Comparing structured and unstructured problems

Well-structured Problems Definition

Unstructured Problems

Can be described with a high degree Cannot be described with a high of completeness degree of completeness Can be solved with a high degree of Cannot be resolved with a high certainty degree of certainty Experts usually agree on the correction solution Experts often disagree about the best solution LEARN TO CONSTR CT AN" "E#EN" REASONABLE SOL T!ONS Ranges fro$ very si$ple to very co$plex Esti$ating the su$ of future cash flows fro$ the use of long'lived assets (udging the ade)uacy of an argu$ent pro$oting a reduction in the capital gains tax rate
!nterpret a co$pany%s current ratio *repare operating budget for next + years

Educational goal Complexity Examples

LEARN TO REASON TO CORRECT SOL T!ONS Ranges fro$ very si$ple to very co$plex Reconciling a co$pany%s ban& account Calculating the capital gain on the sale of a building

Relatively simple Relatively complex -

Co$pute straight'line depreciation Classify a lease as capital or operating once all necessary facts are asse$bled

Solving Unstructured Problems

Only through exploring problems and information can we develop the skills for dealing with unstructured problems. It takes a challenging environment in which it is safe to try new ways of thinking. It also takes a lot of practice to become a better problem solver. The payoff for the hard work is a deeper understanding of the world around us, and eventually a greater sense of independence and confidence in meeting lifes most interesting and important challenges.

Skills for Unstructured Problem Solving

1. rere!uisite accounting knowledge

Not necessarily memorized but the ability to find necessary information

".

Identifying the #ature of the roblem

If we fail to properly identify the nature of the problem, we will not explore the problem adequately -- and this will cause additional difficulties in justifying a solution to the problem.

$.

%raming &nstructured roblems

You should explore the problem as thoroughly as time and other resources permit and de elop a framewor! within which to thin! about the problem. "ithout an adequate framewor! for e aluating information and possible solutions, your attempts to resol e the problem will probably be haphazard and the ris! of ma!ing a poor decisions increases greatly.

'.

(esolving an &nstructured roblem

#any people find it somewhat difficult to complete tas!s that require strong justification for their own opinions and that also effecti ely counter arguments supporting the opinions of others.

See also pdf file on ,Steps for -etter Thin&ing.

The $aterial on unstructured proble$ solving was derived fro$ a wor&shop presented by Susan /0 1olcott and Cindy L0 Lynch2 at the 3445 annual $eeting of the A$erican Accounting Association in Chicago0

Reflective Judgment Stages

Pre-reflective !in"ing #Stages $-%& 3 /nowing is li$ited to single concrete observations 6 Two categories for &nowing7 right answers and wrong answers0 8ood authorities have &nowledge9 bad authorities lac& &nowledge0 : !n so$e areas2 &nowledge is certain and authorities have that &nowledge0 !n other areas2 &nowledge is te$porarily un&nown ,! &now what ! have seen. ,!f it is on the news2 it has to be true0. ,!f it is in the textboo&2 it has to be true0. ,1hen there is evidence that people can give to convince everybody one way or the other2 then it will be &nowledge9 until then2 it%s ;ust a guess <opinion=0. ,1e%ll never &now for sure since no one was there0. ,Everyone is entitled to their own opinion0. ,*eople thin& differently and so they attac& the proble$ differently0 Other theories could be as good as $y own2 but based on different evidence0. ,!t is very difficult in this life to be sure0 There are degrees of sureness0 Bou co$e to a point at which you are sure enough for a personal stance on the issue0. ,One can ;udge an argu$ent by how well thought'out the positions are2 what &inds of reasoning and evidence are used to support it2 and how consistent the way one argues on this topic is as co$pared with other topics0.

'uasi-Reflective !in"ing #Stages ( and )& > Concept that &nowledge is un&nown in several specific cases leads to the abstract generali?ation that &nowledge is uncertain + /nowledge is uncertain and $ust be understood within a context9 thus ;ustification is context specific Reflective !in"ing #Stages * and +& 5 /nowledge is uncertain but constructed @rather than discoveredA by co$paring evidence and opinion on different sides of an issue or across contexts C /nowledge is the outco$e of a process of reasonable in)uiry in which solutions to ill' structured proble$s are constructed0 The ade)uacy of those solutions is evaluated in ter$s of what is $ost reasonable or probable on the basis of current evidence and reevaluated when relevant new evidence2 perspectives2 or tools of in)uiry beco$e available0

-ased on various exhibits in *atricia D0 /ing and /aren Stroh$ /itchener2 Developing Reflective Judgment2 San #rancisco7 (ossey'-ass *ublishers2 344>0

Assumptions About Knowledge

Reflective Judgment Stage
3 6 /nowing is li$ited to single concrete observations Two categories for &nowing7 right answers and wrong answers0 8ood authorities have &nowledge9 bad authorities lac& &nowledge0 !n so$e areas2 &nowledge is certain and authorities have that &nowledge0 !n other areas2 &nowledge is te$porarily un&nown

,o- certain is "no-ledge.

Absolutely certain Absolutely certain or certain but not i$$ediately available @$ost issues are assu$ed to have a right answerA Absolutely certain about so$e things9 te$porarily uncertain about others

,o- is "no-ledge gained.

Obtained by direct concrete observation Eia authority figures or through the senses0 1hen the truth is uncertain2 accepts view of authority0 Eia authorities in so$e areas9 through one%s own feelings and biases when &nowledge is uncertain

,o- are beliefs /ustified.

-eliefs need no ;ustification2 no alternatives are perceived -eliefs are either unexa$ined or ;ustified by their correspondence with beliefs of authority figures0 Evidence is not a criterion for establishing truthfulness0 Eia authorities in areas where answers exist2 otherwise defended as personal opinion because the lin& between evidence and beliefs is unclear0 Evidence can neither be evaluated nor used to reason to conclusions0 Opinions and facts cannot be distinguished fro$ factual evidence0 -y giving reasons and using evidence @along with unsubstantiated opinionA2 but the argu$ents and choice of evidence are idiosyncratic @e0g02 choosing evidence that fits an established beliefA Eia rules of in)uiry for a particular context0 Evidence can be evaluated )uantitatively7 within a perspective2 so$e evidence is stronger or $ore relevant than other evidence0 !ndividuals at this stage often provide a balanced picture of an issue or proble$ rather than offering a ;ustification of their own beliefs0

>

Concept that &nowledge is un&nown in several specific cases leads to the abstract generali?ation that &nowledge is uncertain

Not certain because of li$itations of the &nower9 &nowing always involves an ele$ent of a$biguity @e0g02 incorrect reporting of data2 data lost over ti$e2 etc0A !nterpretation is inherent in all understanding9 therefore2 no &nowledge is certain0 /nowledge is contextual and sub;ective because it is filtered through a person%s perceptions and criteria for ;udg$ent0 Only interpretations of evidence2 events2 or issues $ay be &nown0

Eia one%s own and others% biases2 data2 and logic0 "ifferences in points of view exist because of people%s upbringing or because they deliberately distort infor$ation0 Eia evidence and rules of in)uiry appropriate for the context0 !t is relative0 -eliefs $ay be ;ustified only within a given context or fro$ a given perspective0

/nowledge is uncertain and $ust be understood within a context9 thus ;ustification is context specific

Reflective Judgment Stage

+ /nowledge is uncertain and $ust be understood within a context9 thus ;ustification is context specific

,o- certain is "no-ledge.

!nterpretation is inherent in all understanding9 therefore2 no &nowledge is certain0 /nowledge is contextual and sub;ective because it is filtered through a person%s perceptions and criteria for ;udg$ent0 Only interpretations of evidence2 events2 or issues $ay be &nown0 ncertain and $ust be understood in relationship to context and evidence0 So$e personal certainty about beliefs based on evaluations of evidence across different perspectives on an issue Certainty that so$e &nowledge clai$s are better or $ore co$plete than others2 although clai$s $ay need to be re'evaluated when new infor$ation beco$es available

,o- is "no-ledge gained.

Eia evidence and rules of in)uiry appropriate for the context0 !t is relative0 -eliefs $ay be ;ustified only within a given context or fro$ a given perspective0

,o- are beliefs /ustified.

Eia rules of in)uiry for a particular context0 Evidence can be evaluated )uantitatively7 within a perspective2 so$e evidence is stronger or $ore relevant than other evidence0 !ndividuals at this stage often provide a balanced picture of an issue or proble$ rather than offering a ;ustification of their own beliefs0 -y co$paring and evaluating evidence fro$ different points of view Evaluation $ay involve criteria such as the weight of the evidence2 the utility of the solution2 and the prag$atic need for action As $ore or less reasonable con;ectures about the proble$ based on an integration and evaluation of relevant data2 evidence2 andFor opinion0 Conclusions are defended as representing the $ost co$plete2 plausible or co$pelling understanding of an issue on the basis of available evidence0

/nowledge is uncertain but constructed @rather than discoveredA by co$paring evidence and opinion on different sides of an issue or across contexts /nowledge is the outco$e of a process of reasonable in)uiry in which solutions to ill'structured proble$s are constructed0 The ade)uacy of those solutions is evaluated in ter$s of what is $ost reasonable or probable on the basis of current evidence and reevaluated when relevant new evidence2 perspectives2 or tools of in)uiry beco$e available0

/nowledge is constructed into individual conclusions about ill' structured proble$s on the basis of infor$ation fro$ a variety of sources0 So$e points of view $ay be tentatively ;udged as better than others0 Eia co$plex processes of critical in)uiry or synthesis0 Actively open'$inded thin&ing where beliefs can always be i$proved0 Openness to alternatives and to counter evidence0