Dr. Gary observed that people use a decision strategy to navigate through their decision-making moments in life. In the Organizational Engineering (OE) model developed by Dr. Gary Salton, he postulated that there are four kinds of strategic processing styles. Someone is either a Reactive Stimulator or Logical processor (Ungvari, 2011). He can also be a Hypothetical Analyzer or a Relational Innovator (Ungvari, 2011). I fit more as a Hypothetical Analyzer and secondarily as a Logical Processor. I undertook an exercise to determine my personal tendencies. Using a four-column table, modeled after table 1 in the reading, I identified the instances where my natural tendencies fit best and made a mark on each corresponding row.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
A Hypothetical Analyzer loves to solve problems. He takes time to look at all the available alternatives before settling on a decision. He takes a huge problem, breaks it down into small units, and then solves it from that level. This kind of thinking is useful during the initial phases of project design because of the ambiguity that characterizes that stage. Hypothetical Analyzers abhor ambiguity, and hence they will seek to find ways of making the situation explainable. They like it when the environment is predictable. Therefore, they respond by developing explanations for the problems they are working on so that they make the situation explainable.
My secondary processing style fits in the category of Logical Processors. The key characteristic of logical processors is their fixation with a task. They do not get derailed easily once they set on a path to find out something. They rely on logic and they do not stop as long as what they are working on still makes sense. They display a high degree of personal organization, are very systematic, and remain on track for as long as the issue they are handling is logical. This kind of information processing strategy is useful in the identification of inconsistencies in a given situation.
Based on the two primary styles, I fit in the conservator category. People in this category tend to be fixated with procedures and try to stick to agreed upon methods. The conservator tends to come up with an ideal solution given certain assumptions and uses this solution to address all related problems. On the down side, they tend to “force fit” problems into certain solution models in order to have a handle on them (Ungvari, 2011). Other vulnerabilities associated with the conservators are the tendencies towards making conservative decisions and rigidity. They otherwise make ideal candidates for assignments that require a strong adherence to rules and procedures, and make good supervisors in such work environments.
Based on the exercise, I understand better my tendency to behave in certain ways. I realize that I had elements from all the four categories, only that the first two came out prominently. I will endeavor to reduce the downside risks associated with this strategic pattern. It also helps me to know where I can have the best influence in the process of working on issues. I would like to play to my strengths. This means that I will gravitate towards analytical assignments and seek to order things up. Since I have a problem with ambiguity, I will make a career out of dismantling it. This exercise has been useful in providing me with pointers in areas that I can have the most impact.
Ungvari, S. F. (2011). The TRIZ Journal. Web.