I’m still trying to rationalize it, but I think the key is that some problems can be analyzed and solved in a linear, deductive way, while others have to be reverse-engineered from working examples, in an inductive way. To put it another way, some problems you can’t just logic your way through, instead you need to test and find what works and look for patterns.

I think the other key is that it’s important to avoid analysis paralysis, and when you aren’t sure what to do, start taking action and pay attention to feedback.

@ Giovanna

Thank you. I suspect I may need to boil this down further at some point as I learn some more distinctions. So far, think the big ah-ha is that sometimes you can act on facts, but other times you need to act on patterns and intuition.

@ Alik

Thank you. I agree – it’s a great way for consultants to provide leadership. Conultants can help make sense of the chaos and share the patterns that work.

Good stuff!

I have never heard it put this way before. You are a great writer, only you can explain something like this.
Thank you,
Giovanna Garcia
Imperfect Action is better than No Action

This was fascinating. Now I have to make a decision about how to make a decision in any given context!

I like the way you made the complex theory so simple to understand, with three words in sequence for each situation. It’s interesting also to note the domains that each decision-making type can come under.