Current Paradigm
Conventional Management Philosophy
By PMC President Ed Winchester
The Current Paradigm relies on rational thought involving analysis and evaluation for problem solving and decision making. The idea of enlightenment by raising consciousness is believed erroneously to be the result of acquiring more information, facts, and data. In reality enlightenment and raising consciousness is the consequence of having more Light (eugenic radiance and cognitive resonance).
War, or the absence of peace, arises from insufficient "Light" within the human body and biofield resulting in lack of fulfillment and an inability to resolve problems and conflicts. (For discussion of "Light" refer to New Paradigm and "Biofield." Problems are intra-personal in origin. Only people generate problems within themselves in the way they mentally process events. The same is as much true for great leaders in society as it is for the average person on the streets. Most of what are labeled problems and conflicts are in fact thinking deficits. The requirement for effective problem solving, whether in government, business, or in personal affairs is that solutions be generated in the light of clear and enlightened thinking.
The old paradigm emphasizes essentially five steps in thought processes for problem solving and decision-making. These basic steps have been taught for decades in one form or another. They provide a rudimentary framework for independent problem solving:
1. Individuals are taught that problems are a normal part of life with which they can cope. Emotional upset can be identified not as a sign of pathology, but rather as providing cues to shift attention to the problem situation that is producing upset.
2. Individuals are taught to define problems operationally in terms of stimuli, responses, and consequences involved. Once all aspects of a problem or situation are identified concretely, it is possible then to formulate the problem more abstractly, such as a conflict between two or more options or goals, or between the goal and available alternatives for achieving the goal.
3. The next stage is to generate alternatives or a range of possible alternative responses to a given situation.
4. In this decision making stage the person chooses what appears to be the best option based on all available alternatives, considering advantages and disadvantages, costs and benefits, tangible and intangible consequences and the probability of occurrence.
5. Finally, performance evaluations or verification is needed to test the validity of choices that have been made and their overall effectiveness.
For example, with some variations these five stages are similar to steps in decision-making processes used in the U. S. Department of Defense for weapon systems acquisitions (Figure 1) and for spending programs involving tradeoffs and choices and evaluations of overall effectiveness (Figure 2). While on active military duty at the Pentagon Captain Winchester was an Operations Research Analyst responsible for writing Department of Defense guidelines on economic analysis, program evaluation, for the Military Departments to follow in making cost-effectiveness studies.
Defense Economic Analysis Council (DEAC)
The acquisition of decision-making skills is generally viewed as a vital objective of education and training. The revolutionary discoveries of science are evidence for the value of a problem solving philosophy based on logic and empiricism. Problem solving and conflict resolution is a relatively easy skill to learn, but becomes complex considering the fact that human beings continue to develop cognitive abilities and intelligent behavior throughout their lifetime. Limited information, a constellation of attitudes and abilities of key participants, and cultural background further complicates problem solving, e.g. in dealing with foreign cultures, domestic and foreign terrorism and international crises.