Decision Content

The second set of distinctions is in the content of decisions. Here things are not so simple. The decision forums are mutually exclusive and fairly exhaustive. When we turn our attention to the content of decisions, nothing is that neat. So the challenge is providing a useful way of characterizing the content of a decision that supports better quality choices.

Every decision is some blend of attention to (1) ends, (2) means, and (3) values. That is, a choice is always expressing what we want, how we imagine achieving those desires, and how we want to be in the world. For any given decision, these three components may be evident in unequal proportions, but it is seldom that any one of them is completely suppressed.

For example, in the triangle on the left, the small circle would represent a choice that involves an equal mix of ends and values, with little or not attention to means. This might be a decision about the vision or purpose of an organization. It might be a choice about the goals of a project. The focus is on what we want to achieve, and how we want to be in that effort. The particulars of how we'll make it happen are saved for another day.

The small square would represent a decision where the goal is taken for granted, and the only options are around how we'll achieve the goal and (a little) on the values we want to express in that effort.

This simple framework encourages you to be more explicit about the 3 components in a choice. Suppose you are making decisions about the installation of a new software program.

• GOAL: What work flow are we hoping to support or enable?
• MEANS: What training or support will actually change peoples' behavior?
• VALUES: Are we giving people more control? Options? Satisfaction?

Drawing attention to the different components in a choice situation can help structure a debate that otherwise could easily bounce around without any useful movement or resolution.

It is worth noting that one side of our triangle captures the common distinctions between vision, mission, strategy, operations, and tactics. Each step in that sequence involves less attention to ends and correspondingly greater attention to means. A vision statement is pure ends; it defines the desired impact on the world without any mention of how. A mission statement typically outlines in broad strokes what activities are presumed to support that outcome. So the vision might be "End world hunger", and the mission statement could include redistribution of food, or education in farming methods, or outright purchase of food. Strategy would start to outline how any of those mission statements could be achieved in some medium-range time frame. Operations and tactics start to work out the details of who will do what and by when.

While that set of distinctions is critical in making an orderly transition from decisions on outcomes to decisions on methods, this template for decision content is still inadequate. We need one more set of distinctions.

The distinction between ends, means, and values is useful, but there is another dimension that will add as much value to our conceptualization of decision content.

Sometimes we are called upon to make choices about systems, that is, complex collections or structures such as an organization, an agency, a community project, or an entire line of business. Other times, we are making choices about a relatively contained task, where we have activities, work products, and workers applying their expertise.

And sometimes we are faced with choices about people. Succession planning, developmental plans, hiring, firing, and the like.

This distinction is sometimes rather loose, but it can force us to make key distinctions in understanding the decision task at hand. For example, suppose I am trying to decide how best to respond to a project manager who is failing to deliver on time. Is it a choice about a person, which might call for training or coaching? Or is it a choice about a task, which might call for intervening on a particular project? Or is it really a choice about the project management system across the company? Just addressing those questions will undoubtedly enhance the precision of the choice.