
We listen to your senior management, analyze time management and key performance indicators, seek customer feedback, and with the help of value-stream mapping and learner grouping simplify and streamline the entire process from concept to customer.
We start by asking a series of targeted questions designed to help define, and articulate some of the unique challenges, and the unique rewards that are a part of your vision. Examining hidden costs, manufacturing issues, logistical constraints, and strategic hiccups, we look at all market options to find the most cost effective and simple solutions to every aspect of organizational management and production. Realizing and applying individual learning styles we are uniquely able to provide insight on potential obstacles and chart exactly where and what's holding your project back. We then work with you understand or rebuild and restructure operations, culture and creating an environment of effective communication, trust, and a sense of unity in accomplishment. Our processes focus on simplicity, understanding that confusion within a team leads to costly errors and time wasted on miscommunication. Our method stands out in its unique use of mathematical and logical analysis. Using this wide variety of data and metrics allows us to better analyze and process potential in the individual, and achieve predicted desirable outcomes with greater reliability and consistency.
Once we understand who you are, and what your goals are we get to know your team. Deciphering who the pragmatic “details'' thinkers are, and who the theoretical “bigger picture” individuals are, we then look at where and how roles and tasks are defined and addressed. ensuring each individual’s abilities and talents are being best utilized and showcased. Visual, verbal, logical, or social learning styles, we group and conceptualize specifically targeting how your unique team learns and works with information.
We understand that operations, culture, and branding are all integrated. We believe media success is a long game. We augment your marketing team: communicating openly and operating with the big picture in mind to create lasting ripples in the media. .
Active Articulation prides itself on creating a decision-making process that increases efficiency and delegates responsibility. Decision making
-
High cost projects will create stressful conditions, while some people want to skirt
responsibility, others stand out by contributing and making a stand. We ensure high pressure
decisions are thought through, with terms, pattern recognition, and metric creation. It is
important to document decisions n of Responsibility though distribution of responsibility, allowing more
employees to read guidelines, and assert their perspectives, while show-casing their applicable knowledge.
If you need local solutions rather than all-encompassing mandates- a task force is the best
route to go, split testing groups allows for active promotion and recognizing talent. Creating
promotions based on merit increases work morale and improves work-place efficiency.
-
There is no way to fool-proof a choice, as all choices are potentially at a 50% rate of success and
failure. Sometimes the desired outcomes do not manifest, even with the proper metrics and
pattern understanding, this is why we must not base the merit of our decisions solely on the
outcome. Active articulation helps you make sound decisions, regardless of outcome, by clearly
articulating your decision-making process (e.g., What are the decision criteria? Who will be
included in the decisions and at what points? Does it follow protocol? What workplace
procedures should be revalued and changed, are any hampering the outcomes). Not only will
you boost teamwide confidence and a sense of fairness, but you’ll also enable people to make
faster, more independent decisions.
-
Part of the decision-making process (how and when) is determined and communicated when a
company runs into a problem, these problems are precisely when we should implement
decisions for a change in strategy (why and where).
When posed properly, the answers to these questions provide organizations and individuals a
proper timeline.
Rather than responding to the onslaught of decisions and challenges as they pop up, workers
should be trained on pattern recognition to make decisions that do not derail company policy.
Our methodology simplifies conversations, speeds up decisions, and creates an opportunity for
better delegation of responsibility.
-
One of the central challenges that needs to be addressed was one of perception—the mental
models people held about themselves and the project. Often, staff and functional projects get
little attention from senior business leadership.
· Terms, conditions, boundaries, procedures, and taskforce need to be initially outlined and
defined.
· By agreeing upon tactics, roles, and needs in a team setting, the ploy is enfranchising all the
players at the outset, the project leader would be able to anticipate and bypass many of the
difficulties the previous managers had encountered
· The delivery team needed to come to terms with this requirement and to learn to operate in
alignment
Codified Game Theory
-
For PR/Politics
Outcome to maximize the share of the votes
Givens: Ten Positions
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Determine: Are any of the strategies dominated?
MATH:
2 DOMINATES 1
u (1,1)= 50% < U(2,1)=90%
(10% OF INITAL VOTES)
vs 2
u(1,2)=10% < u(2,2)50%
vs 3
(1,3)=15% < u (2,3)=20%
vs 4
(1,4)=20% ,u(2,4) =25%
(The pattern set is an increase in 5%)
2 Dominates 3 when deleting 1
vs2 (2,2)=50% < U(3,2)=80%
vs3 ((2,3)=20% < (3,3)=50%
vs4 (2,4)=25% <U(3,4)=30%
VS5 (2,5)=30% < U(3,5)=35%
I choose 1 and the other candidate chooses 1? 50%...tie for everybody, so I’ll get 50% of the vote.
-My share of the vote if I choose 2 and the other candidate chooses 1? 90%.
Opponent will get all the voters at 1. I’ll get everyone else. So I get 90%. So in this case choosing 2 is better than choosing 1.
So suppose my opponent chooses 2. So what’s my payoff
I get all the voters right on top of me at position 1 and she gets everyone else, is that right?
So I get 10%. And what about if we both choose 2? 50%,
So 50% in this case, and once again, 2 did better than 1.
Against 3: so now we’re comparing my choosing 1 versus 3 and my choosing 2 versus 3. If I choose 1 against 3, what share of the vote do I get? I’m going to get all the people at position 1 and half the people at position 2 for a total of 15. And if I chose 2 against 3… I get 20,
So if I choose 1 against 4, and comparing my choosing 2 against 4.
In the former case if I choose 1 against 4, how many votes do I get? I get all the people at 1, and all the people at 2, so I get 20% of the votes, she gets everyone else. And here if I choose 2 against 4, I get all the people at 1, all the people at 2, PLUS Half the people at 3, so that comes out as 25% and once again and so on.
ignoring these first two positions which were OUTLIERS, choosing 2 always gave me 5% more votes than choosing 1, regardless of what the other person chooses.
Works with everything even product placement
-
2
H L
1 H 1,1 6,-2
L -2,6 3,3
Advertisement
$10.00 Product Placement
High 4
LOW 2
(10-4=6) PAYOUT
SPLIT MARKET SHARE 5/5
Result (1:1)
There is a Dominant Strategy-
Player 2: LOW 6
HIGH 1
These numbers convey relative wins and loses even though it is possible to assign values
-
2
H L
H 1,2 0,0
L 0,0 2,1
1
Sometimes a Dominant strategy doesn’t exist- and it does not need to always exist
The point is to see all options and considerations