The aspects of critical thinking that would enhance the authors’ approach of determining tradeoffs would be identifying, analyzing, and evaluating. Determining tradeoffs between two or more choices requires the identification between what choice has the better necessity of a tradeoff compared to the other plans. Identifying the most crucial point of your plan and how to strengthen that specific characteristic through a tradeoff would enhance your critical thinking skills to wisely and accurately go with that choice. Once you have identified the premier choice and understand the tradeoff you must endure, the next step would be to analyze your choice and discover all possibilities of tradeoffs that could occur to create that specific characteristic you believe your critical thinking process requires. Analyzing the advantages versus the disadvantages of said tradeoff should conclude in the strengthening of the specific characteristic, which eventually leads to the evaluation of the tradeoff. According to Charles Corbett and Luke Van Wassenhove, researching manufacturing plants who rely on the effects of tradeoffs has determined their main focus of currency to be the tradeoff of a phenomenal product and results in less than perfect pieces, but more money for the plant to grow. (Corbett, Wassenhove, 1993). A clear advantage for the company as they save money, while also, producing revenue because of unnoticed tradeoff situations. The advantages of approaching tradeoffs in the way the authors recommend as described above are the evaluation of the pros and cons of the tradeoff between the two or more choices, which allows the objective (tradeoff) to be prioritized and value the tradeoffs as necessities to discover the premier choice.
The four decision bottlenecks identified by Rogers and Blenko:
Global versus local decision making
Center versus business unit decision making
Function versus function decision making and
Inside versus outside partners decision making (Blenko, Rogers, 2006).
When considered as a whole, the four decision bottlenecks are noticeably indecisive on who makes the ultimate decision, primarily in marketing terms. The primary solution is to establish roles and responsibilities within prior to beginning the process of deciding critical decision making. Other bottlenecks I have had personal experience with are player versus coach and supervisor versus veteran employee. In player versus coach scenarios, I have seen the quarterback deem the coach to be misconstrued when calling out plays and perform alternatives to what was called that resulted in success. In veteran employee versus supervisor scenarios, I have witnessed the veteran employee implement a better idea and the manager praising such brilliance.
Blenko, M., W., Rogers, P. (2006). Harvard Business Review. Who has the D?: How Clear Decision Roles Enhance Organizational Performance. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2006/01/who-has-the-d-how-clear-decision-roles-enhance-organizational-performance
Corbett, C., & Wassenhove, L. V. (1993). Trade-offs? what trade-offs? competence and competitiveness. California Management Review, 35(4), 107. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.prx-keiser.lirn.net/do…