial and error and focuses learning on a proven process. A structured or professional approach involves applying a theoretical model in problem solving and decision making. To improve decision-making ability, it is important to use an adequate process model as the theoretical base for understanding and applying critical-thinking skills. Many acceptable problem-solving models exists, and most include a decision-making step; only four are reviewed here: TRADITIONAL PROBLEM-SOLVING PROCESS One of the most well-known and widely used problem-solving models is the traditional problem-solving model. The seven steps follow. (Decision-making occurs at step 5.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Identify the problem. Gather data to analyze the causes and consequences of the problem. Explore alternative solutions. Evaluate the alternatives. Select the appropriate solution. Implement the solution. Evaluate the results.

Although the traditional problem solving process is an effective model, its weakness lies in the amount of time needed for proper implementation. This process, therefore, is less effective when time constraints are a consideration. Another weakness is lack of an initial objectivesetting step. Setting a decision goal helps to prevent the decision maker from becoming sidetracked.

MANAGERIAL DECISION-MAKING MODELS To address the weakness of the traditional problem-solving process, many contemporary models for management decision making have added an objective-setting step. These models are known as managerial decision-making models. One such model suggested by Sorach (2000) includes the following steps: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Determine the importance and the context of the decision. Determine the objectives for the decision. List all options. Explore promising options. Establish decision-making criteria. Evaluate the options against the criteria. Select the options to pursue. Analyze the risks.

In the first step, problem solvers must consider the possible consequences of the decision, the time period included, and who needs to be involved in the decision process. More important decisions require more careful consideration of context. Primary and secondary goals are outlined in the second step as well as desirable and undesirable outcomes. In step 3, problem solvers must attempt to identify as many alternatives as possible. Alternatives are then analyzed in step 4 often using some type of SWOT (strength, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis. In step 5, objectives are rank ordered or quantified so that problem solvers are clear regarding which criteria will be weighted most heavily in making their decision. Step 6 then encourages decision makers to apply quantitative decision-making tools, such as decisionmaking grids or payoff table, to objectively review the desirability of alternatives. In step 7, desirable alternatives or combinations of alternatives are selected for implementation. In the final step, challenges to successful implementation of chosen alternatives are identified and strategies are developed to manage these risks.

NURSING PROCESS The nursing process, developed by Ida Jean Orlando in the late 1950s, provides another theoretical system for solving problems and making decisions. Originally a four-step model (assessment, planning, intervention, evaluation), diagnosis was declined as a separate step, and most contemporary depictions of this model now include at least five steps. Although the process was designed for nursing practice with regard to patient care and nursing accountability, it ca easily be adapted as a theoretical model for solving leadership and management problems. Table 1.1 shows how closely the nursing process parallels the decisionmaking process.

Table 1.1 Comparing the Decision-making process with the Nursing process DECISION-MAKING PROCESS Identify the decision Collect data Identify criteria for decision Identify alternatives Choose alternatives Implement alternatives Evaluate steps in decision SIMPLIFIED NURSING PROCESS Assess Plan Implement Evaluate

The weakness of the nursing process, like the traditional problem-solving model, is in not requiring clearly stated objectives. Goals should be clearly stated in the planning phase of the process, but this step is frequently omitted or observed. However, because nurses are familiar with this process and its proven effectiveness, it continues to be recommended as an adapted theoretical process for leadership and managerial decision-making.

THE IDEALS MODEL A more contemporary model for effective thinking and problem-solving, the IDEALS Model was developed by Facione (2006) and includes six steps for effective thinking and problem-solving. While similar to the models already presented, the mnemonic IDEALS makes this model easy to remember and use: Identify the problem. Whats the real question were facing here? Define the context. What are the facts and circumstances that frame this problem? Enumerate choices. What are our most plausible three or four options? Analyze options. What is our best course of action, all things considered? List reasons explicitly. Lets be clear: Why are we thinking this particular choice? Self-correct. Okay. Lets look at it again. What did we miss? Many other excellent problem analysis and decision models exist. The model selected should be one with which the decision maker is familiar and one appropriate for the problem to be solved. Using models or processes consistently will increase the likelihood that critical analysis will occur. Moreover, the quality of management or leadership problem solving and decision making will improve tremendously via a scientific approach.

INTUITIVE DECISION-MAKING MODEL There are theorists who suggest that intuition should always be used as an adjunct to empirical or rational decision-making models. Andrews (2006) suggest that one of the critical skills separating good leaders from great leaders is the conscious use of intuition in daily decision-making. Great leaders actively call on their intuition to enhance decision making, whereas less effective leader tend to rely too heavily on traditional approaches. Leaders in the field of intuitive decision-making research include Gary Klein. Dr. Klein and his colleagues developed the Recognition-Primed Decision (RPD) model for intuitive decision making in the mid-1980s to explain how people can make effective decisions under time pressure and uncertainty. Considered a part of naturalistic decision making, the RPD model attempts to understand how humans make relatively quick decisions in complex, real-world settings such as fire fighting or critical care nursing without having to compare options (Klein, 2004). Klein work suggests that instead of using classical rational or systemic decision-making processes, many individuals act on their first impulse if the imagined future look acceptable. If this turns out not to be the case, another idea or concept is allowed to emerge from their subconscious and is examined for probable successful implementation. Thus, the RPD model blends intuition and analysis, but pattern recognition and experience guide decision makers when time is limited or systematic rational decision making is not possible.