DTU ProjectLab - User contributions [en-gb]

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-29T00:24:34Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey <ref name="portrait"> http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881 </ref> ]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England </ref>

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix <ref name="matrix"> http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg </ref> ]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. <ref name="Thompson"> J. D. Thompson, A. Tuden (1959); Strategies, structures and processes of organizational decision, University of Pittsburgh Press., Pittsburgh. </ref> They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. <ref name="Turton"> R. Turton (1991); Behaviour in a Business Context, London: Chapman and Hall. </ref> When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. <ref name="Child"> J. Child (1972); Organizational structure, environment and performance: the role of strategic choice, ''Sociology'', vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-21. </ref> <ref name="Pfeffer"> J. Pfeffer (1981); Power in Organizations, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. </ref> Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
This section introduces three well-known models of decision-making in the conditions of certainty.

=== Technical rationality ===
Technical rationality is an effective mode of decision-making in the situation when stakeholders are aware of their objectives and they are in agreement. Frederick Taylor (1911) established the theory of a scientific management where pure rationality prevails. <ref name="Taylor"> F. Taylor (1911); Scientific Management, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref>

Scientific managers are continuously scanning and researching the facts changing with the environment. Thus, they discover the way, how the capability of the organization is changing, too. By analyzing these facts, they apply step-by-step rules of logical consequences to bring out the possible options or routes. Considering their organization objectives, they calculate the effect of each option and choose the one, which maximizes the objectives. Afterwards, they also act on behalf to implement this option.

This method has two limitations. It only works if the stabile dynamics exists by being close both to agreement and to cause and effect certainty. On the other hand, another limitation originates from the human cognition. Pure rationality requires direct perception without any distortion. The person would have to memorize and store all facts in an exact way they have been observed. This way, the choice should be predetermined purely and directly by the facts. However, human manner is recognized not to be able to perceive facts and environment directly and purely on rational basis.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
Recognizing the limitations of the pure technical rationality model, ‘’’bounded rationality’’’ model was developed by Herbert Simon (1960). <ref name="bounded "> H. A. Simon (1960); The New Science of Management Decisions, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref> Bounded rationality is a weak form of technical rationality. It admits the limitation in economic resources such as in experience and knowledge. The nature of human brain provides only limited intellectual abilities, which also restrict the flow of communication in an organization. In these circumstances, instead of screening all the options, the managers only identify the most important information and options. It follows that they cannot maximize their objectives. Rather they satisfice them. They achieve the first action in the range of satisfactory in the given circumstances and limitations.

Managers also aimed to reduce the number of the decision-makings in order to compensate the limited resources and brain processing capacities. Thus, precedents were established based on previous cases and experience. This procedure is the so-called ‘’’bureaucracy’’’. This way, managers seek to avoid having to repeat the processes over and over again. Decisions happen to be outputs of same patterns. For instance, the budget of an organization for the coming year is often determined by the rate of expenses and spends of this year. Thus, by applying the bureaucratic roles, the goal is not to optimize the outcomes but rather to reduce the level of uncertainty faced during decision-making procedures. <ref name="bounded "> H. A. Simon (1960); The New Science of Management Decisions, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref> <ref name="bur"> R. M. Cyert, J. G. March (1963); A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. </ref>

In numerous cases, although the objectives are clear and indicating a high certainty, the interests conflict. There is no agreement between different stakeholders. In this situation, the most powerful coalition formed from managers will be the one bringing the outcome and taking action. This is the model of the ‘’’dominant coalition’’’. <ref name="bur"> R. M. Cyert, J. G. March (1963); A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. </ref>

=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===
This is a research-based model, which was discovered and developed by Quinn’s investigation (1980). <ref name="quinn"> J. B. Quinn (1980); Strategic Change: Logical Incrementalism, Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. </ref>

It is seen from Quinn’s research that large number of companies and effective managers are making strategic decisions not based on formal planning models such as the ones described in the paragraphs above. Rather they interfuse behavioural, political and formal analytical processes. This is a planned strategy. There effective managers accept the fact of high rate of uncertainty and do not plan everything. They only have the goal defined, therefore, the destination is strongly intended.
However, they leave a certain amount of flexibility for the company to deal with. There is no prior central intension how the goal should be reached, but goal is a motivation force showing the direction. The route is discovered by ‘one step at a time’ logical process. Through the whole way, there is possibility to learn and adjust the overall strategy by taking small steps as well as trial-and-error actions. The managers oversee the process and sustain some logic. On the other hand, they leave the organization to handle unforeseen happenings. Urgent and piecemeal decisions shape the future approach of the company towards its goal. It follows an orderly logical way by these minor decisions. They are always prepared to move opportunistically.

To conclude, the Quinn’s research showed a lifelike adjusted way of management of processing decisions. Only the start and end point is defined. The route to achieve the goal on is flexible and formed by small step decisions and trial-error processes.

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
The Stacey matrix is good to apply for the initial phase of decision-making. Its purpose is to examine the connection between cause and effect certainty and stakeholder agreement. In this regard, it gives guideline which model is worth to use for further analysis and steps in decision-making.

Thus, the Stacey matrix can only inform about the state of decision-making and navigate in the initial phase.

The other limitation is drawn by the fact of human behaviour. As its consequence, there are no sharp borderlines indicated between certain areas of the matrix. Each situation vary, this is what gives the challenge of handling complexity in management.

==Related articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-29T00:23:30Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey <ref name="portrait"> http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881 </ref> ]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England </ref>

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix <ref name="matrix"> http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg </ref> ]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. <ref name="Thompson"> J. D. Thompson, A. Tuden (1959); Strategies, structures and processes of organizational decision, University of Pittsburgh Press., Pittsburgh. </ref> They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. <ref name="Turton"> R. Turton (1991); Behaviour in a Business Context, London: Chapman and Hall. </ref> When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. <ref name="Child"> J. Child (1972); Organizational structure, environment and performance: the role of strategic choice, ''Sociology'', vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-21. </ref> <ref name="Pfeffer"> J. Pfeffer (1981); Power in Organizations, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. </ref> Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
This section introduces three well-known models of decision-making in the conditions of certainty.

=== Technical rationality ===
Technical rationality is an effective mode of decision-making in the situation when stakeholders are aware of their objectives and they are in agreement. Frederick Taylor (1911) established the theory of a scientific management where pure rationality prevails. <ref name="Taylor"> F. Taylor (1911); Scientific Management, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref>

Scientific managers are continuously scanning and researching the facts changing with the environment. Thus, they discover the way, how the capability of the organization is changing, too. By analyzing these facts, they apply step-by-step rules of logical consequences to bring out the possible options or routes. Considering their organization objectives, they calculate the effect of each option and choose the one, which maximizes the objectives. Afterwards, they also act on behalf to implement this option.

This method has two limitations. It only works if the stabile dynamics exists by being close both to agreement and to cause and effect certainty. On the other hand, another limitation originates from the human cognition. Pure rationality requires direct perception without any distortion. The person would have to memorize and store all facts in an exact way they have been observed. This way, the choice should be predetermined purely and directly by the facts. However, human manner is recognized not to be able to perceive facts and environment directly and purely on rational basis.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
Recognizing the limitations of the pure technical rationality model, ‘’’bounded rationality’’’ model was developed by Herbert Simon (1960). <ref name="bounded "> H. A. Simon (1960); The New Science of Management Decisions, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref> Bounded rationality is a weak form of technical rationality. It admits the limitation in economic resources such as in experience and knowledge. The nature of human brain provides only limited intellectual abilities, which also restrict the flow of communication in an organization. In these circumstances, instead of screening all the options, the managers only identify the most important information and options. It follows that they cannot maximize their objectives. Rather they satisfice them. They achieve the first action in the range of satisfactory in the given circumstances and limitations.

Managers also aimed to reduce the number of the decision-makings in order to compensate the limited resources and brain processing capacities. Thus, precedents were established based on previous cases and experience. This procedure is the so-called ‘’’bureaucracy’’’. This way, managers seek to avoid having to repeat the processes over and over again. Decisions happen to be outputs of same patterns. For instance, the budget of an organization for the coming year is often determined by the rate of expenses and spends of this year. Thus, by applying the bureaucratic roles, the goal is not to optimize the outcomes but rather to reduce the level of uncertainty faced during decision-making procedures. <ref name="bounded "> H. A. Simon (1960); The New Science of Management Decisions, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref> <ref name="bur"> R. M. Cyert, J. G. March (1963); A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. </ref>

In numerous cases, although the objectives are clear and indicating a high certainty, the interests conflict. There is no agreement between different stakeholders. In this situation, the most powerful coalition formed from managers will be the one bringing the outcome and taking action. This is the model of the ‘’’dominant coalition’’’. <ref name="bur"> R. M. Cyert, J. G. March (1963); A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. </ref>

=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===
This is a research-based model, which was discovered and developed by Quinn’s investigation (1980). <ref name="quinn"> J. B. Quinn (1980); Strategic Change: Logical Incrementalism, Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. </ref>

It is seen from Quinn’s research that large number of companies and effective managers are making strategic decisions not based on formal planning models such as the ones described in the paragraphs above. Rather they interfuse behavioural, political and formal analytical processes. This is a planned strategy. There effective managers accept the fact of high rate of uncertainty and do not plan everything. They only have the goal defined, therefore, the destination is strongly intended.
However, they leave a certain amount of flexibility for the company to deal with. There is no prior central intension how the goal should be reached, but goal is a motivation force showing the direction. The route is discovered by ‘one step at a time’ logical process. Through the whole way, there is possibility to learn and adjust the overall strategy by taking small steps as well as trial-and-error actions. The managers oversee the process and sustain some logic. On the other hand, they leave the organization to handle unforeseen happenings. Urgent and piecemeal decisions shape the future approach of the company towards its goal. It follows an orderly logical way by these minor decisions. They are always prepared to move opportunistically.

To conclude, the Quinn’s research showed a lifelike adjusted way of management to process decisions. Only the start and end point is defined. The route to achieve the goal on is flexible and formed by small step decisions and trial-error processes.

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
The Stacey matrix is good to apply for the initial phase of decision-making. Its purpose is to examine the connection between cause and effect certainty and stakeholder agreement. In this regard, it gives guideline which model is worth to use for further analysis and steps in decision-making.

Thus, the Stacey matrix can only inform about the state of decision-making and navigate in the initial phase.

The other limitation is drawn by the fact of human behaviour. As its consequence, there are no sharp borderlines indicated between certain areas of the matrix. Each situation vary, this is what gives the challenge of handling complexity in management.

==Related articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-29T00:23:03Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey <ref name="portrait"> http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881 </ref> ]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England </ref>

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix <ref name="matrix"> http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg </ref> ]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. <ref name="Thompson"> J. D. Thompson, A. Tuden (1959); Strategies, structures and processes of organizational decision, University of Pittsburgh Press., Pittsburgh. </ref> They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. <ref name="Turton"> R. Turton (1991); Behaviour in a Business Context, London: Chapman and Hall. </ref> When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. <ref name="Child"> J. Child (1972); Organizational structure, environment and performance: the role of strategic choice, ''Sociology'', vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-21. </ref> <ref name="Pfeffer"> J. Pfeffer (1981); Power in Organizations, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. </ref> Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
This section introduces three well-known models of decision-making in the conditions of certainty.

=== Technical rationality ===
Technical rationality is an effective mode of decision-making in the situation when stakeholders are aware of their objectives and they are in agreement. Frederick Taylor (1911) established the theory of a scientific management where pure rationality prevails. <ref name="Taylor"> F. Taylor (1911); Scientific Management, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref>

Scientific managers are continuously scanning and researching the facts changing with the environment. Thus, they discover the way, how the capability of the organization is changing, too. By analyzing these facts, they apply step-by-step rules of logical consequences to bring out the possible options or routes. Considering their organization objectives, they calculate the effect of each option and choose the one, which maximizes the objectives. Afterwards, they also act on behalf to implement this option.

This method has two limitations. It only works if the stabile dynamics exists by being close both to agreement and to cause and effect certainty. On the other hand, another limitation originates from the human cognition. Pure rationality requires direct perception without any distortion. The person would have to memorize and store all facts in an exact way they have been observed. This way, the choice should be predetermined purely and directly by the facts. However, human manner is recognized not to be able to perceive facts and environment directly and purely on rational basis.
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England. </ref>

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
Recognizing the limitations of the pure technical rationality model, ‘’’bounded rationality’’’ model was developed by Herbert Simon (1960). <ref name="bounded "> H. A. Simon (1960); The New Science of Management Decisions, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref> Bounded rationality is a weak form of technical rationality. It admits the limitation in economic resources such as in experience and knowledge. The nature of human brain provides only limited intellectual abilities, which also restrict the flow of communication in an organization. In these circumstances, instead of screening all the options, the managers only identify the most important information and options. It follows that they cannot maximize their objectives. Rather they satisfice them. They achieve the first action in the range of satisfactory in the given circumstances and limitations.

Managers also aimed to reduce the number of the decision-makings in order to compensate the limited resources and brain processing capacities. Thus, precedents were established based on previous cases and experience. This procedure is the so-called ‘’’bureaucracy’’’. This way, managers seek to avoid having to repeat the processes over and over again. Decisions happen to be outputs of same patterns. For instance, the budget of an organization for the coming year is often determined by the rate of expenses and spends of this year. Thus, by applying the bureaucratic roles, the goal is not to optimize the outcomes but rather to reduce the level of uncertainty faced during decision-making procedures. <ref name="bounded "> H. A. Simon (1960); The New Science of Management Decisions, New York: Harper Brothers. </ref> <ref name="bur"> R. M. Cyert, J. G. March (1963); A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. </ref>

In numerous cases, although the objectives are clear and indicating a high certainty, the interests conflict. There is no agreement between different stakeholders. In this situation, the most powerful coalition formed from managers will be the one bringing the outcome and taking action. This is the model of the ‘’’dominant coalition’’’. <ref name="bur"> R. M. Cyert, J. G. March (1963); A Behavioural Theory of the Firm, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. </ref>

=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===
This is a research-based model, which was discovered and developed by Quinn’s investigation (1980). <ref name="quinn"> J. B. Quinn (1980); Strategic Change: Logical Incrementalism, Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. </ref>

It is seen from Quinn’s research that large number of companies and effective managers are making strategic decisions not based on formal planning models such as the ones described in the paragraphs above. Rather they interfuse behavioural, political and formal analytical processes. This is a planned strategy. There effective managers accept the fact of high rate of uncertainty and do not plan everything. They only have the goal defined, therefore, the destination is strongly intended.
However, they leave a certain amount of flexibility for the company to deal with. There is no prior central intension how the goal should be reached, but goal is a motivation force showing the direction. The route is discovered by ‘one step at a time’ logical process. Through the whole way, there is possibility to learn and adjust the overall strategy by taking small steps as well as trial-and-error actions. The managers oversee the process and sustain some logic. On the other hand, they leave the organization to handle unforeseen happenings. Urgent and piecemeal decisions shape the future approach of the company towards its goal. It follows an orderly logical way by these minor decisions. They are always prepared to move opportunistically.

To conclude, the Quinn’s research showed a lifelike adjusted way of management to process decisions. Only the start and end point is defined. The route to achieve the goal on is flexible and formed by small step decisions and trial-error processes.

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
The Stacey matrix is good to apply for the initial phase of decision-making. Its purpose is to examine the connection between cause and effect certainty and stakeholder agreement. In this regard, it gives guideline which model is worth to use for further analysis and steps in decision-making.

Thus, the Stacey matrix can only inform about the state of decision-making and navigate in the initial phase.

The other limitation is drawn by the fact of human behaviour. As its consequence, there are no sharp borderlines indicated between certain areas of the matrix. Each situation vary, this is what gives the challenge of handling complexity in management.

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T20:23:44Z

Biankajuh:

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T20:15:48Z

Biankajuh:

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T20:11:33Z

Biankajuh:

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T20:03:20Z

Biankajuh:

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T20:02:26Z

Biankajuh:

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:52:48Z

Biankajuh:

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:51:34Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey [http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881] ]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix <ref name="matrix"> [http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg] </ref> ]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:49:44Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey [http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881] ]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix [http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg] ]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:49:13Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey [http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881] ]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix <ref name="matrix"> http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg </ref>]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:47:07Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey <ref name="portait"> http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881 </ref>]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix <ref name="matrix"> http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg </ref>]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:45:44Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey <ref name="portait"> http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881 </ref>]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:44:06Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimensions Stacey matrix. It allows us to compare the level of agreement amongst stakeholders with the degree of certainty about the relationships between cause and effect. Thus, the decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political and Chaotic.

== The idea of the strategic choice theory ==
Ralph D. Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the strategic choice theory. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system, which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium in order to reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, important parameters are to consider cause and effect uncertainty and conflict. These are main properties of decision-making, which appears in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originates in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This aligns with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
The Stacey matrix places a decision by identifying the level of agreement amongst stakeholders and the level of certainty about the cause and effect relationships. There are the parameters appearing on the axes of the matrix as can be seen in Figure 2. The scale is defined between close and far. The closest the parameter is marked, the highest the level is.

If the relationships between cause and effect are highly certain, as well as having agreement amongst the different stakeholders, the conditions for a simple decision-making case are present. In Figure 2, the area called ''Simple'' shows this situation. In this situation, the management makes the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as moving away from the so-called “Simple” field, the application of rational logic will be critical and different approaches are getting necessary to use.

When there is a high certainty and the causal connections are still clear, but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections are uncertain and make the situation unclear how to deal with, then it falls into the zone of so-called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision-making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is not agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred to as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation, which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgment combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===

=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error or logical incrementalism ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:38:06Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

==Related Articles==

* [[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
* [[Constructive Controversy]]
<div style="clear:both"> </div>

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:20:04Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="Staceybook"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:17:52Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="PPP"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==

== Annotated bibliography ==

<references />

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T19:16:05Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref name="PPP"> Ralph D Stacey (2000); Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity, Pearson Education, England
'''Annotation''': Strategic choice and Stacey matrix </ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
== Annotated bibliography ==

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T16:21:24Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with [[Complexity]] and [[Uncertainty]] in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
== Annotated bibliography ==

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T16:19:22Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[Human Behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
== Annotated bibliography ==

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-28T16:18:19Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of [[human behaviour]] in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
== Annotated bibliography ==

Talk:Project Execution Model (PEM)

2015-09-22T20:09:45Z

Biankajuh:

Mette: Very nice topic choice that fits the requirements for the type of article. Remember the structure of a "method article". Look forward to reading more about this tool.

Reviewer 1:Andkamp

*Describes an interesting method developed by Novo Nordisk, a nice blend between case study and method description
*Minor English mistakes, that can be corrected through second time reading
*Good presentation of the topics, however some minor grammar mistakes make it a little more difficult to be read
*Nice figures, but missing captions and misplacement could provide a better outlook.
*Main points are clear but not extensively described, in order the reader to get a better understanding of the topic.
*No figure reference
*More effort in inter-wiki links and hyperlinks in the text should be done
*Better matrix of plan communication of stakeholders
*Missing references and bibliography
*Interesting subject with various aspects
*Length of the article is small, as probably it is unfinished, but there is a clear enthusiasm on that subject
*Phases makes a concrete structure of the article but the sections should be better presented in the table of contents.
*It would be nice to see implementations on other business, as well as the pros and cons of this method
*All in all, a nice subject that needs more effort in order to be useful and be connected with subjects such as Project Evaluation and Selection for the Formation of the Optimal Portfolio

== Reviewer 3 - Biankajuh ==
# I have find the abstract of your article very well-designed which fulfill the role of introducing the main purpose and highlights of the article including a brief introduction to the PEM model. I really like the fact that you have chosen such a real life method as the PEM model used by Novo Nordisk.
# I appreciate your idea of discussing your model by comparing it with other relevant project models as you have indicated it in the current last paragraph title (Discussion of Novo Nordisk's Project Execution Model compared to other project models).
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures more specifically at the relevant place of the text.
# "A project is defined as: "A temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service or result"." --> Could you expound and describe more what do you mean under this project title? As for me, it is not so clear.
# For further investigation:
## I would suggest to consider writing about the concrete applications and limitations of the model chosen.
## It would be also nice to focus on the references and make a bibliography section at the end of the article.

Talk:Project Execution Model (PEM)

2015-09-22T20:07:30Z

Biankajuh:

Mette: Very nice topic choice that fits the requirements for the type of article. Remember the structure of a "method article". Look forward to reading more about this tool.

Reviewer 1:Andkamp

*Describes an interesting method developed by Novo Nordisk, a nice blend between case study and method description
*Minor English mistakes, that can be corrected through second time reading
*Good presentation of the topics, however some minor grammar mistakes make it a little more difficult to be read
*Nice figures, but missing captions and misplacement could provide a better outlook.
*Main points are clear but not extensively described, in order the reader to get a better understanding of the topic.
*No figure reference
*More effort in inter-wiki links and hyperlinks in the text should be done
*Better matrix of plan communication of stakeholders
*Missing references and bibliography
*Interesting subject with various aspects
*Length of the article is small, as probably it is unfinished, but there is a clear enthusiasm on that subject
*Phases makes a concrete structure of the article but the sections should be better presented in the table of contents.
*It would be nice to see implementations on other business, as well as the pros and cons of this method
*All in all, a nice subject that needs more effort in order to be useful and be connected with subjects such as Project Evaluation and Selection for the Formation of the Optimal Portfolio

== Reviewer 3 - Biankajuh ==
# I have find the abstract of your article very well-designed which fulfill the role of introducing the main purpose and highlights of the article including a brief introduction to the PEM model. I really like the fact that you have chosen such a real life method as the PEM model used by Novo Nordisk.
# I appreciate your idea of discussing your model by comparing it with other relevant project models as you have indicated it in the current last paragraph title (Discussion of Novo Nordisk's Project Execution Model compared to other project models).
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures more specifically at the relevant place of the text.
# For further investigation:
## I would suggest to consider writing about the concrete applications and limitations of the model chosen.
## It would be also nice to focus on the references and make a bibliography section at the end of the article.

Talk:Project Execution Model (PEM)

2015-09-22T20:07:03Z

Biankajuh:

Mette: Very nice topic choice that fits the requirements for the type of article. Remember the structure of a "method article". Look forward to reading more about this tool.

Reviewer 1:Andkamp

*Describes an interesting method developed by Novo Nordisk, a nice blend between case study and method description
*Minor English mistakes, that can be corrected through second time reading
*Good presentation of the topics, however some minor grammar mistakes make it a little more difficult to be read
*Nice figures, but missing captions and misplacement could provide a better outlook.
*Main points are clear but not extensively described, in order the reader to get a better understanding of the topic.
*No figure reference
*More effort in inter-wiki links and hyperlinks in the text should be done
*Better matrix of plan communication of stakeholders
*Missing references and bibliography
*Interesting subject with various aspects
*Length of the article is small, as probably it is unfinished, but there is a clear enthusiasm on that subject
*Phases makes a concrete structure of the article but the sections should be better presented in the table of contents.
*It would be nice to see implementations on other business, as well as the pros and cons of this method
*All in all, a nice subject that needs more effort in order to be useful and be connected with subjects such as Project Evaluation and Selection for the Formation of the Optimal Portfolio

== Reviewer 3 - Biankajuh ==
# I have find the abstract of your article very well-designed which fulfill the role of introducing the main purpose and highlights of the article including a brief introduction to the PEM model. I really like the fact that you have chosen such a real life method as the PEM model used by Novo Nordisk.
# I appreciate your idea of discussing your model by comparing it with other relevant project models as you have indicated it in the current last paragraph title (Discussion of Novo Nordisk's Project Execution Model compared to other project models).
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures more specifically at the relevant place of the text.
# Further investigation:
## I would suggest to consider writing about the concrete applications and limitations of the model chosen.
## It would be also nice to focus on the references and make a bibliography section at the end of the article.

Talk:Financial Portfolio Optimization Methods

2015-09-22T19:47:03Z

Biankajuh:

Josef: Thank you for an interesting, and already rather detailed, Wiki article.

What I struggle with is the relationship of your article with the management of project portfolios. There are in fact serious limitations to the applicability of financial portfolio theory to project portfolios, for example the assumptions that you can invest/divest into options without changing their risk/return balance, or the assumption that you can actually divest from options ("selling" a failing project will almost always be impossible, as I am not aware of a secondary market for projects).
I am not sure how we can "salvage" all the details you have already produced. What I would suggest is to focus on what part of financial portfolio management theory is applicable to project portfolio management, or better, why it is not applicable.

'''Reviewer 1 – User: s141938'''

== Reviewer 2 - Biankajuh ==
# I have find the description of the models very accurate. Also commendable that you mention the implementations and the limitation/disadvantages of the certain Financial Portfolio Optimization Methods. Furthermore, I really like the usage of direct links to other articles and websites. It shows a very precise job and makes it easy to follow and read up in the certain topic.
# Structural suggestions:
## I would suggest to write a brief abstract section for the beginning of the article. That would help the reader to find a short few sentences summary about the main aspect and purpose of this work.
## Did I assume correctly that the section of “Financial Portfolio Optimization Methods in PPM” is more about the history? Would it make more sense to refer on it rather as History perhaps also in the title of the section?
# As for me, you could make the article easier to read by defining some expressions such as “assets” in the given circumstances (similarly like you defined “investor” in the same paragraph). Please also consider to define abbreviation such as MPT. (Financial Portfolio Optimization Methods in PPM)
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures at the relevant place of the text. For example: “Figure shows an example where all the possible portfolios which are formed based on the expected return and risk relations.” - Here you could specify by saying Figure 2.
# At the first picture entitled as “Translation of MPT criterias to PPM criterias”, you use MPT in the title and also in the article above it, however, it says MPM in the figure itself. Are MPT and MPM referring to the same subject? Could you define what they are?
# Grammatical/Formatting hints:
## “Application of methods of financial portfolio optimization can help a project manager to evaluate projects taking in consideration the interaction and influence of other projects” (Financial Portfolio Optimization Methods in PPM) —> Dot is missing from the end of the sentence. Plus I would suggest to change the word order for the following: “Application of methods of financial portfolio optimization can help a project manager to evaluate projects taking the interaction and influence of other projects in consideration.”

'''Reviewer 3 – User: s113735'''

Feedback:

Formal Aspects:
*The article clearly follows the “method or tool” requirement for the wiki article
*I recognize very few spelling errors. Things I were able to find are small mistakes like omitting a word or missing a large letter in the beginning of a new sentence:
“In order [for] a business to minimize the danger of exposure to a failed project… “
“… strategic alignment and resource levelling. [A]<strike>a</strike>pplication of such methods…”
*I am not sure I fully understand figure 1: “Tranlation of MPT criterias to PPM criterias”, maybe this can be elaborated better? You second figure is well explained and easy to understand.
*You make great use of the <nowiki><math></math></nowiki> tool in your article. And although the content is quite complex, it gives the article a wiki-“esque” feeling, which is good.

Content Aspects:

*The article is clearly within the topic scope, as it directly relates to a “portfolio” topic
*You clearly have extensive knowledge of the subject and your very rigid use of references show me that you back up every statement you make. Sadly, (and this is of no fault of yours or a drawback to the content of the article) most of your references are hard-copy (aka. Book) references so I do not currently have to possibility to review your sources.
*“Northwestern” part of the curve… Why not “Top left?”
*I have no idea what “[καινουριο paper CVaR]” (in the CVaR model section) is or means, maybe this is something you left by mistake in the article?
*The size, quality and references of the article are definitely up to par. It is very clear that you know much more about the topic than I ever will.

Overall conclusion:

As mentioned, it is very clear by the content and quality of the article, that you have extensive knowledge of the tools you present. The only, albeit minor, drawback is that I feel the article is not very engaging. I think the article could benefit a lot from a few “bridging” sentences about the '''general''' purpose of the models you present – some more example uses or sentences of how exactly they relate to portfolio management. I think that would really bind the article together.

Talk:Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)

2015-09-22T18:29:41Z

Biankajuh: /* Reviewer 1 - Biankajuh: Feedback */

Anna: Very nice topic! It seems that you have a good grasp on the structure of the article and the theme fits the first article type: method :).

== Reviewer 1 - Biankajuh: Feedback==
# I have find your abstract very well-designed which fulfill the role of introducing the main purpose and highlights of the article. Also commendable that you mention the limitation of the PERT model and talk about the comparative tools as well as the modifications.
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures more specifically. So for example instead of the sentence “This information is presented in a box representation.”, you could say “This information is presented in the box representation showed in Figure 1.”.
#The third figure entitled in “PERT network in MS Project 2013” is quite unclear. Could you increase the quality of the picture?
#In some cases, too long sentences could be substituted by two or three shorter ones to help the understanding. For example: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization; DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections; the advantage of this representation is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.” (Comparison to other tools) —> Could be changed to: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization. DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections. The advantage of this representation in DSM is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.”
#Grammatical/Formatting hints:
##Space missing between two sentence: “whereas the events are the nodes.For instance,” (Network diagram),
##No need for space before question mark: “How do they differ from eachother ?” (Comparison to other tools)
#Regarding the Bibliography, I would note to refer all these references within the text of the article at the corresponding spaces.

'''Reviewer 2 – User: s113735'''
Feedback: Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)
Formal Aspects:
*The article clearly follows the “method or tool” structure required. Super!
*The grammar and spelling in the article is at a decently high level. The sentences are short and concise, which makes it a pleasurably read with clear and easy to understand points.
*Your choice of figures are good and in line with the points, you are trying to make. Some figures could, however, be explained a little better (for instance the PERT box).
*Figures are missing references.
*The article has a bibliography, but is otherwise free of references and links. This makes it really hardto check the validity of your points. The article will have to be referenced.

Content Aspects:
*The article is clearly within the scope as it relates directly to a “Program” tool/method.
*The length of the article seems fair, but a few headings and sub-sections could easily be elaborated a bit. (For instance the “process” section: What are the benefits/drawbacks from using the tools you present? Are the tools prescribed or optional? Etc… You explain the overall applications and limitations for the PERT model, but not for the individual tools).
*The “critical path” in Project Management to my knowledge is not “the path that includes the most time consuming tasks” but is instead “the sequence of activities which add up to the longest overall duration”. You clearly show in your article that you know this while ALSO showing you know how to calculate the critical path.
With a little bit sharper terminology and definitions, it would increase the understanding a lot.
*When making a statement like: “But soon, project managers and companies have found that it is too ineffective and error-prone to use it, causing lots of failures.” This definitely need to be referenced.
Other than in a few cases the article is generally void of personal/unverifiable opinions, which is good.
*So far, the article doesn’t link to any other articles on the Wiki. I understand that it might be tough to find something directly related to this specific tool amongst the rather limited topics on the Wiki. I suggest trying to find some broad topics or even Categories to link to when writing. For instance, you might link to “human behaviour” (a category on the Wiki) when writing about the “agreement dimension” in the Stacey Matrix.

Overall Conclusion: The article is written at a high level and is easy to read and understand. Some points could however be elaborated a bit and the article needs to be referenced according to Wiki standards using the
<nowiki><ref> lastname, firstname (year) [www.link.com “linkname”] </ref></nowiki> standard.

== MistaJacob, reviewer 3 ==

=== The feedback will be given in the form: ===
*My feedback
**My feedback

OR

*’’Copy of your text’’
**My feedback

=== Feedback ===
*The general formatting is almost as it’s supposed to be. The pictures though lack the numbering and the references in the text, and you shift with using ‘thumbs’ and placing it in the middle. Consistency can be recommended for a better visual overview.
*The language is clear and easy to read, only with small number of places where i found typo’s, like in “Limitation” where you start and end a sentence with: Therefore
**I will not comment these since they will be obvious to you when you read through your article for corrections.

*I found the article relevant, with a good red thread through it.
*The step by step approach worked as it should. That being said, the reader’s understanding could have been improved if you included a practical example you carried out through all steps
**As you promised in the introduction :)
*in the section “Key Concepts”, the sequence of the bullet point list should be the same as the sequence in which they are explained, or vice versa.
*’’The process of making a PERT analysis can be divided into 4 steps:’’
**you have written 5 bullet points below
*‘’Preparation of a list of all the tasks that will be involved in a given project’’
**I would stick to using ‘activities’ and not ‘tasks’ as you write here.
**There are other places (maybe only one) where you use task as well
*I would suggest that you also explain the term ‘float’, since it appears in your figure
*‘’In this step we estimate the amount of time that can be taken by each activity.’’
**You normally don’t use ‘we’
*‘’A project cannot be completed as long as his longest component isn't finished.’’
**Don’t know whether you would be able to argue your way out of defining a project as being ‘male’ ;)
*‘’Gantt charts are used to display the timing of activities aGantt charts are used to display the timing of activities and progress of the project.’’
**Double up
*Since you describe the other tool in the comparison very briefly, I would suggest to include links to their respective articles (if they exists)

Talk:Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)

2015-09-22T18:28:57Z

Biankajuh: /* Reviewer 1 - Biankajuh: Feedback */

Anna: Very nice topic! It seems that you have a good grasp on the structure of the article and the theme fits the first article type: method :).

== Reviewer 1 - Biankajuh: Feedback==
# I have find your abstract very well-designed which fulfill the role of introducing the main purpose and highlights of the article. Also commendable that you mention the limitation of the PERT model and talk about the comparative tools as well as the modifications.
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures more specifically.
So for example instead of the sentence “This information is presented in a box representation.”, you could say “This information is presented in the box representation showed in Figure 1.”.
#The third figure entitled in “PERT network in MS Project 2013” is quite unclear. Could you increase the quality of the picture?
#In some cases, too long sentences could be substituted by two or three shorter ones to help the understanding.
For example: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization; DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections; the advantage of this representation is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.” (Comparison to other tools) —> Could be changed to: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization. DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections. The advantage of this representation in DSM is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.”
#Grammatical/Formatting hints:
*Space missing between two sentence: “whereas the events are the nodes.For instance,” (Network diagram),
*No need for space before question mark: “How do they differ from eachother ?” (Comparison to other tools)
#Regarding the Bibliography, I would note to refer all these references within the text of the article at the corresponding spaces.

'''Reviewer 2 – User: s113735'''
Feedback: Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)
Formal Aspects:
*The article clearly follows the “method or tool” structure required. Super!
*The grammar and spelling in the article is at a decently high level. The sentences are short and concise, which makes it a pleasurably read with clear and easy to understand points.
*Your choice of figures are good and in line with the points, you are trying to make. Some figures could, however, be explained a little better (for instance the PERT box).
*Figures are missing references.
*The article has a bibliography, but is otherwise free of references and links. This makes it really hardto check the validity of your points. The article will have to be referenced.

Content Aspects:
*The article is clearly within the scope as it relates directly to a “Program” tool/method.
*The length of the article seems fair, but a few headings and sub-sections could easily be elaborated a bit. (For instance the “process” section: What are the benefits/drawbacks from using the tools you present? Are the tools prescribed or optional? Etc… You explain the overall applications and limitations for the PERT model, but not for the individual tools).
*The “critical path” in Project Management to my knowledge is not “the path that includes the most time consuming tasks” but is instead “the sequence of activities which add up to the longest overall duration”. You clearly show in your article that you know this while ALSO showing you know how to calculate the critical path.
With a little bit sharper terminology and definitions, it would increase the understanding a lot.
*When making a statement like: “But soon, project managers and companies have found that it is too ineffective and error-prone to use it, causing lots of failures.” This definitely need to be referenced.
Other than in a few cases the article is generally void of personal/unverifiable opinions, which is good.
*So far, the article doesn’t link to any other articles on the Wiki. I understand that it might be tough to find something directly related to this specific tool amongst the rather limited topics on the Wiki. I suggest trying to find some broad topics or even Categories to link to when writing. For instance, you might link to “human behaviour” (a category on the Wiki) when writing about the “agreement dimension” in the Stacey Matrix.

Overall Conclusion: The article is written at a high level and is easy to read and understand. Some points could however be elaborated a bit and the article needs to be referenced according to Wiki standards using the
<nowiki><ref> lastname, firstname (year) [www.link.com “linkname”] </ref></nowiki> standard.

== MistaJacob, reviewer 3 ==

=== The feedback will be given in the form: ===
*My feedback
**My feedback

OR

*’’Copy of your text’’
**My feedback

=== Feedback ===
*The general formatting is almost as it’s supposed to be. The pictures though lack the numbering and the references in the text, and you shift with using ‘thumbs’ and placing it in the middle. Consistency can be recommended for a better visual overview.
*The language is clear and easy to read, only with small number of places where i found typo’s, like in “Limitation” where you start and end a sentence with: Therefore
**I will not comment these since they will be obvious to you when you read through your article for corrections.

*I found the article relevant, with a good red thread through it.
*The step by step approach worked as it should. That being said, the reader’s understanding could have been improved if you included a practical example you carried out through all steps
**As you promised in the introduction :)
*in the section “Key Concepts”, the sequence of the bullet point list should be the same as the sequence in which they are explained, or vice versa.
*’’The process of making a PERT analysis can be divided into 4 steps:’’
**you have written 5 bullet points below
*‘’Preparation of a list of all the tasks that will be involved in a given project’’
**I would stick to using ‘activities’ and not ‘tasks’ as you write here.
**There are other places (maybe only one) where you use task as well
*I would suggest that you also explain the term ‘float’, since it appears in your figure
*‘’In this step we estimate the amount of time that can be taken by each activity.’’
**You normally don’t use ‘we’
*‘’A project cannot be completed as long as his longest component isn't finished.’’
**Don’t know whether you would be able to argue your way out of defining a project as being ‘male’ ;)
*‘’Gantt charts are used to display the timing of activities aGantt charts are used to display the timing of activities and progress of the project.’’
**Double up
*Since you describe the other tool in the comparison very briefly, I would suggest to include links to their respective articles (if they exists)

Talk:Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)

2015-09-22T18:27:09Z

Biankajuh: /* Reviewer 1 - Biankajuh: Feedback */

Anna: Very nice topic! It seems that you have a good grasp on the structure of the article and the theme fits the first article type: method :).

== Reviewer 1 - Biankajuh: Feedback==
# I have find your abstract very well-designed which fulfill the role of introducing the main purpose and highlights of the article. Also commendable that you mention the limitation of the PERT model and talk about the comparative tools as well as the modifications.
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures more specifically. So for example instead of the sentence “This information is presented in a box representation.”, you could say “This information is presented in the box representation showed in Figure 1.”.
#The third figure entitled in “PERT network in MS Project 2013” is quite unclear. Could you increase the quality of the picture?
#In some cases, too long sentences could be substituted by two or three shorter ones to help the understanding. For example: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization; DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections; the advantage of this representation is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.” (Comparison to other tools) —> Could be changed to: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization. DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections. The advantage of this representation in DSM is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.”
#Grammatical/Formatting hints: Space missing between two sentence: “whereas the events are the nodes.For instance,” (Network diagram), No need for space before question mark: “How do they differ from eachother ?” (Comparison to other tools)
#Regarding the Bibliography, I would note to refer all these references within the text of the article at the corresponding spaces.

'''Reviewer 2 – User: s113735'''
Feedback: Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)
Formal Aspects:
*The article clearly follows the “method or tool” structure required. Super!
*The grammar and spelling in the article is at a decently high level. The sentences are short and concise, which makes it a pleasurably read with clear and easy to understand points.
*Your choice of figures are good and in line with the points, you are trying to make. Some figures could, however, be explained a little better (for instance the PERT box).
*Figures are missing references.
*The article has a bibliography, but is otherwise free of references and links. This makes it really hardto check the validity of your points. The article will have to be referenced.

Content Aspects:
*The article is clearly within the scope as it relates directly to a “Program” tool/method.
*The length of the article seems fair, but a few headings and sub-sections could easily be elaborated a bit. (For instance the “process” section: What are the benefits/drawbacks from using the tools you present? Are the tools prescribed or optional? Etc… You explain the overall applications and limitations for the PERT model, but not for the individual tools).
*The “critical path” in Project Management to my knowledge is not “the path that includes the most time consuming tasks” but is instead “the sequence of activities which add up to the longest overall duration”. You clearly show in your article that you know this while ALSO showing you know how to calculate the critical path.
With a little bit sharper terminology and definitions, it would increase the understanding a lot.
*When making a statement like: “But soon, project managers and companies have found that it is too ineffective and error-prone to use it, causing lots of failures.” This definitely need to be referenced.
Other than in a few cases the article is generally void of personal/unverifiable opinions, which is good.
*So far, the article doesn’t link to any other articles on the Wiki. I understand that it might be tough to find something directly related to this specific tool amongst the rather limited topics on the Wiki. I suggest trying to find some broad topics or even Categories to link to when writing. For instance, you might link to “human behaviour” (a category on the Wiki) when writing about the “agreement dimension” in the Stacey Matrix.

Overall Conclusion: The article is written at a high level and is easy to read and understand. Some points could however be elaborated a bit and the article needs to be referenced according to Wiki standards using the
<nowiki><ref> lastname, firstname (year) [www.link.com “linkname”] </ref></nowiki> standard.

== MistaJacob, reviewer 3 ==

=== The feedback will be given in the form: ===
*My feedback
**My feedback

OR

*’’Copy of your text’’
**My feedback

=== Feedback ===
*The general formatting is almost as it’s supposed to be. The pictures though lack the numbering and the references in the text, and you shift with using ‘thumbs’ and placing it in the middle. Consistency can be recommended for a better visual overview.
*The language is clear and easy to read, only with small number of places where i found typo’s, like in “Limitation” where you start and end a sentence with: Therefore
**I will not comment these since they will be obvious to you when you read through your article for corrections.

*I found the article relevant, with a good red thread through it.
*The step by step approach worked as it should. That being said, the reader’s understanding could have been improved if you included a practical example you carried out through all steps
**As you promised in the introduction :)
*in the section “Key Concepts”, the sequence of the bullet point list should be the same as the sequence in which they are explained, or vice versa.
*’’The process of making a PERT analysis can be divided into 4 steps:’’
**you have written 5 bullet points below
*‘’Preparation of a list of all the tasks that will be involved in a given project’’
**I would stick to using ‘activities’ and not ‘tasks’ as you write here.
**There are other places (maybe only one) where you use task as well
*I would suggest that you also explain the term ‘float’, since it appears in your figure
*‘’In this step we estimate the amount of time that can be taken by each activity.’’
**You normally don’t use ‘we’
*‘’A project cannot be completed as long as his longest component isn't finished.’’
**Don’t know whether you would be able to argue your way out of defining a project as being ‘male’ ;)
*‘’Gantt charts are used to display the timing of activities aGantt charts are used to display the timing of activities and progress of the project.’’
**Double up
*Since you describe the other tool in the comparison very briefly, I would suggest to include links to their respective articles (if they exists)

Talk:Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)

2015-09-22T18:25:52Z

Biankajuh:

Anna: Very nice topic! It seems that you have a good grasp on the structure of the article and the theme fits the first article type: method :).

== Reviewer 1 - Biankajuh: Feedback==
# I have find your abstract very well-designed which fulfill the role of introducing the main purpose and highlights of the article. Also commendable that you mention the limitation of the PERT model and talk about the comparative tools as well as the modifications.
# The article is nicely illustrated with the pictures which help the understanding. Although, I would suggest to name them as ‘’Figure 1, 2, 3, …etc.’’ which would allow to refer to the pictures more specifically. So for example instead of the sentence “This information is presented in a box representation.”, you could say “This information is presented in the box representation showed in Figure 1.”.
#The third figure entitled in “PERT network in MS Project 2013” is quite unclear. Could you increase the quality of the picture?
#In some cases, too long sentences could be substituted by two or three shorter ones to help the understanding. For example: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization; DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections; the advantage of this representation is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.” (Comparison to other tools) —> Could be changed to: “The essential difference between a PERT chart and DSM is the visualization. DSM matrices represent basically the same information as a PERT network, which is different activities and their connections. The advantage of this representation in DSM is its conciseness compared to PERT, where lots of space is required to have a readable network.”
#Grammatical/Formatting hints: Space missing between two sentence: “whereas the events are the nodes.For instance,” (Network diagram), No need for space before question mark: “How do they differ from eachother ?” (Comparison to other tools)
#Regarding the Bibliography, I would note to refer all these references within the text of the article at the corresponding spaces.

'''Reviewer 2 – User: s113735'''
Feedback: Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)
Formal Aspects:
*The article clearly follows the “method or tool” structure required. Super!
*The grammar and spelling in the article is at a decently high level. The sentences are short and concise, which makes it a pleasurably read with clear and easy to understand points.
*Your choice of figures are good and in line with the points, you are trying to make. Some figures could, however, be explained a little better (for instance the PERT box).
*Figures are missing references.
*The article has a bibliography, but is otherwise free of references and links. This makes it really hardto check the validity of your points. The article will have to be referenced.

Content Aspects:
*The article is clearly within the scope as it relates directly to a “Program” tool/method.
*The length of the article seems fair, but a few headings and sub-sections could easily be elaborated a bit. (For instance the “process” section: What are the benefits/drawbacks from using the tools you present? Are the tools prescribed or optional? Etc… You explain the overall applications and limitations for the PERT model, but not for the individual tools).
*The “critical path” in Project Management to my knowledge is not “the path that includes the most time consuming tasks” but is instead “the sequence of activities which add up to the longest overall duration”. You clearly show in your article that you know this while ALSO showing you know how to calculate the critical path.
With a little bit sharper terminology and definitions, it would increase the understanding a lot.
*When making a statement like: “But soon, project managers and companies have found that it is too ineffective and error-prone to use it, causing lots of failures.” This definitely need to be referenced.
Other than in a few cases the article is generally void of personal/unverifiable opinions, which is good.
*So far, the article doesn’t link to any other articles on the Wiki. I understand that it might be tough to find something directly related to this specific tool amongst the rather limited topics on the Wiki. I suggest trying to find some broad topics or even Categories to link to when writing. For instance, you might link to “human behaviour” (a category on the Wiki) when writing about the “agreement dimension” in the Stacey Matrix.

Overall Conclusion: The article is written at a high level and is easy to read and understand. Some points could however be elaborated a bit and the article needs to be referenced according to Wiki standards using the
<nowiki><ref> lastname, firstname (year) [www.link.com “linkname”] </ref></nowiki> standard.

== MistaJacob, reviewer 3 ==

=== The feedback will be given in the form: ===
*My feedback
**My feedback

OR

*’’Copy of your text’’
**My feedback

=== Feedback ===
*The general formatting is almost as it’s supposed to be. The pictures though lack the numbering and the references in the text, and you shift with using ‘thumbs’ and placing it in the middle. Consistency can be recommended for a better visual overview.
*The language is clear and easy to read, only with small number of places where i found typo’s, like in “Limitation” where you start and end a sentence with: Therefore
**I will not comment these since they will be obvious to you when you read through your article for corrections.

*I found the article relevant, with a good red thread through it.
*The step by step approach worked as it should. That being said, the reader’s understanding could have been improved if you included a practical example you carried out through all steps
**As you promised in the introduction :)
*in the section “Key Concepts”, the sequence of the bullet point list should be the same as the sequence in which they are explained, or vice versa.
*’’The process of making a PERT analysis can be divided into 4 steps:’’
**you have written 5 bullet points below
*‘’Preparation of a list of all the tasks that will be involved in a given project’’
**I would stick to using ‘activities’ and not ‘tasks’ as you write here.
**There are other places (maybe only one) where you use task as well
*I would suggest that you also explain the term ‘float’, since it appears in your figure
*‘’In this step we estimate the amount of time that can be taken by each activity.’’
**You normally don’t use ‘we’
*‘’A project cannot be completed as long as his longest component isn't finished.’’
**Don’t know whether you would be able to argue your way out of defining a project as being ‘male’ ;)
*‘’Gantt charts are used to display the timing of activities aGantt charts are used to display the timing of activities and progress of the project.’’
**Double up
*Since you describe the other tool in the comparison very briefly, I would suggest to include links to their respective articles (if they exists)

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:43:29Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Limitations of the Stacey matrix model ==
== Annotated bibliography ==

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:42:50Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

== Annotated bibliography ==

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:40:45Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

This report is devised in the course 42433 Advanced Engineering Project, Program and Portfolio Management at the Technical University of Denmark in Autumn 2015.

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:37:23Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:35:58Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

'''The Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into consideration.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:35:14Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

'''The Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:34:55Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea: The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The '''Stacey matrix model''' introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:33:55Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The Big Idea; The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. The cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict. These are the two main properties of decision making in the management of an organization including project, program and portfolio management.

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

== Application of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:23:00Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

=== Cybernetic system theory ===
=== Cognitivist psychology ===

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

== Models of decision making in conditions of certainty ==
=== Technical rationality ===
=== Bounded rationality, bureaucracy and dominant coalitions ===
=== Trial and error - logical incrementation ===

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:18:56Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or close certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:16:18Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. The atmosphere can be decried with the main factors of tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. In an organization this is a situation which really needs to be avoid. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:12:32Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. This is a very life-like usual case at a company atmosphere, where the main factors are tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:12:08Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).

=== The Stacey matrix ===
<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. This is a very life-like usual case at a company atmosphere, where the main factors are tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:11:35Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. This is a very life-like usual case at a company atmosphere, where the main factors are tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' ''</ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T23:08:48Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey (2000).

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

When the managers agree on the desires aimed to achieve but the causal connections make the situation unclear and uncertain how to do it, then it falls into the zone of so called ''Complicated''. The usage of judgmental or intuitive modes of decision making is necessary to execute. In this case, more than one right answer is possible, therefore, the feasibility is judged with the interaction and coordination of expertise. The reasoning is mostly analog. They need think in a literal way, taking trial-and-error cases into account to progress into decision.

The most problematic situation is when there is no agreement nor certainty, all is unclear and the objectives conflict. This level of complexity is referred as ''Chaotic''. This is a very life-like usual case at a company atmosphere, where the main factors are tension, turbulence and lack of any patterns. Here the manager has to decide based on intuitive individual judgement combined with the political interactions of the group.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' '' </ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T22:40:54Z

Biankajuh:

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T22:40:34Z

Biankajuh:

[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|150px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey.

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' '' </ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T22:39:42Z

Biankajuh:

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|150px|thumb|right|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey.

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' '' </ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T22:35:10Z

Biankajuh:

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|150px|thumb|left|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey.

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' '' </ref>

Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix

2015-09-21T22:33:48Z

Biankajuh:

The Stacey matrix model was proposed by Ralph Douglas Stacey. It gives the possibility to distinguish management decisions and deal with complexity and uncertainty in organization platform. The result is brought out by usage of the two dimension Stacey matrix. It allows to compare the level of agreement with the degree of certainty. The decision can fall into the following areas of the matrix for further analysis: Simple, Complicated, Political, Chaotic.

== The strategic choice theory ==
[[File:Ralphstaceypic.jpg|150px|thumb|left|Figure 1: Ralph Douglas Stacey, Professor of Management at Hertfordshire Business School, University of Hertfordshire, Source: http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news/newsRelease.asp?newsPk=881]]

Ralph Stacey defined management and organization dynamics in frame of the theory of strategic choice. In this view the organization changes over time in a direction chosen by the most powerful individual or small group of managers. The theory of strategic choice displays its theoretical origin in two main pillars; cybernetic system theory and cognitivist psychology. Cybernetic theory is highly focused on control and regulation of a system which helps to guide and return into the state of stabile equilibrium and reach the desired destination. the cognitivist psychology describes the nature of human behavior in this context.

In the aspect and understanding of strategic choice, an important parameter is to consider the cause and effect of uncertainty and conflict.

== Outline of the Stacey matrix ==
[[File:Staceymatrix11pic.jpg|800px|thumb|right|Figure 2: The Stacey matrix, Source: http://be-in-unison.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/staceymatrix1.jpg]]

The Stacey matrix model introduces the phenomenon of strategic choice in the organization management by taking uncertainty and management agreement into account.

=== Background ===
As antecedent representatives, Thompson and Tuden (1959) have already related to the effect of uncertainty on decision-making mode in a similar manner. They defined that uncertainty originate in the lack of clarity and the lack of agreement over objectives. Managers are mentioned as objectives. This alines with the theory of Ralph D. Stacey.

=== The Stacey matrix ===
If the causal connections are clear meaning a high or far certainty is faced beside having shared objectives in agreement, this provides the conditions for the managers for a simple decision-making case. In Figure 2, it is showed by the area called ''Simple''. In this situation, the management take the decisions in a rational, logical way. When the aimed direction, destination and circumstances are clear at a company, this can be the case of certain decisions. The right answer exists and a simple fact-based, traditional management situation arises. Although, as they move away from this field, the application of rational logic will be impossible and they need to use different approaches.

When the causal connections are still clear, there is a high certainty but managers conflict then the decision has to be made on ''Political'' manner. This proposes that the one with the biggest power will dominate and the strongest individual who builds coalitions will control the decision-making. Here it is an important aspect to build relationships, negotiate and compromise in order to gain further steps.

<ref>[''Strategic choice and Stacey matrix''] ''Ralph D Stacey (2000) "Strategic Management and Organization Dynamics, The challenge of Complexity", ''Pearson Education, England'' '' </ref>