Hello. Welcome to you listening online to this program. My name is Mack Mukai. We're gonna be talking about those decision making. And I worked for the aaw LTD were remarking between consultancy on the legal sector Your job, Kelly W. Is where folks to help and support folks like you. And it's really quite interesting this particular program, he notes. Siri's will have no heavy this video clip here which run 30 40 minutes. Aquino Siri's hoping to get you some reminder of the decision making critical thinking long program that data according well back. Or it will give you some incentive Gonna look at it. But it is something entire itself backed up by a complaint workbook download. Have look at the area. I suppose you think a lot of jobs deep if we are in ministry capacity and professional service organization is all about being think, proving that a current situation from applying all knowledge without that legal going from my case, marketing management knowledge to make decisions on behalf kinds on do that successfully, I suppose what this program gives us it's going interest is if you look at this, this is a program that it matched very closely to the SA raise competency framework for qualified solicitors on it probably reminds us the sorts of things that we have to do as professionals. Your case, special services that would not necessarily have been spelled out haven't been competency frameworks. Although we have to come to terms with its spring working, he's actually signaling really quite interesting areas. So what is covered in the policy framework? Well, first of all, we need to be able to look at the information sources. That's what See more information sources doesn't mean better. We then need to be able to search for the information. We'll success having gone certain information. But I need more. Find out something else the way you're fine. Having found that we need to recognize what is good, what's not good. So what is the quality of the viability of information? I give you a little example off elementary statistics that are quite simply biased. So if we get all those information sources together, how then bring about protecting judgments? All chemin make decisions on behalf of all kinds. There are suggestions so far has been supported by the appropriate material, So let's get into it. Let's have a good information source is critical eye on some of those things and see what this makes honors. If you think about workflow project processes that you go through when you take off matter, then there are a number of different decision stages. So very quickly, Maura, visit notes, Take instruction from a client and then you must decide to take things on. Are we going to be a conflict of interests? Sides decisions there. Then we put the engagement best together. Represent our information. What we're gonna do, response to that on, feel fresh, then designing. Okay, how do we get all on deliver to this mountain for fear? Upstanding expects from us. Let's get on. Do the work that we're doing the work decisions made throughout that process They next age. Having completed this, what else is needed camp beside off waiting to go from there on. We will then have a fight with you at some stage to make some decisions about professional improved And as that process is going on, what we have to resuscitate physician's pH levels risk issue management, deal with those sorts of things and also recognize that we have to manage your stakeholders in danger. The matter ourselves, We've got the client plans Family. We've got our own support around supervise a lot about people who have a fair amount of interest. So throughout its course, there are lots of lost seasons that needs today. So how do we assess some of those information sources? Well, when I was going through as a student of looking at postgraduate qualifications, I was advised by the universities colleges that was working with to beware off this acronym crop, Of course, Crab. So what? All those steps and I use a number of different acronyms on this program to help guide you of the useful checklists. So you can explore these a bit more detail if you wish. 1st 1 is to say okay, how current is the information now, the amount of information that's been delivered throughout time has grown and grown and grown grown exponentially on with Of course, we have information changes so rapidly. And if you look for film leaving at the S r raise code of conduct, the incarnations have gone through a number of different stages. So no. 18 version of 19 version about something this Is it the 20th version off the condom? So the question we have any information? When was it published? When you do a search online, for example, finish your such a camping only timeline basis, then the information will not be having got home reliable recent information. We don't have to question reliability off that so called reliable information. Who says So? What can we do with it? How do we know that is reliable? Because I think when books were being published, then an editor that short of board side with content of doing, I've written books, work colleagues so forth last Twinkie on years and all those who appeared with you before they're published. But today, the Internet, everybody becomes a publisher. You can publish whatever you like. Even write your dogs. You information up there you could put informational link it. Who is assessing some of content that's been put up. So what authority? They have experiences. Their own research is a collection of research there. Where is it coming from? On. There are good journals out there. Obviously you read the Gazette re practice law. You'll read those sort documents. They're very, very good journals. But There are other things that may be coming from other territories with other degrees off quality that authority. But then something put the information together with this is that well, I'll show you statistics drawn this program how to make a simple gaffe and skew the information insults is accurate or is comparable. Might be. Then finally does the information. So you hold off doesn't actually meet the purpose that you wanted to, because after all, it was written for the purpose of something else. That's what your purpose is, his or her purpose and be matched yours. So a few thoughts there. I hope you find that quite useful. Well, talking about the incident, searching for information, I think very, quite good at it. We're very used to using various search engines. We're used to looking at the way in which information is presented. But here's an interesting thought. You do a Google search or Yahoo on the other search engine. Five hops. You do that having pages do you go through? Do you look at first page second page? While there's 20 information sources and someone besides its most relevant your search well again, you could change the relevance of that search like date, time zone, so forth to think about your more successful information. Now, you see, because we all do that we all think rather clever. I thought I was quite good at finding stuff in line breaks. When I got my masters, I thought, Well, how many times I gotta get remarkably marking how often during periods of language? No, find this stuff looking for. And then I started talking to the librarians. My goodness, the leave, boys and girls in the library that I used really smart it comes from Do a lot of I'm mine searching yourselves. It doesn't mean we're smart as we think. So let's have a look at different ways of searching. And, of course, as soon as this is recorded, it is out off date. Why? Because those search engines I just mentioned are changing their algorithms. So let's have a look. We used to use those lovely 1,000,000,000 searches by putting in various quotes and asterisks and so forth to decide what it wants. More search the links and searches containing all of these words. Some of the world's this were those were so on so forth. Well, Of course, that's changing. I have some information that I've published in early 2018 Win this material was the corny on search and so forth, and I do apologize if you're looking at this program in 2019 because it is 12 months old, that's your problem. You're doing some search now. And is it going to the same sort things before? So a number of things that you can start doing on. I'm sure that you're if you're using Google do or the other search engines, then there will be those classic taps that you have, because behind that there's lots of lots of other taps. You convince people such if you go to your C drive on the laptop and and you search for a keyword like solicitor, then it will take a long time to search every document on gigabytes of information to try and find what you want. It would be best, but of course, if you then go through the files and go down to a client or pretty firm Dave, whatever else that sub folders, your search will be so much faster. So your taps allowing you to narrow searches into areas that you want on when you open up their parents? It is going interesting. How many chaps there are on here are just a selection? Get based Google one images on that would be a very rich source of information. Their copyrights, of course, track financial information. Bean variously there. Being the Microsoft surgeon is not Senator, because it's not too mass is a lot of things on YouTube. Way direct people to various bits. Beast on YouTube. Very unsourced off information off various people putting up their own videos. Not just interested cats trying to get themselves out of buckets. You could then look at various play on so so news that the logs exemption. Exception. Exception. The list is endless, but it's well worth it. Did you would know this to have a look in detail? Alternatives to narrow down some centuries? Okay, let's have a look at them where we could go. Well, I mentioned somebody being searches. You use things like close to get particular words or groups of words began. That's very powerful. Of course, Asterisk Comic Self given is the Estes used as a wild card were come as the risk right now ask your is me, but it quotes like that. What is it? Well, that's one of the Beatles lyrics on, uh, that would be a life searching for It's actually that and see what comes up. If you want a a page that links to another page, look at UK. Well, think Carol will then find pages that links to things that with presents it has that it gives a rich data for you could get narrow down. Six. Now things use The Gazette could be anything else. Practicable, eccentric, eccentric Central. And then, if you wanted sites that remains to other sites and go to law journals and find related to physical really shopping. No, seriously. When you're looking at these ways searching, you're saying that there's lots of lots of different I haven't used. Okay, well, that's your online searches, your internal searches, your own life researches. I haven't talked about any of those very good searches for presidents and so forth for legal matters. LexisNexis Lortel Exception exception. This quite long you'll have your favorites there. Sane rules apply and searching with those, and I think it's well worth. It's outside the scope of this to talk with Jeff not every function your firm has to talk. People practice on. Attend some of those online training programs specific to LexisNexis or so along the account manager said, will help you with that. I think when we've presented some information the whatever source it might be, we then have to stop, have a look at that information and then stuck validating, evaluative and seeing whether or not there's any gaps there or whether or not we can believe it. So a few thoughts and ideas on this particular area when somebody writing going to block or something like that getting somebody else's. Elon's right. Here's thoughts, particular fact about the marketplace. Fact about what's going on. Interpretation. What's been happening then there's a number. Things. What do you think about all that? Any gaps? If you look at what people write, whether that's, you know, a learning journal. It's an Exacto law. Some area like that, some industry journal then think about it from the point of view writer. Are they trying to show off their expertise? Are trying to sell the business? Are they trying to make a political point because all of that may or may not be giving me the information. Exactly you want it is what Today? Is Spain something there viewing spittle Because then looking at their connection To what degree are they supporting their arguments with vantage data on Well explores Look later on this program degreed, which we will, if we have your idea, find evidence to support that rather than given more balance approaching. This happens in all sorts. Yeah, as I'm sure you know, from what she news on any particular chapter. Because if this person is what evidence we need to validate whether that evidence be robust enough, whether it's actually valid and works for particular situation. So how we identify some of those gaps make well, a few things to think here, look at the person because he hasn't. People have. Now we can't be candy Martin Luther King that something will put tremendous amount to get swept along by that. But in fact, what they're saying isn't necessarily the complete. The absolute picture is being put across. And be careful when you look at other people's work rating, or D. A video presentation is whether that is a valid piece of work with that's their fuses get way I'll be being influenced by anything. Certain things that I've written when I've been in employees would be different than I would write as an employer, because my gender it's slightly different. So if you're looking at any information, get any account from any other person, then clearly looking at those peripheral external factors influencing them to give a pretty story in a particular way. And we see this. I don't know if you take it sector something like scientific journals, people will often right information there as a professor or something that you find on the phone to do. Cos. Is behind sponsoring their next piece of research with something. So on external influences there was inference. And then, of course, those internal literal factors as well. The way you say say, Do you want the as an employee say is quite different from a So my little check NIST four points here I find those is to actually say, What is it that still confusing you? What you want to find out about why this happens? What do you need help in understanding what's do you still have questions about when you've identified your own thoughts, where there may be a gap. You can then start to look a little bit more, certainly to find out whether fill those gaps in time. Now then, let's take a simple example. I'm getting here. More information notes. Of course, when somebody is saying that they've done research and they got taken ill. So therefore this is giving. So let's say that somebody's doing client satisfaction in the particular sector. When looking at housing, we're looking the crime. This with the other on there's reporting or whether they're firm is meeting particular benchmark of competence of delivering good staff service. So here we've got a simple scale, a five point scale, a scale of sharpness might say, somebody thinking about service we gave you how you score us on a scale. And as you can see, we have given it a new miracle scale. One bottom into the scale. Five. Dominance go well, quite natural. So something saying, Well, OK, what's your average school? Well, we need to look at that and think about it in some way, and you've done survey of 500 times you reporting on what, 500 your clients think about your phone so you might say, Well, OK, we've got a scale. Find itself 200% so we might. But this sort of situation se 2040 60 80 100. That's a very logical off. 500 respondents. We've got 42 very unhappy hundreds and be five middle of the road and 77 Very happy. So what's our percentage? Satisfaction? Well, 42 multiplied by 2098 40 175. 60. And so we end up with that figure. Maximum be scored is, uh, uh, 500 people school five. So we could say what will be screened out of 50,000 we have a total score of 31,600 out of a possible 50,000 that must equal 63% satisfaction. And therefore this'll firm is doing very well compared to benchmark sector, which is, I don't know, 58% or whatever the figure might be says that he's writing about this telling how wonderful that phone amazing it's done on. They've put a scale together. So there will scale of justness. Unhappy, Very happy Score. 12345 Start counting one. So feminist percentages and you end up like that. Well, isn't it one? What's wrong with it? Come on. What is wrong with this? Well, what's happened, of course, is that although you start counting from 12345 12345 fingers on my hands, we don't start saying north 1234 But we should on this scale, because although it's 100 point scale, the bottom end of it should be zero. So let's put the bottom end of it. Zero on then, instead of being 20 points between each of the five areas, is 25 57 500 mortars That matter what? Of course it matters because now when you multiply 42 by 0 98 25 except etcetera, you get a score 27,000 out of possible 50,000. That gives a 54% satisfaction. No, 63 very, very elementary, say here, saying this is quite obvious. But I have seen so many firms put some information together about how well things are put, a present presentation to management, and they used this falling into that trap 500. There are therefore five groups, so each group is worth 20 points. It must your scale must start from zero up to him. And that was the bias for you. So beware of the distance sticks. Beware of the numbers. Lies damn lies and statistics. That title off book that I used many years ago when I was Electra Post grad college being statistics quite interesting here. So with that in mind, let's go and evaluate some of the information for its quality and its reliability. Well, if you're evaluating date ecology, a few things to think about what we think, Well, what credentials has somebody got a lot of people blogging, but they have no credentials whatsoever. I may have a qualification in one particular area and it might be in marketing. It might be in management, but wouldn't pay much attention to me if I was talking about neurosurgery because I'm not that good at it, quite honestly. So you know, what credentials do I have in the areas that I am speaking? Seem to be quite bored. What methods have been used to collect the data? What have they done to bring together their article? Where what sources of they got good articles have sources of information? How credible was that recent laws it and used the craft example we gave earlier. I think about Datelines. That sort of thing mentioned that before. If you're writing things for the professionally in Chile is quite different. A set of criteria writing public vice versa. So be very careful that you are looking at it from with professional I on your then question whether or not it's actually written for a professional. I in that way on the even break broad overview very, very narrow treatment to support particular thought theory. Right? They got evaluate data. Primary data is data that is established for a particular purpose. Is your purpose your definition? Watch want? But if you rely on somebody else's information days to put together an argument, well, that's secondary. It's secondary to the purpose in which they got the information together on that, of course, has a bearing on its validity and pick up those references. I've written texts going back 1991 was my first go off the book with Jon Will Test 2007 was my most recent, so, therefore, that's a decade or more ago when you're listening to this well, in some things, a van it then. But some things are less valid going back today when we're looking at use of from people's time in work and work situation, time in office, thinking about support, starting about artificial intelligence, doing jobs, fishing terms, new data that worked back, looking at sports, last contribution fee. Any is a bit out of date in the light. All artificial intelligence. Okay, that's a given area completely. But you can see whether or not the modernity the Recency information has its validity. Onda Azul, just young with smiling faces through the numbers, make sense. So from all that we're putting on the information together, we want to make some infected judgments from all those various sources you pull over together. And I think, what is it working now? This is really quite tough, because if you have a particular thought in mind and you've got six pieces of information to build up a particular report to management, uh, caseload, something like that. Somebody, your are put together. The difficulty is to decide which ones to use What not You were biased in our thinking on that. Something worth exploring. We're talking big about devices on this program. There is another day to program that explores in more detail. So off that online information we mentioned, a very simple acronym that I've used is represented by this tin can bouncing across the screen, kicking down the street. Well, some questions that I find quite useful is to remember. See, the A N. C. Is credibility that person, the authority, opinions, facts, the language. They're using the authority of language, a professional language, a trying to convince, with flowery language to publics of what credibility? That's the sea A looks at their agenda. What were they writing for? If you're picking up information? 14. That would be quite different from somebody else's reporting on a similar matter where they're trying to give a particular spin on outcome to that particular information. If they are good authors, they'll clear about their best invest clear about their viewpoint. So there's a CNN A. On the end is the need. Is the trustworthy source gonna be useful to you? What to do with that information? What need that it's fulfilling so again, a little help. Get your thinking straight when it comes to questions off the information and one of the other techniques that I quite like this one. Prompt coming a bit more detail, workbook again, Quite useful thing to stop and think and use this acronym and to think about the number off different facets. How is this information presented verbally or really video written graphics, data charts, all those sorts of things tabulations? They will be very, very careful about how those pieces of information are put together on the ours for relevance. Does the authors information how relevant is into the purpose that you want to put it to? And I think I know what I've done research. I find things that really quite interesting but not actually relevant to the argument put across Wembley. Story across I can end up with. The relevance is that's only worth thing, applying that objectivity to the data to the information where it's presented to what the author has tried to do with it. So look at the methodology used, whether it's a business record, how it's structured to whom the audiences aimed for actually your information for the same purpose if not be something difference between two Problems, of course, is very important to the author source where that's come from organization that represented references, citations, those things going to be very important. Then finally, the recency time units, the appropriateness. Very simple acronym, the very useful to use. And then you'll be much more objective about how you're looking those multiple sources to see whether or not you're reaching a coherent and valid answer to the problem. Getting better decisions on the information leads us to make breeze and decisions supported by the relevant evidence. Sift out the irrelevant will be mildly interesting on the not as important to your situation that circles. So that's look a decision making on Look at it in a bit more detail. How can we use these different sources of information to make some good decisions for you? Well, when it comes to decision making, I think there's a lot of things that one used to look at alternatives and uncertainty. The risks of making wrong decisions hurt the people involved. Complexity, big position, small position. So looking at position, we say, OK, what is the nature off problem? But I am trying to solve what is situation. Purpose Decision isn't ABOUT CLIMB ISn't ABOUT FIRM ISn't ABOUT man from kids about other things What expected outcomes, at least that way, Ask like questions about the priorities, time or money. Then we can collect and summarize the data because they can't be made in a complete vacuum, because it has to be in context of what's going on within situation. Client situations different from a business situation different from a situation for a family matter. So so how do we look at the alternatives? What are those creative and alternative? And I think this one area we can struggle a little bit to produce some ideas on generating tenders. You want tips on how to brainstorm ideas, then you'll find those in the notes to guide you. From there. We can say, OK, what are our alternatives? There are that will tend to just get on with it. Maybe other alternatives. Reaching a decision from that becomes very, very poor and then finally getting old to make that decision. So thinking Joyce has become a very important part of those decision making skills on, and taking that forward into the next phase is implementation to make sure that we implement those decisions very, very careful, while not something want to dwell on. But when you recall the great tragedy of Challenger space shuttle disaster in his published days of publishing information Heather to up until that particular launch, where there was a time pressure on the weather pressure window of opportunity to launch questions hitherto had always been any proof could fly as the decision. Can you prove that seem to be fairly robust for many of the new admissions? And so for the challenger process, they looking that they asked scientists, Can you prove another question? Hey, proved we can fly. Can you prove we come fly? Isn't that the same question put to different ways? Well, actually, in decision making, no faster Because if you prove you could fly, then you know, conference drink doing If you can't prove If you bruv, you can't fly, you can't prove you can apply, doesn't mean you can't fly. Just improved it. That was the problem. There was problems with the O rings. They couldn't prove that they failed, but we all know they did tragic results. So something to explore on decision making because post event is thoroughly permanent. If you get the decisions right up until 0.6, then you won't likely not have to deal with after strong things as just so reaching reason. Decisions? Well, anything caps were written on. The reason must not be that you have poor decision making skills. So reasonable decisions. We got some elements in the notes on good choice. What might they be? Well recognized choices got got to be made the cult of that decision when the choice has been made. So So what constitutes critical success for a particular decision? What makes for a good out and from the options you've got? Which action meets those critical, successful? And if you get it wrong, what are the risks? Is it a bit of time? Money is reputations current situation. That's very risks placed on those decisions that are made. So let's go through a process off critical thinking just to summarize it. Taken here in four very straightforward steps, The first thing is we analyzed the information which we've already discussed, and then we decide, what can I draw conclusion from? There's gonna build on any hypothesis. Does this information lead me help? May. How did I interpret it? Cannot decode thoughts of the author of the people, people asking questions. Am I going to restore it. Any of this, with my own interpretation off that doesn't fit with my own experience. And then and I conclude logically from that that makes him about it. Conclusions on. Then where do I take that? Do I need to go back to further analysis of a simple process? Perhaps critical thinking gone through very quickly, but it's reminding you off cognitive use for thinking process rather up about that fits that works and then we induct, happened to survive consequences. Or Paul thinking This remarkable neck top computer that we have on top of our spinal cord is actually remarkable organ, but it has shortcuts. It has ways of dealing with everyday matters, and it takes a logical behavior rather rational, which is frustrating. You see, we attack the human being. If somebody says something like, I don't like them. Therefore we don't like anything they say they're cleaning, distributed. They don't agree with that protect human being who's coming up with something we don't like. We know that people say to us well, you want to care. Was this attending on a slippery slope? If you agree to this thing that will happen, they wouldn't agree to this. I that would you? It's a sticker soap. Rational argument. The circular arguments, circular arguments are welcome. You have agreed to this on its beauty. Agree with that. Two things are related in my wooden time. Just that doesn't make any sense. Tickets like jumping was tickets like to jump. I mean, that's what Tiggers like to do. It is a circular argument. Doesn't make sense. But big. We use these very often. Of course, people say, Well, if you don't agree, operate your kneecaps. Well, that's quite a valid argument, and I agree with anything you don't bring unique. So we have these logical environments that create all these errors in logic. And we have those thinking or cognitive biases that I explored more detail on one of the other programs. But it leads to a genuine deficiency or limitation now, thinking we will have a floor in judgment all I'm always wrong. I must be wrong this time. Conversely usually right. So it must be right this time The bosses you right. So the boss must be right. This time we have flaws in their judgments. I can't remember any time that it didn't work, So I suppose it must work. Okay, But we might say, Well, people always do that. They you know, they like whatever they are, whether they might be social attribution there. It's the way we do things around here so we can't question it. Is the leading a comic bias? We've already talked about statistical errors of miscalculation, but we also have false senses of probability. That's something I'll be picking up on the program that deals in detail with biases. Just to whet your appetite nix to that program like this little cartoon. Give me a moment to find bias data supports called you and you, my dear stupid. So what are the cops? Devices? What? I'm not gonna get through on this program. Just in a straight The range of things got confirmation. Bias is where we look for things that confirm our ideas. They can do groupthink the way the firm thinks, and so on. And so, Andi, there are any more number of other ones looking at sort of biases that come with your interest in exploring these help of your appetite because they're in the next programme on there. Thoroughly good. A bit of fun looking at these and quite quite interesting. I don't enjoy exploring these myself. Well, that leaves us, then finish off. This program is just beginning. It is very much something that broadened our thoughts because of the competency framework from the S and A are identifying professional people like you need to be able to make value judgements, critical thinking, advise our clients appropriately. So from this program, I hope you thought a little bit more than incredible I to apply your information sources. I hope that you've bean able to be coupled my ideas to improve the way in which you search for information and recognize that there's a long tools out there that can help us search more successfully. We know that having collected that information that we can put it all together, not just distribute this guard Rather, all those things that we don't agree with just keep things do agree that we know what to believe or not. I got a checklist to go through to consider those quality reliability of information. We looked crop. We looked out. Props and other ideas can recall those use those on beam or analytical in your thinking. Make perfect judgments. Looking at all the various sources you've got putting together to do that on. Of course, we will reach better decisions supported by evidence when we're dealing with some of those biases. So there are That's it that's developed decision making. Predictably on overview in this keynote Sami's from Dayton. Oh, I hope you've enjoyed it. I've enjoyed pulling it all together. Do you look at the workbook? Explore that a bit more detail on a four to talking with you about critical thinking and a little bit more detail, which is on another program from the port. Failure with data, I said, Thanks very much for that. I think I I don't foresee talking to you on the next one, so bye for now.
Webinar
Workbook
3673 Users
41 Courses
143 Reviews
