scholarly journals Developing High Quality Decision‐Making Discussions About Biological Conservation in a Normal Classroom Setting

2009 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 551-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Grace
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Biological Conservation ◽  
Classroom Setting ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Quality Decision

The post-normal sciences of precaution

2005 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 11-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Ravetz
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Management ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Corporate Control ◽  
Applied Science ◽  
Normal Science ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Puzzle Solving ◽  
Peer Community ◽  
Quality Decision

After centuries of optimism, science has become problematic and compromised. We can no longer assume that innovations are safe until proven dangerous. The ‘technocratic’ approach to science, with its reductionist methodology and its corporate control, is no longer appropriate. We need a ‘precautionary’ science that will be ‘post-normal’ in character. For this, we contrast ‘applied science,’ like the ‘puzzle-solving’ of Kuhn's ‘normal science’ and the ‘professional consultancy’ like the practice of the surgeon or engineer. Rather, we have a situation where ‘facts are uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high, and decisions urgent.’ For high-quality decision-making, we need an ‘extended peer community’ who will bring their ‘extended facts’ to the dialogue. There are a number of initiatives that advance the post-normal programme, including the endeavours of Poul Harremoës and the conference on Uncertainty and Precaution in Environmental Management.

Knowledge Communication

2011 ◽  
pp. 324-335
Author(s):  
Martin J. Eppler
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Interpersonal Communication ◽  
Professional Knowledge ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Organizational Action ◽  
Effective Transfer ◽  
Quality Decision ◽  
Knowledge Communication

Communicating professional knowledge is a key activity for today’s specialized workforce. The efficient and effective transfer of experiences, insights, and know-how among different experts and decision makers is a prerequisite for high-quality decision making and coordinated, organizational action (Straub & Karahanna, 1998). Situations of such deliberate (interfunctional) knowledge transfer through interpersonal communication or group conversations (Gratton & Goshal, 2002) can be found in many business constellations, as the following typical examples illustrate:

Knowledge Communication

2010 ◽  
pp. 515-526 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.J. Eppler
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Interpersonal Communication ◽  
Professional Knowledge ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Organizational Action ◽  
Effective Transfer ◽  
Quality Decision ◽  
Knowledge Communication

Communicating professional knowledge is a key activity for today’s specialized workforce. The efficient and effective transfer of experiences, insights, and know-how among different experts and decision makers is a prerequisite for high-quality decision making and coordinated, organizational action (Straub & Karahanna, 1998). Situations of such deliberate (interfunctional) knowledge transfer through interpersonal communication or group conversations (Gratton & Goshal, 2002) can be found in many business constellations, as the following typical examples illustrate:

Knowledge Communication

2011 ◽  
pp. 317-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.J. Eppler
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Interpersonal Communication ◽  
Professional Knowledge ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Organizational Action ◽  
Effective Transfer ◽  
Quality Decision ◽  
Knowledge Communication

Communicating professional knowledge is a key activity for today’s specialized workforce. The efficient and effective transfer of experiences, insights, and know-how among different experts and decision makers is a prerequisite for high-quality decision making and coordinated, organizational action (Straub & Karahanna, 1998). Situations of such deliberate (interfunctional) knowledge transfer through interpersonal communication or group conversations (Gratton & Goshal, 2002) can be found in many business constellations, as the following typical examples illustrate:

scholarly journals Improving Breast Cancer Surgical Treatment Decision Making: The iCanDecide Randomized Clinical Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7) ◽  
pp. 659-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah T. Hawley ◽  
Yun Li ◽  
Lawrence C. An ◽  
Kenneth Resnicow ◽  
Nancy K. Janz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Web Site ◽  
Treatment Decision ◽  
Breast Cancer Treatment ◽  
High Quality ◽  
High Knowledge ◽  
Quality Decision

Purpose This study was conducted to determine the effect of iCanDecide, an interactive and tailored breast cancer treatment decision tool, on the rate of high-quality patient decisions—both informed and values concordant—regarding locoregional breast cancer treatment and on patient appraisal of decision making. Methods We conducted a randomized clinical trial of newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer making locoregional treatment decisions. From 22 surgical practices, 537 patients were recruited and randomly assigned online to the iCanDecide interactive and tailored Web site (intervention) or the iCanDecide static Web site (control). Participants completed a baseline survey and were mailed a follow-up survey 4 to 5 weeks after enrollment to assess the primary outcome of a high-quality decision, which consisted of two components, high knowledge and values-concordant treatment, and secondary outcomes (decision preparation, deliberation, and subjective decision quality). Results Patients in the intervention arm had higher odds of making a high-quality decision than did those in the control arm (odds ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.92; P = .0004), which was driven primarily by differences in the rates of high knowledge between groups. The majority of patients in both arms made values-concordant treatment decisions (78.6% in the intervention arm and 81.4% in the control arm). More patients in the intervention arm had high decision preparation (estimate, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.34; P = .027), but there were no significant differences in the other decision appraisal outcomes. The effect of the intervention was similar for women who were leaning strongly toward a treatment option at enrollment compared with those who were not. Conclusion The tailored and interactive iCanDecide Web site, which focused on knowledge building and values clarification, positively affected high-quality decisions largely by improving knowledge compared with static online information. To be effective, future patient-facing decision tools should be integrated into the clinical workflow to improve decision making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document