Decisionmaking in practice: The dynamics of muddling through. (September 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Flach, John M.; Feufel, Markus A.; Reynolds, Peter L.; Parker, Sarah Henrickson; Kellogg, Kathryn M.
• Is Part Of: Applied ergonomics. Volume 63(2017)
• Page Start: 133
• Page End: 141
• Publication Date: 2017-09
• Subjects: Abduction -- Decisionmaking -- Judgment -- Heuristic -- Adaptive control; Human engineering -- Periodicals; 620.82
• DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2017.03.017
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-6870

Abstract

Abstract: An alternative to conventional models that treat decisions as open-loop independent choices is presented. The alterative model is based on observations of work situations such as healthcare, where decisionmaking is more typically a closed-loop, dynamic, problem-solving process. The article suggests five important distinctions between the processes assumed by conventional models and the reality of decisionmaking in practice. It is suggested that the logic of abduction in the form of an adaptive, muddling through process is more consistent with the realities of practice in domains such as healthcare. The practical implication is that the design goal should not be to improve consistency with normative models of rationality, but to tune the representations guiding the muddling process to increase functional perspicacity. Highlights: Central Theme is that decision making in practice is not well-represented by open-loop models of choices. In practice, decision making involves a closed-loop, muddling through process to find solutions to complex problems. This dynamic search process is described in terms of an adaptive control system. In the adaptive control system an outer-loop functions as a metacognitive critic of an inner-loop control system. The adaptive control model can be applied to either individuals or distributed organizations.