Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Unstructured Problems
Can be described with a high degree Cannot be described with a high of completeness degree of completeness Can be solved with a high degree of Cannot be resolved with a high certainty degree of certainty Experts usually agree on the correction solution Experts often disagree about the best solution LEARN TO CONSTRUCT AND DEFEND REASONABLE SOLUTIONS Ranges from very simple to very complex Estimating the sum of future cash flows from the use of long-lived assets Judging the adequacy of an argument promoting a reduction in the capital gains tax rate
Interpret a companys current ratio Prepare operating budget for next 5 years
LEARN TO REASON TO CORRECT SOLUTIONS Ranges from very simple to very complex Reconciling a companys bank account Calculating the capital gain on the sale of a building
Compute straight-line depreciation Classify a lease as capital or operating once all necessary facts are assembled
2.
If we fail to properly identify the nature of the problem, we will not explore the problem adequately -- and this will cause additional difficulties in justifying a solution to the problem.
3.
You should explore the problem as thoroughly as time and other resources permit and develop a framework within which to think about the problem. Without an adequate framework for evaluating information and possible solutions, your attempts to resolve the problem will probably be haphazard and the risk of making a poor decisions increases greatly.
4.
Many people find it somewhat difficult to complete tasks that require strong justification for their own opinions and that also effectively counter arguments supporting the opinions of others.
See also pdf file on Steps for Better Thinking
The material on unstructured problem solving was derived from a workshop presented by Susan K. Wolcott and Cindy L. Lynch, at the 1996 annual meeting of the American Accounting Association in Chicago.
Quasi-Reflective Thinking (Stages 4 and 5) 4 Concept that knowledge is unknown in several specific cases leads to the abstract generalization that knowledge is uncertain 5 Knowledge is uncertain and must be understood within a context; thus justification is context specific Reflective Thinking (Stages 6 and 7) 6 Knowledge is uncertain but constructed (rather than discovered) by comparing evidence and opinion on different sides of an issue or across contexts 7 Knowledge is the outcome of a process of reasonable inquiry in which solutions to illstructured problems are constructed. The adequacy of those solutions is evaluated in terms of what is most reasonable or probable on the basis of current evidence and reevaluated when relevant new evidence, perspectives, or tools of inquiry become available.
Based on various exhibits in Patricia M. King and Karen Strohm Kitchener, Developing Reflective Judgment, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994.
Concept that knowledge is unknown in several specific cases leads to the abstract generalization that knowledge is uncertain
Not certain because of limitations of the knower; knowing always involves an element of ambiguity (e.g., incorrect reporting of data, data lost over time, etc.) Interpretation is inherent in all understanding; therefore, no knowledge is certain. Knowledge is contextual and subjective because it is filtered through a persons perceptions and criteria for judgment. Only interpretations of evidence, events, or issues may be known.
Via ones own and others biases, data, and logic. Differences in points of view exist because of peoples upbringing or because they deliberately distort information. Via evidence and rules of inquiry appropriate for the context. It is relative. Beliefs may be justified only within a given context or from a given perspective.
Knowledge is uncertain and must be understood within a context; thus justification is context specific
Knowledge is uncertain but constructed (rather than discovered) by comparing evidence and opinion on different sides of an issue or across contexts Knowledge is the outcome of a process of reasonable inquiry in which solutions to ill-structured problems are constructed. The adequacy of those solutions is evaluated in terms of what is most reasonable or probable on the basis of current evidence and reevaluated when relevant new evidence, perspectives, or tools of inquiry become available.
Knowledge is constructed into individual conclusions about illstructured problems on the basis of information from a variety of sources. Some points of view may be tentatively judged as better than others. Via complex processes of critical inquiry or synthesis. Actively open-minded thinking where beliefs can always be improved. Openness to alternatives and to counter evidence.