METHODS OF PROBLEM STRUCTURING

PROBLEM STRUCTURING- Problem structuring is the

process of generating and testing alternative
formulations of substantive problems.

CLASSIFICATION ANALYSIS
- is a technique for clarifying concepts used to
define and classify problem situations. In
sensing a problem situation, analysts must
classify their experiences.
- When we encounter a problem, we naturally
categorize and classify our experiences. This
OTHER METHODS
process involves inductive reasoning, where we
- Problem tree analysis/ Decision Tree Analysis create general (abstract) concepts like poverty,
- Root cause analysis crime, or pollution based on our experiences
- SWOT analysis with specific (concrete) objects or situations.
- Mind mapping - It involves two key processes: logical division
and logical classification.
- Logical division is when we take a group and
BOUNDARY ANALYSIS- s is a crucial step in problem- break it into its parts, while logical
solving. It helps us determine if the various problem classification is the opposite, where we group
formulations, referred to as a " meta problem, " cover elements together.
all aspects of the issue.
In most cases, we do not deal with just one clear-cut
problem; instead, stakeholders define multiple problems Rules several rules that help ensure that a classification
differently. system is both relevant to a problem situation and
logically consistent.
Boundary analysis is like making sure you have all the
necessary pieces to solve the puzzle completely. You 1. Substantive relevance (analysts’ purpose and the
want to check if any crucial pieces are missing. nature of problem situation)

Boundary analysis helps you make sure you haven 't - For example, when addressing the issue of poverty,
forgotten something crucial, like invitations or a place to substantive relevance would involve classifying it based
hold the party. It' s like a checklist to ensure you cover on factors that truly matter, like inadequate income,
all the important parts of the problem. cultural influences, or psychological motivations. It could
even involve a combination of these factors, as poverty
Boundary analysis helps ensure you are not forgetting is a complex issue with multiple dimensions.
important aspects in identifying the problem, or missing
pieces of the puzzle. It's about making sure you consider 2. Exhaustiveness (all subjects or situations of interest
everything to identify the problem effectively. Boundary to the analyst must be "used up, " so to speak)
analysis can be done with the help of multiple - For instance, when categorizing income class in the
stakeholders. families in the United States, you should have categories
that include every type of family. If you find that there
are families with no income, you might need to create a
new category to make sure every situation is accounted
for.
3. Disjointness (Categories must be mutually
exclusive.)
- For example, if you're sorting families based on
income, a family should either go into the "above
poverty line" category or the "below poverty line"
category, but not both. This way, no family is counted
twice, and the categories are clear and separate.
 analysis can limit alternative explanations when done by
one person rather than a group.
4. Consistency (Each category and subcategory should
be based on a single classification principle)
-For instance, let's say you're classifying families. If you SYNECTICS- which refers broadly to the investigation of
create categories based on whether they are above the similarities, helps analysts make creative use of
poverty line or receive welfare payments, it can cause a analogies in structuring problems.
problem because many families can fall into both
Synectic is based on the assumption that an awareness
categories. This creates an overlap and makes the
of identical or similar relationships among problems
classification less clear and accurate. So, consistency
increases the problem-solving capacities of analysts.
ensures that each category is based on a single, well-
defined principle to avoid such confusion.
5. Hierarchical Distinctiveness (levels in a classification IN STRUCTURING POLICY PROBLEMS, FOUR TYPES OF
system (categories, subcategories, subsubcategories) ANALOGIES MAY BE IDENTIFIED:
must be carefully distinguished) 1. PERSONAL ANALOGIES mean that analysts try to
- Think about classifying vehicles. You might have put themselves in the shoes of someone else,
categories like "land vehicles, " "water vehicles, " and like a policymaker or client group, and imagine
"air vehicles." Within the "land vehicles" category, you how they would experience a problem.
could have subcategories like "cars" and "motorcycles." 2. DIRECT ANALOGIES involve finding similar
Now, imagine if you had a sub-subcategory under connections between two or more different
"motorcycles" called "twowheeled vehicles." problem situations.
3. SYMBOLIC ANALOGIES involve finding
similarities between a problem and some
Venn diagrams, classification schemes, and cross breaks symbolic process or concept.
are useful tools for organizing problems. Classification 4. FANTASY ANALOGIES give analysts the freedom
analysis is typically done by individuals, and we judge its to find similarities between a real problem and
success by how logically consistent it is. an entirely imaginary scenario.
In Synectic, both individuals and groups use analogies to
understand problems better. The key factor for judging
HIERARCHY ANALYSIS
how well a problem is understood is how believable the
- Hierarchy analysis is a technique for identifying comparisons are, meaning how much the problem is
possible causes of a problem. genuinely like the situations used as analogies.
- Traditional logic and social science theories
don't always give clear answers. So, to discover
possible causes, we need a way to outline and BRAINSTORMING- is a method for generating ideas,
understand the different factors at play in a goals, and strategies that may help conceptualize
situation. problem situations.
Originally designed by Alex Osborn as a means to
enhance creativity, brainstorming may be used to
HIERARCHY ANALYSIS HELPS IDENTIFY THREE KINDS OF
generate a large number of suggestions about potential
CAUSES:
solutions for problems.

BRAINSTORMING INVOLVES SIMPLE PROCEDURES:

Brainstorming can be structured or unstructured,

depending on the goals and constraints. In less
The rules for conducting a hierarchy analysis are the
structured brainstorming, like in government agencies
same as those used for classificational analysis:
or think tanks, discussions about policy problems are
substantive relevance, exhaustiveness, disjointness,
informal and spontaneous, involving people with
consistency, and hierarchical distinctiveness. Similarly,
various expertise.
procedures of logical division and classification also
apply to both types of analysis. Brainstorming-like activities can also be structured, with
methods like Harold Lasswell' s continuous decision
The main difference is that classification analysis sorts
seminars. These structured approaches involve highly
concepts in general, while hierarchy analysis focuses on
motivated experts who meet frequently over several
causes. However, neither guarantees that you'll find the
years to discuss and make decisions.
perfect way to understand a problem, and hierarchy
Another set of procedures for coordinating and focusing Assumptional analysis is designed to overcome four
brainstorming activities is the construction of scenarios, major limitations of policy analysis:
SCENARIOS are outlines of possible future events that 1.) Policy analysis often assumes there ' s one decision-
can affect a problem. Scenario writing involves using maker with clear and unchanging preferences who
imagination to describe a future situation. There are makes decisions at one specific time.
two main types: free-form and operations-analytical.
2.) Policy analysis often overlooks different and strongly
held opinions about what problems are and how to
solve them.
3.) Policy analysis mostly occurs in organizations that are
closed off to questioning established problem
definitions, making it challenging to challenge prevailing
views.
4.) When evaluating problems and solutions, the criteria
often focus on surface-level aspects like logical
MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVE ANALYSIS
consistency instead of digging into the fundamental
- is a method for understanding problems by assumptions behind how the problems are defined.
looking at them from three angles: personal,
organizational, and technical.
- Seen as an alternative to the nearexclusive Assumptional analysis acknowledges the significance of
emphasis on so-called rationaltechnical disagreements and dedication within a group. It creates
approaches, multiple perspective analysis is highly contrasting policies through conflict, which helps
expressly designed to address ill-structured expose and question the assumptions behind each
problems. policy.
MAJOR FEATURES: Assumptional analysis involves the use of five
sequentially ordered methods.
TECHNICAL PERSPECTIVE. The technical (T) perspective
views problems and solutions in terms of optimization
models and employs microeconomics, benefit–cost
analysis, systems analysis, and decision analysis.
ORGANIZATIONAL PERSPECTIVE. The organizational (O)
perspective views problems and solutions as part of an
orderly progression (with minor but temporary crises)
from one organizational state to another.
PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE. The personal (P) perspective
views problems and solutions in terms of individual
perceptions, needs, and values.

ASSUMPTIONAL ANALYSIS
- Assumptional analysis is a method that aims at
the creative synthesis of conflicting assumptions
about problem situations.
- Assumptional analysis is explicitly designed for
problem situations where policy analysts, CHAPTER SUMMARY
policymakers, and other stakeholders cannot
agree on how to formulate a problem. This chapter has provided an overview of the nature of
- Assumptional analysis is relatively policy problems, described the process of structuring
comprehensive, because it may be used with these problems, and examined relationships among
other methods and with groups, individuals, or policy models and specific methods of problem
both. structuring. One of the most important challenges
facing policy analysts is reducing the likelihood of a type
iii error: formulating the wrong problem.
CHAPTER3: ASSESSMENT AND FORECASTNG POLICY
FEATURES

Knowing the future, probably gives us a warning of what

is to come and allows you to plan. Then it can be applied
also in analyzing a policy.

FORECASTING- is a set of procedures for creating

information about future states of society on the basis
of present and prior information.

- Forecasting provides a prospective vision of policy

outcomes, enlarging capacities for understanding,
control, and societal guidance.

THREE PRINCIPAL FORMS/APPROACHES

CHAPTER 4. DECISION-MAKING (HBO) 2. Limited review of alternatives – focus on
alternatives, similar to those already in effect
Link between Perception and Decision-Making
Perception 3. Satisficing – selecting the first alternative that is
“good enough”
- process with which individuals detect and
interpret the environment. Our perception of
the environment is not entirely rational.
2. INTUITIVE DECISION-MAKING
DECISION-MAKING
It occurs outside conscious thought; it relies on holistic
It refers to making choices among alternative courses of associations, or links between disparate pieces of
action—which may also include inaction (Conger, information; it’s fast; and it’s affectively charged,
Kanungo, 2017) meaning it usually engages the emotions.
USES
TWO MAIN FACTORS IN DECISION-MAKING 1. Increases with experience
 Who is going to make the decision? 2. Can be a powerful complement to rational analysis in
 What is the quality of the decision? decision making.

TWO TYPES OF DECISIONS 3. LINEAR MODEL OF DECISION MAKING

1. PROGRAMMED- straightforward decisions that involves listing positive and negative factors of each
occur frequently enough that an automated decision alternative (Lumen, 2012).
response is developed.
If you’ve ever made a list of pros and cons around a
2. NON-PROGRAMMED- unique and require
certain decision, then you’ve embarked on linear
conscious thinking, informational gathering, and
decision making.
careful consideration of alternatives.

4. GARBAGE CANMODEL
ASSESSING ETHICAL CONCERNS IN DECISION-MAKING
The garbage can model is one where managers use
 Is decision fair?
information about problems, participants, solutions, and
 Will I feel better or worse about myself after I
opportunities haphazardly to generate ideas and
make this decision?
potential decisions (Lumen, 2012).
 Does this decision violate any organizational
rules?
 Does this decision break any laws? COMMON BIASES AND ERRORS IN DECISION-MAKING
 How would I feel if this decision was broadcast
on the news? 1. OVERCONFIDENCE BIAS- As managers and
employees become more knowledgeable about
an issue, the less likely they are to display
THREE CATEGORIES OF DECISION overconfidence.
2. ANCHORING BIAS- A tendency to fixate on
1. STRATEGIC DECISIONS- set the course of an
initial information and fail to adequately adjust
organization.
for subsequent information.
2. TACTICAL DECISIONS- are decisions about how
3. CONFIRMATION BIAS- Seeking out information
things will get done.
that reaffirms our past choices and discounting
3. OPERATIONAL DECISIONS- refer to decisions
information that contradicts past judgments.
that employees make each day to make the
4. AVAILABILITY BIAS- Basing judgments on
organization run.
information that is readily available.
DECISION-MAKING MODELS 5. ESCALATION OF COMMITMENT- Staying with a
decision even when there is clear evidence that
1. RATIONAL DECISION-MAKING- relies on a number of
it is wrong.
assumptions, including that the decision maker has
6. RISK AVERSION- Preferring a sure thing over a
complete information, is able to identify all the relevant
risky outcome.
options in an unbiased manner, and chooses the option
7. HINDSIGHT BIAS- Believing falsely that we could
with the highest utility.
have predicted the outcome of an event after
STEPS: that outcome is already known.
1. Limited search for criteria and alternatives – familiar
criteria and easily found alternatives
HANDLING A PROBLEM
When determining a course of action, there are five
different courses of action for handling a problem:
1. Corrective action—finding a solution for the problem
once it has occurred
2. Interim action— allowing the decision maker to
postpone the decision
3. Preventive action—aim at never letting the cause of
the problem happen
4. Contingency action—provides a backup plan in the
event there is a problem
5. Adaptive action—the decision is made to adapt to
the situation rather than spend the time or money to fix
it or eliminate it.

CREATIVITY IN ORGANIZATIONS
- Better decisions are those that incorporate
novel and useful ideas, or creativity. An
organization will tend to make better decisions
when creative people are involved in the
process.

CREATIVITY- The ability to produce novel and useful

ideas. It helps people to:
 See problems others can’t see.
 Better understand the problem
 Identify all viable alternatives.
 Identify alternatives that aren’t readily
apparent.

THREE-STAGEMODEL OF CREATIVITY STEPS

1. Problem formulation: identify a problem or
opportunity that requires a solution as yet
unknown.
2. Information gathering of possible solutions
incubate in an individual’s mind.
3. Idea generation: develop possible solutions
from relevant information and knowledge.
4. Idea evaluation: evaluate potential solutions
and identify the best one Cause of creative
behavior:
 Creative potential- Expertise is the single most
important predictor of creative potential.
 Creative environment- Motivation and Rewards
and recognition.