BUSM2577 Chap.7 Developing and Selecting Solutions

Developing and Selecting Solutions

Developing and Selecting Solutions frames a decision through divergent ideation, convergent criteria and feasibility and desirability.

The objective is to generate several alternatives before scoring them against the reframed problem, so the chapter should be read as a chain from problem definition to evidence, option comparison and accountable action.

Start with divergent ideation and name the decision owner, affected stakeholders and time horizon.

The same fact can matter differently across those positions, so the opening frame determines which evidence is relevant.

Use convergent criteria to explain how the present condition produces an opportunity, cost or risk. A strong mechanism states what changes, for whom and through which organisational, market or institutional process.

Apply feasibility and desirability when comparing options.

Keep criteria distinct, test trade-offs and ask which assumption drives the recommendation. A score or matrix only helps when its criteria are justified by the case.

For the application — generate several alternatives before scoring them against the reframed problem — finish with an actor, action, rationale and review trigger.

This turns analysis into a recommendation while keeping the decision open to new evidence.

Build a decision ledger for Developing and Selecting Solutions. Separate the current condition, the stakeholder affected, the evidence supporting divergent ideation, the mechanism represented by convergent criteria and the criterion supplied by feasibility and desirability.

If a recommendation cannot point back to one of those entries, it is probably preference dressed as analysis rather than a consequence of the case.

Compare at least two feasible options against the same criteria. State who benefits, who bears cost or risk, what capability implementation requires and what evidence would reveal failure.

This comparison is essential when students need to generate several alternatives before scoring them against the reframed problem, because an attractive option is not yet a defensible choice until its trade-offs are made visible.

Rehearse the BUSM2577 response as a short briefing: one sentence for the decision, two for the evidence and mechanism, one for the alternative and one for the qualified recommendation.

Then expand only the move that needs more support.

This protects the argument structure when a report, presentation or timed case imposes a strict word or time limit.

A complete Developing and Selecting Solutions response should make the task visible before the detail: identify what must be decided, define the relevant terms, connect the evidence to convergent criteria, and use feasibility and desirability to test the result.

The final sentence should answer the question actually asked rather than merely repeat the topic.

The controlling limit is specific: A scoring matrix makes assumptions visible but cannot manufacture reliable inputs.

Keep that limit beside the worked example, because it separates a careful BUSM2577 answer from one that sounds confident but claims more than the task or evidence supports.

For revision, retrieve divergent ideation, convergent criteria and feasibility and desirability without notes, explain their relationship aloud, then complete a changed version of the application: generate several alternatives before scoring them against the reframed problem.

Record the first point at which your reasoning fails and repair that move before attempting another case.

What this chapter covers

• 01

  divergent ideation

• 02

  convergent criteria

• 03

  feasibility and desirability

• 04

  Applying divergent ideation

• 05

  Limits of convergent criteria and feasibility and desirability

Worked example: Developing and Selecting Solutions

Key terms

Desirability, Viability, Feasibility (DVF) and the Impact-Effort Matrix

DVF tests whether an idea is wanted by users, sustainable as an organisation and technically achievable; an Impact-Effort Matrix then compares expected benefit with implementation effort. In this chapter, use the concept when you generate several alternatives before scoring them against the reframed problem.

Cognitive bias in design thinking (bandwagon effect, confirmation bias, IKEA effect)

Cognitive bias is a systematic distortion in judgement; the bandwagon effect favours popular ideas, confirmation bias seeks supporting evidence, and the IKEA effect overvalues solutions people helped create. In this chapter, use the concept when you generate several alternatives before scoring them against the reframed problem.

Wicked problem

A wicked problem is a complex, contested problem with interacting causes, no single agreed formulation and no final solution that can be judged simply true or false. In this chapter, use the concept when you generate several alternatives before scoring them against the reframed problem.

Developing and Selecting Solutions FAQ

Assessment move

Reconstruct the relationship among divergent ideation, convergent criteria and feasibility and desirability; complete the chapter application without notes; then test the result against this limit: A scoring matrix makes assumptions visible but cannot manufacture reliable inputs.

Working through Developing and Selecting Solutions in BUSM2577? Sia is AskSia’s AI Management tutor — ask any BUSM2577 Developing and Selecting Solutions question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how BUSM2577 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.