|"Satisficing" vs. "Optimizing"||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Thomas Lofft (tloffthotmail.com)|
|Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 18:48:12 -0700 (PDT)|
Sharon Villines wrote: "A decision-making concept I was introduced to last week is satisficing, a blend of satisfy and suffice. I've never been comfortable with the sociocratic standard of "good enough." 'Satisficing' has certainly been in the community planning jargon since the 1960's. It is a concept in rational decision making that is contrasted to 'optimization'. Satisficing is dependent upon first being able to come to agreement on the criteria for a decision. The Satisficing principle says, 'If an alternative meets all the criteria, then it is acceptable.' Of course, if our criteria identifiers are not extremely specific, multiple alternatives may perhaps meet the criteria. Then the choices are to revisit the criteria to make the criteria more specific, at the risk of having some judgmental party attempt to skew the criteria at this point to filter the options already in consideration. An important point to retain in the current active memory is that only one criterium can be 'maximized' or 'minimized'. All other criteria can be held as constraints in the optimization process. N.B.: Optimization is not at all the same thing as maximization. Optimization is the total decision based upon the most acceptable balance of the important criteria under consideration. Maximization is attempting the realize the largest amount of one particular criterium. E.g., trying to achieve the largest possible common house at the lowest possible cost with the best quality materials possible and the lowest environmental impact possible in the least possible time will be very frustrating. If you don't believe that, consider the five elements of that statement. Are any of them contradictory? Are any of them not contradictory? Only one of them can be met. All the rest must be set independently as constraints for measuring and evaluating the options. Happy Decision Making, from Tom Lofft Liberty Village, MD Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 08:56:42 -0400 From: Sharon Villines <sharon [at] sharonvillines.com> Subject: [C-L]_ Satisficing To: Cohousing-L Cohousing-L <cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org> Message-ID: <A743866E-B1C5-410C-9212-58159983AADE [at] sharonvillines.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes A decision-making concept I was introduced to last week is satisficing, a blend of satisfy and suffice. I've never been comfortable with the sociocratic standard of "good enough." Even when good enough is placed in the context of an ongoing cycle of evaluation and improvement it seems a low level to start with and has no energy in it. I also know that many decisions never get reviewed no matter whether they are good or good enough. There are too many new ones to make to revisit old ones. A satisficing decision feels like a better standard, and probably the same as is intended in saying "good enough" but the image it evokes seems stronger. it isn't enough for a decision to suffice; it must also be satisfying. Sharon ---- Sharon Villines Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC http://www.takomavillage.org _________________________________________________________________ The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail. http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.