Decision-making occurs as individual decision-making (IDM) and group decision-making (GDM).
Almost all strategic decisions are made using GDM-D.
SchellingPoint’s focus is GDM-D, the least developed area of theory and practice.
The following video introduces one of the most consequential research insights: how the stakeholder interview and analysis technique, not designed for but used in most strategic decisions, has misled decision teams, consultants, and facilitators for decades.
One group might be the three founders of a fintech venture clarifying their first year’s goals, the other might be a Fortune 500 healthcare leadership team revising their three-year strategy; they are both strategic collaborations.
How do groups, and consultants running projects, transition from discovery to solutioning, pinpointing what needs to be discussed, and in what sequence? This traditionally unstructured project room task becomes a rapid interaction creating client commitment to the right conversations.
The typical business case Risk Analysis cites 5 to 7 possible issues, then provides remedies to them. With groups seeing on average 61 different reasons why their goals and plans won’t work, they needed an authentic process acknowledging reality.
Groups of two to ten people – most leadership and project teams – have over 140 unique and relevant opinions on a shared topic, on average – twice what is expressed in conventional meetings and workshops. Don’t leave anything unsaid in your next collaboration.
Groups want action plans, but what they need is coordinated action. There are four conditions for coordinated action which their agreement, goal-setting, and planning activities must produce.
Few groups want to hear the implementation truth; the negative views, the ideas that failed, the new information that could disrupt their hard-fought plans. To maintain alignment through to outcomes, a new governance method ensures reality and change are accommodated.