Decision making in high-velocity environments: implications for healthcare

• Published in: Journal of healthcare management 1999-05, Vol.44 (3), p.197-206
• Main Authors: Stepanovich, P L, Uhrig, J D
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aircraft accidents & safety; Analysis; Biotechnology industry; Conflict resolution; Decision making; Decision Making, Organizational; Executives; Group Processes; Health administration; Health care industry; Health care policy; Health Care Reform; Health Facility Planning - methods; Health Facility Planning - organization & administration; Health Services Research; Humans; Information Services - utilization; Management; Medical care; Negotiating; Organizational Culture; Organizational Innovation; Planning Techniques; Strategic planning; Studies; Time Management; United States; Velocity
• ISSN: 1096-9012; 1944-7396
• DOI: 10.1097/00115514-199905000-00009

Healthcare can be considered a high-velocity environment and, as such, can benefit from research conducted in other industries regarding strategic decision making. Strategic planning is not only relevant to firms in high-velocity environments, but is also important for high performance and survival. Specifically, decision-making speed seems to be instrumental in differentiating between high and low performers; fast decision makers outperform slow decision makers. This article outlines the differences between fast and slow decision makers, identifies five paralyses that can slow decision making in healthcare, and outlines the role of a planning department in circumventing these paralyses. Executives can use the proposed planning structure to improve both the speed and quality of strategic decisions. The structure uses planning facilitators to avoid the following five paralyses: 1. Analysis. Decision makers can no longer afford the luxury of lengthy, detailed analysis but must develop real-time systems that provide appropriate, timely information. 2. Alternatives. Many alternatives (beyond the traditional two or three) need to be considered and the alternatives must be evaluated simultaneously. 3. Group Think. Decision makers must avoid limited mind-sets and autocratic leadership styles by seeking out independent, knowledgeable counselors. 4. Process. Decision makers need to resolve conflicts through "consensus with qualification," as opposed to waiting for everyone to come on board. 5. Separation. Successful implementation requires a structured process that cuts across disciplines and levels.