Description
I want the answer without similarity at all, and Conceptual and professional, they’re important. I have a solution model.
وزارة التعليم
الجامعة السعودية اإللكترونية
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Ministry of Education
Saudi Electronic University
College of Administrative and Financial Sciences
Assignment 1
Decision Making and Problem Solving (MGT 312)
Due Date: End of week 6, 1/03/2024 @ 23:59
Course Name: Decision Making and Problem Student’s Name:
Solving
Course Code: MGT312
Student’s ID Number:
Semester: 2ND
CRN: 27260
Academic Year:2024-25; SECOND SEMESTER
For Instructor’s Use only
Instructor’s Name: Karim Garrouch
Students’ Grade:
/ 10
Level of Marks: High/Middle/Low
General Instructions – PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY
•
The Assignment must be submitted only in WORD format via allocated folder.
•
Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted.
•
Students are advised to make their work clear and well presented, marks may be
reduced for poor presentation.
•
Students must mention question number clearly in their answer.
•
Late submission will NOT be accepted.
•
Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words, copying from students or
other resources without proper referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions.
•
All answered must be typed using Times New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font.
No pictures containing text will be accepted and will be considered plagiarism).
Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted.
Restricted – مقيد
Course Learning Outcomes-Covered
•
Demonstrate a solid understanding of decision making process for complex issues
pertaining to business environment both internally and externally. (1.2)
•
Explain critical thinking and cognitive psychology as it pertains to analyze and
synthesize information for problem solving and decision making. (2.7)
•
Identify and analyze different perspectives on understanding problems for different
situations. (3.1)
Assignment Instructions:
• Log in to Saudi Digital Library (SDL) via University’s website
• On first page of SDL, choose “English Databases”
• From the list find and click on EBSCO database.
• In the search bar of EBSCO find the following article:
Title:
“To Solve a Tough Problem, Reframe It”
Author:
Julia Binder and Michael D. Watkins
Date of Publication:
January February 2024
Published:
Harvard Business Review
Assignment Questions:
(Marks 10)
Read the attached article titled as “To Solve a Tough Problem, Reframe It” by Julia
Binder and Michael D. Watkins, published in Harvard Business Review, and answer
the following Questions:
1. Summarize the article and explain the main issues discussed in the article. (In
500-600 words) [4 Marks]
2. What do you think about the article in relations to what you have learnt in the
course about problem solving approach and improving decision making skills?
Use additional reference to support your argument. (In 150-200 words) [2 Marks]
Critical Thinking Question:
3. How would you handle a situation where a colleague is having trouble
understanding your process or solution? (In 100-150 words) [2 Marks]
4. How would you handle a situation where you noticed your supervisor made an error
in a report or presentation? (In 100-150 words) [2 Marks]
Restricted – مقيد
Answer
Restricted – مقيد
المملكة العربية السعودية
وزارة التعليم
الجامعة السعودية اإللكترونية
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Ministry of Education
Saudi Electronic University
College of Administrative and Financial Sciences
Assignment 1
Decision Making and Problem Solving (MGT 312)
Due Date: End of week 6, 1/03/2024 @ 23:59
Course Name: Decision Making and Problem Student’s Name: SEU ELITE
Solving
Course Code: MGT312
Student’s ID Number:
Semester: 2ND
CRN: 27262
Academic Year:2024-25; SECOND SEMESTER
For Instructor’s Use only
Instructor’s Name:
Students’ Grade:
/ 10
Level of Marks: High/Middle/Low
General Instructions – PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY
•
The Assignment must be submitted only in WORD format via allocated folder.
•
Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted.
•
Students are advised to make their work clear and well presented, marks may be
reduced for poor presentation.
•
Students must mention question number clearly in their answer.
•
Late submission will NOT be accepted.
•
Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words, copying from students or
other resources without proper referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions.
•
All answered must be typed using Times New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font.
No pictures containing text will be accepted and will be considered plagiarism).
Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted.
Course Learning Outcomes-Covered
•
Demonstrate a solid understanding of decision making process for complex issues
pertaining to business environment both internally and externally. (1.2)
•
Explain critical thinking and cognitive psychology as it pertains to analyze and
synthesize information for problem solving and decision making. (2.7)
•
Identify and analyze different perspectives on understanding problems for different
situations. (3.1)
Assignment Instructions:
• Log in to Saudi Digital Library (SDL) via University’s website
• On first page of SDL, choose “English Databases”
• From the list find and click on EBSCO database.
• In the search bar of EBSCO find the following article:
Title:
“To Solve a Tough Problem, Reframe It”
Author:
Julia Binder and Michael D. Watkins
Date of Publication:
January February 2024
Published:
Harvard Business Review
Assignment Questions:
(Marks 10)
Read the attached article titled as “To Solve a Tough Problem, Reframe It” by Julia
Binder and Michael D. Watkins, published in Harvard Business Review, and answer
the following Questions:
1. Summarize the article and explain the main issues discussed in the article. (In
500-600 words) [4 Marks]
2. What do you think about the article in relations to what you have learnt in the
course about problem solving approach and improving decision making skills?
Use additional reference to support you argument. (In 150-200 words) [2 Marks]
Critical Thinking Question:
3. How would you handle a situation where a colleague is having trouble
understanding your process or solution? (In 100-150 words) [2 Marks]
4. How would you handle a situation where you noticed your supervisor made an error
in a report or presentation? (In 100-150 words) [2 Marks]
Answers
Q1. In the article “To Solve a Tough Problem, Reframe It,” authors Julia Binder and
Michael D. Watkins emphasize the importance of problem-framing in effective decisionmaking and problem-solving within organizations. They argue that many companies rush
into finding solutions without adequately understanding the underlying issues. This hasty
approach often leads to suboptimal outcomes and missed opportunities for innovation.
The authors outline a structured methodology, the E5 framework, which consists of five
phases: Expand, Examine, Empathize, Elevate, and Envision. This framework aims to
ensure a comprehensive understanding of complex problems before attempting to solve
them.
The article begins by highlighting a common pitfall in organizational decision-making:
the tendency to jump straight into solution mode. The authors reference research
indicating that a significant number of decision-making processes fail due to insufficient
problem examination. For instance, Paul Nutt’s study revealed that more than half of the
analyzed decision-making cases in medium to large companies did not achieve their
desired results, primarily due to the pressure to act quickly. This lack of thorough
analysis restricts teams’ abilities to design innovative solutions.
To counter this issue, Binder and Watkins propose a five-phase approach to problemframing. The first phase, Expand, encourages teams to set aside preconceived notions
and explore the problem comprehensively. They introduce a tool called frame-storming,
which focuses on identifying all aspects of a challenge rather than generating solutions
for a pre-defined problem. This phase fosters creativity and helps teams uncover
assumptions and blind spots.
The second phase, Examine, involves digging deeper to identify root causes. The
authors suggest using the iceberg model, which distinguishes between surface-level
events and deeper systemic factors contributing to a problem. By exploring these layers,
teams can better understand the complexities of the issue at hand and avoid superficial
solutions.
In the third phase, Empathize, the focus shifts to understanding the perspectives of
stakeholders affected by the problem. The authors advocate for the creation of empathy
maps to capture what different stakeholders think, feel, say, and do regarding the issue.
This process ensures that the solutions developed are aligned with the needs and
perceptions of those impacted.
The fourth phase, Elevate, requires teams to consider broader organizational issues and
how these connect to the problem. The authors recommend employing the four-frame
model by Bolman and Deal, which examines structural, human resources, political, and
symbolic aspects of the organization. This holistic view allows teams to identify
interconnected issues and understand the broader context influencing the problem.
Finally, in the Envision phase, teams transition from analysis to action by setting clear
goals and backcasting to outline a path toward achieving these objectives. This involves
defining long-term milestones and immediate actions necessary for success. By
synthesizing insights from the previous phases, teams can create a strategic action plan
that directs efforts toward a concrete outcome.
Throughout the article, the authors illustrate their points with a case study of a fictional
company, Omega Soundscapes, which faced declining sales. By applying the E5
framework, Omega’s leadership team was able to uncover deeper issues related to
product quality, market perception, and sales team morale. This structured approach led
to the development of a comprehensive action plan aimed at revitalizing the brand and
addressing customer concerns.
“To Solve a Tough Problem, Reframe It” advocates for a deliberate and structured
approach to problem-solving that goes beyond superficial solutions. The E5 framework
serves as a valuable tool for organizations seeking to enhance their decision-making
processes and foster innovation. By taking the time to thoroughly understand the
complexities of a problem, teams can design more effective and sustainable solutions.
Q2. The article aligns closely with the principles regarding structured problem-solving
and decision-making. The E5 framework—Expand, Examine, Empathize, Elevate, and
Envision—highlights the necessity of thoroughly understanding a problem before
jumping to solutions, which is a critical skill emphasized in.
Effective decision-making requires examining problems from multiple perspectives, as
supported by research from Simon (1977) on bounded rationality, which suggests that
decision-makers often operate under constraints that limit their ability to consider all
options. By employing tools like frame-storming and the iceberg model, organizations
can uncover underlying issues and stakeholder perspectives, fostering innovative
solutions.
Furthermore, the emphasis on empathy in the decision-making process resonates with
Goleman’s (1998) work on emotional intelligence, which underscores the importance of
understanding others’ emotions and motivations in leadership. Overall, the article
reinforces the notion that a comprehensive approach to problem-solving not only
improves decision-making skills but also enhances organizational effectiveness.
Q3. When a colleague struggles to understand my process or solution, I would first
approach the situation with empathy and open communication. I would initiate a private
conversation to identify their specific concerns or confusion. By actively listening, I can
gauge their understanding and clarify any misconceptions. Visual aids, such as flowcharts
or diagrams, can help illustrate complex ideas more effectively (Larkin & Simon, 1987).
Furthermore, I would encourage collaborative discussion, inviting them to share their
thoughts and perspectives, which can foster a deeper understanding. If necessary, I would
offer to walk them through the process step-by-step, ensuring they feel supported
throughout. This approach not only enhances clarity but also strengthens our professional
relationship.
Q4. If I noticed an error in a report or presentation made by my supervisor, I would
handle the situation with tact and professionalism. First, I would verify the error to ensure
that my observation is accurate. Then, I would approach my supervisor privately, framing
the conversation positively, focusing on the goal of maintaining high-quality work. I
might say something like, “I noticed a detail in the report that might need a second look.”
This approach minimizes defensiveness and fosters a collaborative atmosphere (Brown et
al., 1996). If my supervisor is receptive, I would offer to assist in correcting the error.
Maintaining respect and professionalism is crucial, as it helps preserve the working
relationship while ensuring that the final product is accurate.
References
Binder, J., & Watkins, M. D. (2024). To solve a tough problem, reframe it. Harvard
Business Review, January–February, 80-89.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. Bantam Books.
Simon, H. A. (1977). The New Science of Management Decision. Prentice Hall.
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand
words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65-99.
Brown, D. J., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (1996). Ethical leadership: A review and
future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 255-279.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
