I. Expert Opinion

    Here's a demonstrative example:¹

Using the fewest words possible, describe the figure shown in cell A.

    You may be surprised to learn that only one word is necessary! For an explanation, click here.

    This problem seems deceptively simple, doesn't it? However, even a group may not recognize the hidden optimal solution, especially if none of them has had any experience with spatial visualization.

    One more point: Suppose someone were to verbally describe this problem to you. "We have a problem," you might be told. "We need someone who can provide us with a description using the fewest words possible." How would you respond? Hire someone with an enormous vocabulary? That would probably be a bad choice.

    The gist of where this is all leading should be clear:

• Relying too heavily on a single, particular individual, however qualified, experienced or educated can lead to less than optimal decision-making

  and

• Relying too heavily on a single, particular group, however qualified, experienced or educated can lead to less than optimal decision-making.

However, which of the two — individual or group — would more likely consistently find optimal solutions? The group, of course! The greater the variety in perspective, the greater the chance of finding that one particular perspective that may yield the best possible solution. (One must note as well that lengthening the time frame in which the problem is studied would also increase the chances of success.) Herein lies the sole purpose behind the notion of "seeking a second opinion." You're trying to avoid the chance that that single particular individual whom you are relying upon isn't overlooking any subtle detail that could prove helpful to you. So, you seek the advice of another in search of some alternate, but viable, perspective on your particular issue.

II. Accumulating ALL Relevant Perspectives

    With the above stated, you may be tempted into believing that whenever an important decision arises (assuming adequate time for discussion) you should assemble a group composed of all interested parties. However logical this may seem, it is an oversimiplified solution to the problem.

    The solution lies not so much in assembling such a discussion group as it does in seeking out ALL relevant perspectives on the issue ... not to mention brainstorming ... and diligent research and analysis.

    Assembling a large group of people will usually lead to a large number of opinions, personal attitudes and beliefs. There are time conflicts among those who want to be there but cannot, disinterestedness among those who don't want to be there but are, some who wind up dominating (perhaps controlling) particular discussions, some conflicting personalities, some timid ones as well. This is not to say that their opinions are valueless, but don't expect a very carefully analyzed decision out of a group. Expect, at best, a popular solution that may not actually be the most optimal.

    If the decision you must make involves too many variables for you to handle individually, first start by recognizing all the relevant perspectives that would be invaluable to you in the way of reaching an (there is not necessarily one, unique) optimal solution. An easy mnemonic to use to help you remember this process is here:

Past   •   Present   •   Future

Pretty simple to remember, isn't it?

[..more on next several pages >>]

Member World Wide Web Chamber of Commerce
Promoting "Responsible and Ethical Internet Business”

All opinions expressed in this web site, unless otherwise noted, are my own, Michael Gaspard. If you notice any errors or have any suggestions for improvement, please let me know by e-mailing webmaster@mdpme.com. Thank you!

This web page was last updated on Monday, April 12, 2004.
http://www.mdpme.com/solutions.htm

Terms of use &
Disclaimer/Privacy.