That's me, above, in 1987, facilitating a decision conference, a workshop that engages key players representing all the main viewpoints on a topic of concern, supported by impartial facilitation and a computer model built on-the-spot which incorporates all the perspectives, available data and judgements that are sufficient to resolve the issues. Much more can often be accomplished in this type of face-to-face meeting than in three-months’ or more work by outside consultants or by circulating internal reports to all concerned parties.
How is that possible? By bringing together the key players they can share their perspectives and information, debate its value, and exercise face-to-face peer review, all within a structured process that promotes rational discussion. This creates new insights and clarifies the issues sufficiently for the decision maker to take a decision confidently. I provide impartial facilitation of decision conferences using Edgar Schein's process consultancy principles, the most important being “The client owns the problem and the solution.” By helping participants to construct a model incorporating the issues they face, the group explores the model under different viewpoints and judgements, which enables participants to generate shared understanding, a sense of common purpose and commitment to an agreed way forward.
Most of my consultancy work is with groups, in workshops and decision conferences. A sample of my publications and projects is given below, grouped under headings that define an individual's or organisation's objective: to appraise or evaluate, to develop strategies or policies in the face of risk and uncertainty, to choose among options when objectives conflict, to prioritise or allocate resources across different budget categories, or to create a high-performing team. I’ve included public, private and voluntary sector work across a wide spectrum of topics.
How is that possible? By bringing together the key players they can share their perspectives and information, debate its value, and exercise face-to-face peer review, all within a structured process that promotes rational discussion. This creates new insights and clarifies the issues sufficiently for the decision maker to take a decision confidently. I provide impartial facilitation of decision conferences using Edgar Schein's process consultancy principles, the most important being “The client owns the problem and the solution.” By helping participants to construct a model incorporating the issues they face, the group explores the model under different viewpoints and judgements, which enables participants to generate shared understanding, a sense of common purpose and commitment to an agreed way forward.
Most of my consultancy work is with groups, in workshops and decision conferences. A sample of my publications and projects is given below, grouped under headings that define an individual's or organisation's objective: to appraise or evaluate, to develop strategies or policies in the face of risk and uncertainty, to choose among options when objectives conflict, to prioritise or allocate resources across different budget categories, or to create a high-performing team. I’ve included public, private and voluntary sector work across a wide spectrum of topics.
Develop strategies or policies that are robust to risk and uncertainty
Phillips, L. D. (1982). Requisite decision modelling: A case study. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 33, 303-311.
An application for a Midlands manufacturing company of a decision analysis that examined possible courses of action in light of considerable uncertainty about the outcomes which were multi-attributed. It was my first experience of bringing a computer into the board room, enabling members to test different assumptions. The Board agreed the way forward, after having rejected successively re-written recommendations in the previous 11 months. Since this experience, I’ve favoured face-to-face discussions, assisted by a computer model, as far more efficient and effective than circulating reports.
An application for a Midlands manufacturing company of a decision analysis that examined possible courses of action in light of considerable uncertainty about the outcomes which were multi-attributed. It was my first experience of bringing a computer into the board room, enabling members to test different assumptions. The Board agreed the way forward, after having rejected successively re-written recommendations in the previous 11 months. Since this experience, I’ve favoured face-to-face discussions, assisted by a computer model, as far more efficient and effective than circulating reports.
Choose wisely among options, when none can achieve all your objectives
Phillips, L. D., Egan, M., & Airoldi, M. (2006). MCDA Decision Conference (CoRWM report number 1716.3). Winchester: Catalyze.
Downloadable from the CoRWM website here. Reports on the findings of an MCDA conducted in support of the largest public consultation exercise ever conducted in the United Kingdom. The subject is the management of the UK's medium and high level radioactive waste. The independent Committee on Radioactive Waste Management was tasked in November 2003 by the UK Government to recommend by July 2006 a policy for managing the wastes. In 2005-06 a series of workshops with specialists and experts informed by the public consultations, developed a mult-criteria appraisal model. Following a final decision conference near the end of April 2006, CoRWM made a preliminary recommendation for deep disposal rather than surface or shall storage. After further public consultation, the revised recommendations were presented to the government in July 2006, and in November 2006 they were accepted by the then Minister for the Environment, David Miliband.
Downloadable from the CoRWM website here. Reports on the findings of an MCDA conducted in support of the largest public consultation exercise ever conducted in the United Kingdom. The subject is the management of the UK's medium and high level radioactive waste. The independent Committee on Radioactive Waste Management was tasked in November 2003 by the UK Government to recommend by July 2006 a policy for managing the wastes. In 2005-06 a series of workshops with specialists and experts informed by the public consultations, developed a mult-criteria appraisal model. Following a final decision conference near the end of April 2006, CoRWM made a preliminary recommendation for deep disposal rather than surface or shall storage. After further public consultation, the revised recommendations were presented to the government in July 2006, and in November 2006 they were accepted by the then Minister for the Environment, David Miliband.
Financial services company.
The new managing director was keen to expand the horizons of the business by creating a new e-commerce business offering. An outside consulting company proposed three possible options, though they preferred one in particular. However, the top-management team themselves appraised the options in a one-day decision conference. After constructing an MCDA model whose criteria comprised two costs, five risks and 11 benefits, scoring the options on the criteria and weighting the criteria, the group were surprised to see one of the originally non-preferred options came out on top, and that was recommended to the international board.
The new managing director was keen to expand the horizons of the business by creating a new e-commerce business offering. An outside consulting company proposed three possible options, though they preferred one in particular. However, the top-management team themselves appraised the options in a one-day decision conference. After constructing an MCDA model whose criteria comprised two costs, five risks and 11 benefits, scoring the options on the criteria and weighting the criteria, the group were surprised to see one of the originally non-preferred options came out on top, and that was recommended to the international board.
Identify areas of greatest opportunities for allocating your resources
Phillips, L. D., & Bana e Costa, C. (2007). Transparent prioritisation, budgeting and resource allocation with multi-criteria decision analysis and decision conferencing. Annals of Operations Research, 154(1), 51-68.
Provides a review and critique of prioritisation and resource allocation approaches, explains that the appropriate value-for-money criterion is rarely used in organisation, and develops the multi-criteria decision analysis approach implemented in the LSE’s Equity software to generate an efficient frontier of projects. The paper includes lessons from case studies, including the evolution of the efficient frontier over five years for Allergan, a pharmaceutical company, along with a discussion of decision conferencing, the social process within which the MCDA modelling is carried out. The paper emphasizes that both technical modelling and social processes are required to create the portfolio that provides best value-for-money.
Provides a review and critique of prioritisation and resource allocation approaches, explains that the appropriate value-for-money criterion is rarely used in organisation, and develops the multi-criteria decision analysis approach implemented in the LSE’s Equity software to generate an efficient frontier of projects. The paper includes lessons from case studies, including the evolution of the efficient frontier over five years for Allergan, a pharmaceutical company, along with a discussion of decision conferencing, the social process within which the MCDA modelling is carried out. The paper emphasizes that both technical modelling and social processes are required to create the portfolio that provides best value-for-money.
Type 45 destroyer.
Facilitated various workshops and decision conferences, attended by all the key players including civilian contractors, who were helped to generate an affordable configuration for the ship. The project successfully aligned all the key players, shortening the pre-Main Gate exploration to only 18 months, a record for a major system. The National Audit Office in its annual Major Project Reports 2002 singled out the Type 45 for its “progressive approach to acquisition” which prevented straightjacketing of the project by the operational requirement, and for the ability to continue trading off capability and cost. BAE Systems believe the decision conferencing process saved them two years of work. The project showed how within a structured process, the MoD and main contractor can work collaboratively to reduce risk, keep costs under control, maintain steady progress and attain the desired capability. All six ships are now afloat, and their final configurations are much as recommended at the end of the analysis.
Facilitated various workshops and decision conferences, attended by all the key players including civilian contractors, who were helped to generate an affordable configuration for the ship. The project successfully aligned all the key players, shortening the pre-Main Gate exploration to only 18 months, a record for a major system. The National Audit Office in its annual Major Project Reports 2002 singled out the Type 45 for its “progressive approach to acquisition” which prevented straightjacketing of the project by the operational requirement, and for the ability to continue trading off capability and cost. BAE Systems believe the decision conferencing process saved them two years of work. The project showed how within a structured process, the MoD and main contractor can work collaboratively to reduce risk, keep costs under control, maintain steady progress and attain the desired capability. All six ships are now afloat, and their final configurations are much as recommended at the end of the analysis.
Pharmaceutical companies.
All pharmaceutical companies are presented with the difficult problem of deciding where best to commit their substantial, but limited resources. I have worked with Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffman La Roche and Allergan, among others, helping them prioritise strategies to create portfolios of their projects in discovery, early and late development, technology support and marketing. While the criteria differ in each of these applications, the basic principles for balancing benefits, costs and risks remain the same. Astonishingly, the modelling frequently shows how by redistributing resources among current and new projects, financial and non-financial benefits can be improved by, on average, 30%. In at least four cases, that amounted to more than $1billion in risk-adjusted net present value, the equivalent of a blockbuster drug, hidden away in the less efficient portfolio being pursued at the time of the analysis.
All pharmaceutical companies are presented with the difficult problem of deciding where best to commit their substantial, but limited resources. I have worked with Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, F. Hoffman La Roche and Allergan, among others, helping them prioritise strategies to create portfolios of their projects in discovery, early and late development, technology support and marketing. While the criteria differ in each of these applications, the basic principles for balancing benefits, costs and risks remain the same. Astonishingly, the modelling frequently shows how by redistributing resources among current and new projects, financial and non-financial benefits can be improved by, on average, 30%. In at least four cases, that amounted to more than $1billion in risk-adjusted net present value, the equivalent of a blockbuster drug, hidden away in the less efficient portfolio being pursued at the time of the analysis.
Barnardo’s Child Care Division. A series of workshops, in which participants created themes and programmes consistent with the UN’s Rights of the Child and aligned to Barnardo’s four purposes, were brought together in a ‘merge’ decision conference. The resulting priorities gave a holistic view, focussed on needy children, which helped to plan programmes and were found to be useful in communicating to the outside world.
Transform your group into a high-performing, skilled team
|
Diversity of viewpoints in a group can create an emotional undertow in a group that distracts work from the primary task. One reason for this is that the work preferences within the team are unbalanced. For example, a group composed of action-oriented individuals, may jump too quickly to conclusions, select the first reasonable option and plough ahead, possibly solving the wrong problem. On the other hand, a group of people who are data and analysis-oriented, may over-analyze the problem, but never come to any definitive solution. One reason is that participants are not aware of differences in work preferences, and so mistakenly attribute unhelpful motives to those who are most different from themselves. Managers may even mistakenly diagnose the problem as ‘personality differences.’
After exploring various instruments, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and Meredith Belbin’s Team Roles, I found that the Margerison-McCann Team Management Profile provides a jargon-free approach that connects individual work preferences to the types of work characteristic of all teams. A 60-item questionnaire completed by an individual becomes the basis for a 4,500-word profile that shows a team member their preferred ways of working, how others are different, and how a team can become a high-performing team by capitalising on those differences. I am qualified to administer and explain the Profile to individuals and teams. |
The Margerison-McCann
Team Management Wheel ® Reproduced by kind permission of TMS Development International, Ltd, 2008 |