Business Problem Solving
Sa1_Jyyy
3.3Synthesisingfindings.pptxSynthesising findings: Turning analysis into a compelling narrative
Dr. Stephen Hills
Learning objectives
To be able to synthesise your analysis to highlight insights.
To structure a compelling narrative of your synthesised findings to communicate them in a way that motivates action.
Sythesising results and telling a great story
These final two steps are the culmination of your problem solving project and should provide a solution to your problem.
They are your conclusions and should be an engaging story supported with facts, analyses and arguments that convince your audience of the merits of your recommended solution.
Project structure
Definition of the problem
Disaggregation of the problem
Prioritisation of the problem
Workplan
Analysis and findings
Synthesis of findings and solutions
Synthesising results
The seven-steps process
How do you define a problem in a precise way to meet the decision maker’s needs?
How do you disaggregate the issues and develop hypotheses to be explored?
How do you prioritize what to do and what not to do?
How do you develop a workplan and assign analytical tasks?
How do you decide on the fact gathering and analysis to resolve the issues, while avoiding cognitive biases?
How do you go about synthesizing the findings to highlight insights?
How do you communicate them in a compelling way?
Step 6: Synthesise findings from the analysis
Assemble findings into a logical structure
Synthesise in a way that convinces others
Synthesising findings
Synthesis of your data gathering and analysis.
Synthesis: Combining components or elements to form a connected whole.
As you move to final synthesis, draw together the individual findings of the work on each branch of your logic tree into an overall picture.
Represent each of your findings in the form of pictures or graphics that highlight the insights that emerged from your work.
Implications and reasons to drive action
Evidence-based action.
What should we do and how should we do it?
Compelling narrative
The seven-steps process
How do you define a problem in a precise way to meet the decision maker’s needs?
How do you disaggregate the issues and develop hypotheses to be explored?
How do you prioritize what to do and what not to do?
How do you develop a workplan and assign analytical tasks?
How do you decide on the fact gathering and analysis to resolve the issues, while avoiding cognitive biases?
How do you go about synthesizing the findings to highlight insights?
How do you communicate them in a compelling way?
Step 7: Prepare a powerful communication
Develop a storyline from the conclusions
Governing thought or argument derived from the situation –observation – conclusion
Support with synthesised findings and assembled into component arguments
Lead with action steps or pose a series of questions that motivate action.
Telling compelling stories
Once you have synthesized your findings into a series of convincing graphics, the final step is to structure a compelling communication for your audience.
Return to your problem definition worksheet and remind yourself:
What problem are we trying to solve?
Has the problem evolved during project (e.g., as new information comes to bear? If so, how?
Did the boundaries change (e.g., to allow for a more creative solution)? If so, how?
What are the key criteria for success? These should be explicitly reflected in our story.
Pyramid structure
The pyramid structure helps us to show clearly how each element of our argument is supported by data and analysis.
At the very top level is our lead or governing statement of the problem.
Final one-day solution – your latest situation-observation-resolution statement.
Using insights from your synthesis stage, fill in supporting arguments that back up your top-level answer.
Structure options
Choose an appropriate structure depending on the nature of your answer and your audience.
Argument types: Deductive and inductive
Arguments can be made both deductively and inductively:
Deductive: From a general principle to observations (data) to a conclusion.
Inductive: From individual observations to general conclusions.
Case: Hechinger Draft Storyline
Case: Hechinger Draft Storyline
The following example looks at the complete narrative for Hechinger.
It draws together evidence from the analysis phase into a synthesis of the findings and then tells the story: Hechinger needed to change its business model quickly to address the competitive threat of Home Depot.
The whole story is on a single page with the governing thought and call to action at the top.
Resolution – situation – observation.
Underneath are the three major arguments that underpin the governing thought.
Then underneath these are the supporting arguments and data that provide the proof for the need for action and the formula for change.
1
2
3
1 – Home Depot Advantage
2 – Sales and Operating Income
3 – Store Openings
Draft Storyline
1983 - 1988
Case: Oilco
Case: Oilco
Recommendation was for the refinery business to cut costs substantially and become a modest growth, niche operation.
Communicated via a revealed approach – did not lead with the resolution.
Case: Oilco
Using a decision tree final storyline structure, you can provide evidence for each yes/no branch in your tree, slowly working the decision maker toward your solution.
You reveal the answer, rather than leading with it.
Revealed compelling competitor data, layer by layer, so to get comfortable with difficult conclusions.
Conclusions
Conclusions
Synthesis brings together all the separate pieces of your analytic work in a way that highlights your insights.
Revisit your original problem definition and answer your decision maker’s question – what should I do? – in a compelling way that motivates action.
Use the logic tree pyramid structure to organise a compelling story.
The pyramid structure helps to structure arguments and support into a powerful story.
Your final one-day answer structure (leading with resolution, then situation and observation) can be used as the governing thought of your narrative.
Try several storyline structures to see which are most clear and compelling, such as a decision tree format to reveal the answer step-by-step.
Workshop: McKinsey & Co’s Insurance in 2030
Step 1: Define the problem
Which three MBA programmes should I apply to and in what order?
Constraints:
Assumes you have already concluded that you are going to undertake postgraduate study and that an MBA is the course you want to study.
You can only apply to three MBA programmes and you should rank them in terms of first, second and third choice.
There is no point applying to MBA programmes for whom you do not meet the entry requirements.
Workshop: McKinsey & Co’s Insurance in 2030
Read the document Insurance productivity 2030: Reimagining the insurer for the future by Mckinsey & Co.
Translate this into a one-page compelling story using the pyramid structure.
Governing thought and call to action at the top (Resolution – situation – observation).
Underneath put the major arguments that underpin the governing thought.
Then underneath these put the supporting arguments and data that provide the proof for the need for action and the formula for change.
