Managers, management and decisions
Introducido| English | Significado |
|---|---|
| management/ˈmænɪdʒmənt/ | gestión |
| fact/fækt/ | hecho |
| assumption/əˈsʌmpʃn/ | suposición |
| anchoring/ˈæŋkərɪŋ/ | ancoraje |
| confirmation/kɒnfəˈmeɪʃn/ | sesgo de confirmación |
| recency/rɪˈsensi/ | sesgo de reciente |
| sunk cost/sʌŋk kɒst/ | costo hundido |
Third shop or pre-order?
- Nimbus can afford one big project this year: open a third shop, or start a pre-order service where customers order online and collect. Both sound good, and the owner already has a favourite.
- Without a method, the favourite usually wins and the reasons are found afterwards. This lesson gives a simple, honest way to decide.
What managers actually do
- Management 管理 is deciding what should happen and making it happen. Managers plan (set goals), organise (arrange people and resources), lead (guide and motivate) and control (compare results with the plan).
- These four form a loop: what control finds feeds the next plan. Every step needs decisions, so deciding well is the core skill.
Each month the Nimbus manager compares sales with the target and adjusts the plan. Which management function is this?
Dificultad 1/5 · 100 monedas + un pequeño bono en el primer intento de hoy
Control compares results with the plan. What it finds feeds the next round of planning, which is why management is a loop.
Frame the decision, then list real options
- Frame a decision, not a topic: "Which project should Nimbus fund this year, given £40,000?" is a decision; "growth" is only a topic.
- List the options that could really be chosen, including doing nothing. An option nobody would fund is only there for show.
Fix the criteria and weights before scoring
- Choose the criteria (what matters) and give each a weight (how much it matters), adding up to 1. For Nimbus: profit impact 0.5, risk 0.3, fit with staff 0.2.
- Do this before anyone scores the options. Once scores are visible, weights quietly shift to favour the option you already like.
Put the steps of a structured decision in order.
Dificultad 3/5 · 200 monedas + un pequeño bono en el primer intento de hoy
The first three steps are fixed before any score is seen, so the scores cannot bend the weights.
It is fine to set the weights after seeing the scores, as long as you write them down.
Dificultad 1/5 · 100 monedas + un pequeño bono en el primer intento de hoy
Weights chosen after the scores tend to favour the option you already prefer. Writing them down does not undo that.
Score, multiply, add
- Score each option on each criterion, say from 1 to 10, where a higher risk score means safer. Multiply each score by its weight and add.
- The total is not the truth. Its value is that it shows where the disagreement lies: in a score or in a weight.
- Weights: profit 0.5, risk 0.3, staff fit 0.2.
- Third shop scores 6, 4, 7: 0.5 × 6 + 0.3 × 4 + 0.2 × 7 = 3.0 + 1.2 + 1.4 = 5.6.
- Pre-order scores 5, 7, 8: 0.5 × 5 + 0.3 × 7 + 0.2 × 8 = 2.5 + 2.1 + 1.6 = 6.2. Pre-order wins.
- With weights 0.7, 0.2, 0.1 both total 5.7. The answer depends on how much profit matters compared with risk, and now everyone can see that.
With weights profit 0.5, risk 0.3 and staff fit 0.2, a third option scores 8, 3 and 5. What is its weighted total?
Dificultad 2/5 · 140 monedas + un pequeño bono en el primer intento de hoy
$0.5 \times 8 + 0.3 \times 3 + 0.2 \times 5 = 4.0 + 0.9 + 1.0 = 5.9$. It beats the third shop (5.6) but not pre-order (6.2).
Label every score: fact or assumption
- A fact 事实 rests on something observed, such as till data or a signed lease. An assumption 假设 rests on a guess about the future, such as "25% of customers will pre-order".
- Label each score. The assumptions become your watch list: if one turns out wrong, you know which decision to revisit.
Which of these are assumptions rather than facts? Select all that apply.
Dificultad 2/5 · 140 monedas + un pequeño bono en el primer intento de hoy
The till figure and the lease are observed and sourced. The pre-order share and the break-even date are guesses about the future, so they go on the watch list.
Four biases the method slows down
- Anchoring 锚定: the first number you hear pulls every estimate towards it. Confirmation 确认偏误: you look for evidence that agrees with you.
- Recency 近因偏误: last month feels more important than the whole year. Sunk cost 沉没成本: "we've already spent so much", although money already spent cannot be recovered whichever option you choose.
Spot the bias
Each remark comes from a Nimbus planning meeting. Name the bias behind it; once named, it is easier to slow down.
Match each remark to its bias.
Dificultad 2/5 · 140 monedas + un pequeño bono en el primer intento de hoy
The structure does not delete these biases, but writing the steps down makes them visible while they are still cheap to correct.
Marks that slip away
- Weights set after the scores. That turns the method into a disguise for a choice already made.
- Options nobody would choose. Include doing nothing, and only real alternatives.
- Unlabelled scores. Without "fact" or "assumption" you cannot tell what to check later.
- Counting sunk costs. Compare only future costs and benefits.
You've got it
- Management is a loop: plan, organise, lead, control. Decisions sit inside every step.
- Frame a decision, list real options, fix criteria and weights before scores, then multiply and add.
- Label each score fact or assumption, and watch for anchoring, confirmation, recency and sunk cost bias.