Situations where sensemaking is useful

CHARACTERISTICS OF SITUATIONS THAT NECESSITATE SENSEMAKING

            McCaskey's (1982) 12 characteristics of ambiguous situations, as cited in Weick (1995, pp. 92-93), demonstrate "[t]he many ways in which ambiguity may crop up in organizational life and trigger sensemaking."

1.    Nature of the problem is itself in question.  Exactly "what the problem is" is unclear.

2.    Information amount and reliability is problematic. Defining the problem is difficult, the amount of information may be overwhelming or insufficient, and the data may be incomplete and unreliable.

3.    Multiple, conflicting interpretations.  Individuals develop multiple and sometimes conflicting interpretations of the data.

4.    Different value orientations, political/emotional clashes. Without objective criteria, individuals rely on personal and/or professional values to make sense of a situation and a clash of personal and emotional values can occur.

5.    Goals are unclear or multiple and conflicting. Managers are not guided by "clearly defined, coherent goals."

6.    Time, money, or attention is lacking. A shortage of one or more of these elements makes a difficult situation worse.

7.    Contradictions and paradoxes appear. The situation appears to have inconsistent features, relationships, or demands.

8.    Roles are vague and responsibilities are unclear.  Individuals do not have clearly defined sets of activities to perform.

9.    Success measures are lacking. Individuals are unsure what "success" in resolving the situation means and/or are unable to assess the degree of their success.

10. Poor understanding of cause-effect relationships. Individuals do not understand "what causes what" in the situation and may be uncertain how to obtain the effects they desire.

11. Symbols and metaphors used. Individuals use symbols or metaphors to express points of view rather than precise definitions or logical arguments.

12. Participation in decision-making is fluid.  The key decision makers and influence holders change when individuals "enter and leave the decision arena."