5 ms·

> Then the competition section comes. It is the part the authors have to consider competitors of their proposal. Thinking about an alternative solution instead

> Then the competition section comes. It is the part the authors have to consider competitors of their proposal. Thinking about an alternative solution instead of their suggestion requires people to focus on the problem instead of blindly loving and defending their solutions. One of the most powerful tools I have found towards constructive discussions is moving away from binary (works or does not work) to options (implications and imitations). The encouragement of generating multiple options allows discussions to consider different ideas. It also allows to think about limitations and implications. The best part is that it puts decision makers to accept these limitations and implications for the upside that they give. On the other side, it allows employees clarity on where the decision makers want to go.

phkahler 6y ago
I like the idea of looking at implications and limitations. That discussion can be useful for understanding. However, at the end I think all options need to be filtered through "will it work?" Because if it doesn't there is no point. That discussion may also result in a change to the definition used for weather it works or not.
- ssss11 6y ago
  Yeah in my projects we usually end up with options on a scorecard against various metrics such as feasibility, cost, security, important features etc.. its not always an exact science which can rattle some participants but the approximate/relative scoring should give the group an answer to all hopefully align with, take to the decision maker and pitch for that desired option.
- tchalla 6y ago
  I see where you are coming from. I would like to add two points. First, I have rarely seen only one approach to "it works". There are always more than one ways to "will it work?". Second, in order to get around the definition of "working" - I encourage people to specify success criteria upfront. Now, even if the definition of success criteria change later - they are all transparent. Everyone involved in the process has accountability and responsibility to oversee the right success criteria, change of success criteria.
  - phkahler 6y ago
    >> I have rarely seen only one approach to "it works". Oh I completely agree. And all the other considerations are important to pick when more than one option will work. But I've seen too many things that don't work get through.
mwilliamson 6y ago
Similarly, I've found one of the most useful questions to pose for each option is "What would need to be true for this to be a good idea?". This is helpful whether you're initially supportive of or opposed to the idea. In either case, you have to be explicit about the conditions/facts you think are necessary for success and why they're either true or false, which tends to lead to a more concrete discussion with more space for agreement and shared understanding. If you're supportive, this makes it easier to acknowledge that those conditions/facts might not necessarily be true. If you're opposed, this makes it easier to appreciate the idea and work on it despite your reservations.
- tchalla 6y ago
  > Similarly, I've found one of the most useful questions to pose for each option is "What would need to be true for this to be a good idea?". Thanks for mentioning this. I think, it's the principle of inversion. I can resoundingly echo your comment. Personally, it has proven to be very useful for me to get people out of "tunnel vision".
- Smaug123 6y ago
  This sounds very related to one of David Marquet's credos from "Turn The Ship Around!". Don't ask "Are we ready?"; instead, ask "How ready are we?". Everything needs to be phrased so as to invite people to express the knowledge they have, rather than demanding what amounts to a declaration of tribal identity.

phkahler 6y ago

I like the idea of looking at implications and limitations. That discussion can be useful for understanding. However, at the end I think all options need to be filtered through "will it work?" Because if it doesn't there is no point. That discussion may also result in a change to the definition used for weather it works or not.

ssss11 6y ago
Yeah in my projects we usually end up with options on a scorecard against various metrics such as feasibility, cost, security, important features etc.. its not always an exact science which can rattle some participants but the approximate/relative scoring should give the group an answer to all hopefully align with, take to the decision maker and pitch for that desired option.
tchalla 6y ago
I see where you are coming from. I would like to add two points. First, I have rarely seen only one approach to "it works". There are always more than one ways to "will it work?". Second, in order to get around the definition of "working" - I encourage people to specify success criteria upfront. Now, even if the definition of success criteria change later - they are all transparent. Everyone involved in the process has accountability and responsibility to oversee the right success criteria, change of success criteria.
- phkahler 6y ago
  >> I have rarely seen only one approach to "it works". Oh I completely agree. And all the other considerations are important to pick when more than one option will work. But I've seen too many things that don't work get through.

mwilliamson 6y ago

Similarly, I've found one of the most useful questions to pose for each option is "What would need to be true for this to be a good idea?". This is helpful whether you're initially supportive of or opposed to the idea. In either case, you have to be explicit about the conditions/facts you think are necessary for success and why they're either true or false, which tends to lead to a more concrete discussion with more space for agreement and shared understanding. If you're supportive, this makes it easier to acknowledge that those conditions/facts might not necessarily be true. If you're opposed, this makes it easier to appreciate the idea and work on it despite your reservations.

tchalla 6y ago
> Similarly, I've found one of the most useful questions to pose for each option is "What would need to be true for this to be a good idea?". Thanks for mentioning this. I think, it's the principle of inversion. I can resoundingly echo your comment. Personally, it has proven to be very useful for me to get people out of "tunnel vision".
Smaug123 6y ago
This sounds very related to one of David Marquet's credos from "Turn The Ship Around!". Don't ask "Are we ready?"; instead, ask "How ready are we?". Everything needs to be phrased so as to invite people to express the knowledge they have, rather than demanding what amounts to a declaration of tribal identity.