My mind boils

in fleeting horizons.

I plunge deeply

into blue veins

of infinite ocean

but cannot glimpse

the ending.

Decisions float

before my eyes,

swirls of possibilities

but no answers.

Stillness of my air

surges and begs

for resolutions.

Deception layers

my skin as confusion

sways in winds

of turbulent fate.

Squalls knock

me into

the vast unknown

leaving me

pondering,

“What is it

that I want?”

I’ve always been told that I need to listen to my gut. As if my gut is some kind of wise master with vast amounts of secret knowledge that even I am not privy to.

I am very, very suspicious of my gut. Because isn’t my gut just the subconscious spouting haphazardly constructed algorithms from an accumulation of past experiences? What if my experiences are wrong? Memories can be surprisingly unreliable. Just think of all the wrongfully identified criminals. Or that experiment where 25% of people remembered a childhood memory of being lost in a mall they’ve never been to. Yeah, not exactly a stellar resume, gut.

So instead, I like to waste an inordinate amount of time deconstructing every situation and analyzing every option until I am so mind-numbingly exhausted that I just pick the option that my gut was telling me to choose in the first place.

I will say, for the most part, Ms. Gut does end up making pretty decent decisions. So maybe I should give her some credit. I still don’t trust her 100% though.

Side note: How I titled this post reminds me of that Ariana Grande song “Positions” and I cannot unthink it. Also, “gut” no longer feels like a real word.

It never matters

where you begin

just start

decide.

The universe will tell you quickly

if you choose well or not.

It is not being perfect

but being

open to action

open to accepting results

then open to changing course.

Resilience

has been shown

to be the most important factor

in achieving success.

Don't decide.

Begin.

Scholars oft’ suggested

That our fates are pre-digested;

That the terms of our free will are not our own.

And there’s something to that folly

If you’ve ever left a trolly

To the gravity of age-enrampened stone...

’Course, deciding to decide

When joy and challenge coincide

Is easy for a dolt to up and say,

Like “don’t pick at that pimple.”

Or like “losing weight is simple.”

Not when different parts of you come out to play...

The why’s are there to get you;

There to taunt you, there to wet you,

While you’re sitting picking grass under a tree

So you think it all,

you think a hole,

you think yourself to be...

Let the good times roll,

and rock,

and quake,

You’re longing to be free,

Till there’s nothing left but choices;

Void of comfort; full of voices.

And then you finally dare to make your lasting grand decree.

Well we all go through decisions, both big and small. The outcome of some decisions may impact the society. In that case we should really think about the pros and cons of the result of that decision. If the result only affects us, then we should think how it impacts us. Taking decisions are not at all easy and no one can take the right decisions all the time. So it is only justified that we should take the decisions according to our conscience. It is actually okay to make wrong decisions as we are only human and we are not perfect. But what we should do before taking decisions is that we should make sure that our decisions would not harm anyone.

One decision can change a life,

But what to decide?

Which one benefits me the most?

Which one benefits those around me?

More decisions to make,

More questions than answers.

Can someone decide for me?

No, I'm old enough to decide for myself...

But I can't decide.

In all honestly, I suck at making decisions too. That’s why when I’m indecisive, I use one of two methods. One is for when I have other people around, and the other by myself.

First, pick a number, or as I sometimes call it, “PAN”. This is for when you have other people. So, how this works is you assign each option a number and then ask that person to pick a number between the amount of options you have.

For example, let’s say you have two options. Whether to go to the store today, or to go to the store tomorrow. Let’s say that tomorrow is “1”, today is “2″. You ask the person next to you, a family member or coworker and ask, “Hey, can you pick 1 or 2?” They pick 2, so you go to the store after work or in an hour.

Second, google’s infamous Roll a Die, or “RAD”. (I know, stupid. I can’t take it seriously either.) So, type in “roll a die” into your browser if you don’t know what this is already. It should pop you up with a six sided die. Use which ever die you need to that’s equal to your amount of options or cuts it in half.

For example, let’s say I need to decide between a blue, pink, and yellow sweater. So I would be using the six sided die as 3 is half of 6. (Math is just- *chefs kiss*). You could lable these how ever you want. Yellow is “2 & 5″ and blue is “1 & 3″. It doesn’t really matter. You could just lable them in order, Yellow “1 & 2” Blue “3 & 4″. So you just roll the die and boom, you got a decision based off of what number it is.

...

Honestly you could just use the first option if you have a phone, but I use that die method as I don't have one and I can't always get ahold of my friends.

I hope you found this helpul!

Prepare one chit per option.

Throw the chits in the air above a table.

The one that lands on the table is the decision.

P.S.If more than one lands on the table, keep repeating the process till you are down to one.

--> February 2020 ~ Some ideas from a paper I was writing last year while in grad school studying Leadership and Decision-Making.

-----

How much does a leader need to know before making a decision? This is the key consideration of Paul J. Quirk’s Presidential Competence, and it speaks to the fundamental role of knowledge when a decision needs to be made. Indeed, a decision cannot be made without at least some knowledge.

The nature and level of information required to make a decision differs depending on which approach a leader uses to gather knowledge. For example, Lindblom describes the extent to which leaders rely on knowledge by comparing the Rational-Comprehensive (Root) and Successive Limited Comparison (Branch) methods. The Root approach allows leaders to analyze factors surrounding a decision comprehensively because “theory is often heavily relied upon” (Lindblom 81). Its foundations in established knowledge makes the Root very valuable to the decision-maker, but Etzioni argues it's a bit “incrementalist," a method maddeningly limiting because it assumes that “values and facts, means and ends, can be clearly distinguished” (Etzioni 386).

Because the existing bed of knowledge is diluted with the values and objectives that may not align with the current times, it’s questionable to make decisions based solely on precedent. While driving incremental change may make “the most of available knowledge” (386), it may ultimately drive decision-makers off-course in reaching long-term goals. This explains why consensus plays such a vital role in shaping leaders’ decisions. It is easier to find agreement between two bodies when addressing a small change that is familiar (for example, voting on adjustments to an annual budget) than to get bipartisan backing for a completely new idea. It could be said that leaders who use related precedent (existing knowledge) to make incremental decisions "get a lot done," or at least they can check plenty of boxes when it comes time for an election. But the impact of these checkbox, incremental decisions can only be measured over time. If leaders too often make decisions based entirely off past decisions, “decisions so reached would...reflect the interests of the most powerful,” (Lindblom 86).

So knowledge is the principle guiding force to almost any level of decision-making, but an individual leader’s approach to applying their knowledge can vary widely. Lindblom notes early in “The Science of Muddling Through” that even if leaders had “an agreed set of values, objectives, and constraints” as well as “an agreed ranking of [them], their marginal values in actual choice situations would be impossible to formulate,” (82). I may be oversimplifying, but I think this is saying that the minutia involved in actual decision-making requires more context and circumstances than perhaps these approaches allow.

According to Etzioni, the test of a "good theory" is decision-makers agreement on the theory itself (387). While incremental changes are more easily accomplished due to the nature of consensus, without also making fundamental changes, “incremental decision-making amounts to... action without direction,” (388).

-----

I like to go with my gut ~

* * * * *

/ n o t a r e

Amitai Etzioni. “Mixed Scanning: A ‘Third’ Approach to Decision-Making.” Public Administration Review (December 1967) pp. 385-392.

Charles E. Lindblom. “The Science of ‘Muddling Through’.” Public Administration Review, Vol. 19. No. 2 (Spring 1959) pp. 79-88.

Paul J. Quirk. “Presidential Competence.” The Presidency and the Political System, 10th Edition (2014) pp. 134-166.