How to hit the Bull’s Eye in decision-making. 9 Hints from The CASE© Method

Decision-making is the responsibility of any Leader. One who didn’t take that responsibility would automatically be unworthy of the title and best removed swiftly, before he/she does a lot of damage by his/her inertia. But the problem is: how do you make the best decisions? In the interest of whom? The latter is especially relevant when more interests are at stake, which is always the case in the leadership of organizations like business companies. We call these situation “multi-stakeholder situations”. You, my reader, know very well what I am talking about.

I am really happy that the mainstream discussion around decision making is taking the road of ethics as a sound foundation to business decision-making. As a passionate sustainability advocate I know that the best long-term decisions are those which are ethically robust and more and more examples of that are supporting that view. The CASE© Method that I have developed, initially a pure conflict transformation process, has become a very effective framework to implement when making complex-multi-stakeholder decisions exactly because its foundations are ethics and lucid leadership responsibility. Let’s share some further reflections on decision-making before we explore some points from the CASE©.

In a recent article on HBR (Sept. 2016 issue, p. 104 “How to tackle your toughest decisions”) Prof. J.L. Badracco, John Shad Professor of Business Ethics at Harvard Business School, puts on the table five key questions that an executive should ask him/herself before making a decision, especially one of those very relevant ones that reside in the “grey area”, i.e. where all is not immediately and apparently black or white. The questions are:

1. What are the net, net consequences of all my options
2. What are my core obligations
3. What will work in the World as it is
4. Who we are
5. What can I live with

I recommend, of course, to read the full article on HBR, always a useful reading, but what is most important to me is how the questions fit into the reasoning at the core of the CASE© decision-making process. Indeed the 9 Steps of The Method are somehow different, and the order of the factors somehow different, but we are on the same frequency. The 5 questions have a lot to do with moral obligations and the relationship between the available options and their effect on the decision-maker’s – and his/her organization’s – identity, values and conscience. This part is mostly dealt with in the Pillars of The CASE©, or attitudes, suggested to maximize the effects of the Steps. or actions. I won’t go into this part in this post.

The Steps, instead, start with a recognition of “the World as it is” and the relationship of the decision-maker with it. In Phase 1, the Cognitive, there are:

• Observe Facts
• Name emotions running and assume yours
• Enquire, collect direct information

That’s relevant not only to know how our decisions would work with the “World as it is” but also to assess the problem requiring our decision accurately. Too often decisions are made without appropriate knowledge of “real facts”.

In Phase 2, there is something which is at the bottom of any evaluation of options, and is also the basis for knowing one’s “core obligations” and what “net, net consequences” there will be for any subject impacted by the decision:

• Mapping the stakeholders and their Basic Needs.

This is the very core of The Method, because the Basic Needs are the guidelines for any process, be it a conflict transformation or a specific decision-making, which is only another form of transformation of conflict between Priorities, Objectives and, rightly so, Needs. Since in my Method there are only four Basic Needs (derived from the studies of Johan Galtung), a very difficult process is simplified, as many feedbacks of The CASE© users demonstrate. Knowing what the Basic Needs of his/her Stakeholders are, those of the Organizations too, the leader will always have the clearest possible visionof the potential impact of any decision and of the core responsibilities in his position. I believe that this is a powerful guide for any decision-maker in any organization. Please mind: among the Basic Needs (Survival. Wellbeing, Identity and Freedom) there is also the answer to the “Wo are we” question, the Identity of the Organization and its Leadership.

Of course an analysis of the root causes of the problem/situation is also part of this Phase, because besides Stakeholders also variables and factors in a situation have to be taken into account. Again, the Works as it is”.

The Strategic Phase, the 3rd, goes beyond mapping the Stakeholders:

• Clarify/set targets and expectations
• Engage Stakeholders in cooperation
• Map and gather resources

The objectives of any action/decision have to be clear to the whole galaxy of the Stakeholders, internal and external, and thus they can be constructively engaged in the strategy development process contributing to the most effective decision.

Also the issue of resources, in a wider meaning of the term, will benefit from more involvement of a variety of subjects impacted, and impacting, the Organization. In any case, the survey of available resources, and of possible sources of more, will well answer the “How with the World as it is” issue.

Finally, in the 4th or Executive phase (indeed CASE comes from the names of the four Phases) synergy and consistency will accompany the cooperation among all the Stakeholders in order to achieve the objectives and match all the Basic Needs involved.

This is how we can put Ethics at work in order to become effective decision-makers, and if we are in business make the best business that can see our Organization thrive in the long run, becoming really sustainable and a constructive corporate citizen.

More in The CASE© Method you can find on the book Sustainable Leadership (Click HERE for a free preview), or you can email me directly at federico@federicofioretto.biz.