A couple of questions regarding the excellent recipe offered by Mike
Ayers ---
Is it okay for #3 to identify the unacceptable symptom (which may be other
than performance)?
Is it likely that the Why round will be followed by the 'How to suppress or
mitigate the unacceptable symptom' round?
Would the How round include an estimate of how the 'fix' might affect the
underlying problem system in other ways? This latter acknowledges the
principle: Design a fix not only for the original problem but also for
foreseeable problems that the fix may cause.
Thanks
> Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:13:40 -0600
> From: Michael Ayers <
mbayers@earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: Decisions, Decisions
[...]
> We have used a modified 'systems thinking approach' to working on complex
> issues for a decade or more. The modification we incorporated is
> fundamental -- we insist on clearly establishing a triggering question at
> the outset with the option to alter as time goes on and we learn more
about
> the issue. We actually insist that it be written on the flipchart so it
is
> literally in front of us all the time.
>
> Further, we insist that the question have exactly this format:
> 1) It must begin with the word 'Why'.
> 2) It must identify the variable that is 'the presenting symptom' (e.g.,
> staff morale, student test scores, adoption of a new marketing scheme,
late
> deliveries).
> 3) It must identify the unacceptable performance (e.g., too low, slipping,
> too high, not changing).
>
> Thus we get
> 'Why is staff morale slowly slipping?'
> 'Why are student test scores staying flat and not improving?'
> 'Why is the adoption of the new marketing scheme going so slowly?'
> 'Why is the staff turnover rate so high?'