Facing a tough decision? Don't rely too much on your gut.

    That's one message from Tom Davenport, a management professor at Babson College in Wellesley, Mass., and co-author of a book on strategy and decisions called 'Competing on Analytics: The New Science of Winning.'

    He urges decision-makers to ask questions and arm themselves with as much information as possible. He suggests that current economic problems could be attributed, in part, to managers who failed to do this. He spoke with The Journal's Michael Sanserino about how to make better decisions. Here are edited excerpts of the conversation:

    What are three steps that managers can take to make better decisions?

    One would be to clarify the decision roles. Clearly establish who the decision-makers are and who's responsible for different aspects of the decision.

    Think about what information you're using to make the decision. We have powerful information tools to make decisions, but in many cases, the information doesn't actually influence the decision as much as it might. You need to acquaint yourself with information tools that are available. In many cases it helps to have someone who can guide you through that process.

    [Also] step back and say, 'What's the best way to make this decision?' If you just immediately decide in the way that's most comfortable to you, chances are you're not going to get the best outcome.

    What are three decision-making mistakes?

    I was looking recently at when the concept of 'group think' first emerged -- where everybody in a small group tends to think the same way. That idea came up more than 50 years ago, but we can think of lots of examples where people still engage in group think. They don't arrive at a good answer as a result.

    Another mistake would be to assume that everybody is thinking rationally. People are often irrational about decision issues in a whole variety of ways. One is they are overly influenced by any numbers that they previously heard or any statement of the problem the so-called anchoring effect.

    The third problem is that people rely on intuition too much. It's easy, it's comfortable, but in general it should be the last resort, not the first. If you can't get data, if you have a lot of experience, maybe intuition is OK. But in general you want to look for the more analytical approaches than just your intuition.

    What sort of analytical approaches do you mean?

    I've defined analytics as the use of data and systematic reasoning to make decisions. [Analytics tools are] mostly software. The IT industry typically calls it business intelligence software. You could say data warehouses fall into that category as well data set aside for analysis.

    What can companies with little experience and few resources do to use analytics in their business practices?

    It's getting easier to enter into the area of analytical decisions. For one thing, almost everybody has better data than they ever had before. If you have any Internet presence whatsoever, the Internet generates a vast amount of data you can use to start making analytical decisions about who's paying attention to your products and information.

    [Also] analytical software is increasingly provided by the drink rather than having to buy the whole software capabilities. And it's even possible to get analytical capabilities in an outsourced way.

    What can leaders do to bridge the knowledge gap between themselves and their employees?

    My thinking has changed a little bit on this. I wrote a book called 'Thinking for a Living,' and said, 'Ah, don't worry about it if your knowledge workers know more than you do. That's the nature of the knowledge economy, and you can't expect to know more than every one of your employees.'

    Now I think in the current financial crisis, we've seen examples where highly analytical knowledge workers were able to snow their bosses a little bit. The most successful organizations have been those who've said, 'If you're a manager and you don't understand this type of analysis, don't base your business on it.' What that means is the analyst has to become better at explaining what they do in common-sense terms. And it probably means managers are going to have to bone up a bit and maybe go back to school. It's just too important to the success of the modern economy to make these decisions blind.

    你正面临艰难的抉择吗？不要过于依赖自己的直觉。

    这是马萨诸塞州巴布森学院（Babson College）管理学教授达文波特（Tom Davenport）的忠告之一。达文波特与人合着了探讨战略与决策的书《分析层面之竞争：赢的新科学》（Competing on Analytics: The New Science of Winning）.

    他敦促决策人士提出问题，并用尽可能多的信息武装自己。他建议，目前的经济问题可以部分归咎于那些没做到这点的管理者。在接受《华尔街日报》桑斯里诺（Michael Sanserino）的采访时，达文波特谈了如何更好地作决策。采访节录如下：

    管理者可以采取哪三个步骤来更好地作决策？

    第一，明确决策角色。清楚地确立谁是决策者，谁对决策的各个方面负责。

    想想作决策时使用了哪些信息。我们有着强大的信息工具来作决策，不过在很多情况下，信息实际上并没有对决策造成应有的影响。你需要让自己了解可以使用的信息工具。很多情况下，向一个可以引导你完成这一过程的人征求意见，也会有所帮助。

    此外，退一步想想，作出这个决策的最佳方式是什么？如果你只是马上按照自己最舒服的方式进行决策，你有可能不会获得最佳结果。

    三大决策错误是什么？

    最近，我在想"群体思维"这个概念是什么时候出现的。"群体思维"指的是一个小团队中的每个人都倾向于以同样的方式思考。这个概念早在50多年前就出现了，不过我们可以想出人们仍在进行"群体思维"的很多例子。结果是，他们不会得到一个好的答案。

    第二种错误是，以为每个人都是理性思考的。人们常常对决策问题并不理性，表现方式各种各样。有一种是，人们受到过去听到的数据或问题陈述的影响，也就是所谓的"先入为主".

    第三种错误是，人们过于依赖直觉。依靠直觉作决策既简单又舒服，但是通常这应该作为最后一招，而不是第一招。如果你无法获得数据，如果你有丰富的经验，或许直觉还行得通。不过通常来讲，你应该寻求分析为主的途径，而不是仅仅依靠直觉。

    你指哪些分析法？

    我将分析定义为运用数据和系统性的推理来做出决定。分析工具绝大部分都是软件。IT行业通常称之为商业智能软件。数据库也可以归入这个范畴──用于分析的数据。

    没什么经验和资源的公司该如何在商业活动中应用分析法？

    进入分析式决策领域越来越容易了。一方面，几乎所有人都拥有比以前更好的数据。只要能上网，网络上有大量的数据，可供你用来分析什么人在关注你的产品和信息。

    同时，分析软件越来越趋向于按需提供，而无需购买整个软件的所有功能。甚至还可以通过外包方式来进行分析。

    身为领袖，应当怎样弥合自身和员工之间的知识差距？

    对这个问题，我的想法略有改变。我写过一本书，名为《思考型工作者》（Thinking for a Living）,书中说，不用担心你手下的知识型工作者知道的比你多。这就是知识经济的特点，你不能指望自己比所有员工懂的都多。

    现在我觉得，在当前的金融危机中，我们已经看到过一些例子，具有很强分析能力的知识型工作者能够欺骗老板。最成功的机构秉承这样的信条：作为经理，如果你不明白这种分析方法，那就不要以此为基础来开展业务。也就是说分析者必须能够更好地用通俗易懂的话来解释他们所做的事情。这或许意味着管理人员必须临阵磨枪一番，或是重新学习。这对于现代经济的成功太重要了，切不可盲目做出决定。