Wiki contents


2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

After the first official rollover, my team has made a solid start, but, I know that we can do better. In order to reflect on this week, I will adopt Daudelin’s framework. The problem I identified from this week in the simulation was that we relied on the practice round decisions to carry over into the official rounds with similar results. This is something that I find myself doing outside of this course, so reflecting on this will be very beneficial to me personally. While this has worked so far in the simulation, I do think that as a team we must take into account the possibility of “the Sunk-Cost Trap” as explained in the ‘hidden traps of decision making’ reading.

I believe that sometimes when things appear to be going well, it’s easy to simply rely on past decisions and expect future success, but what happens when something goes wrong? I think that as a group, if we are constantly aware of this decision-making heuristic we will be much more effective in the long term. For example, the reading states “for all decisions with a history, you will need to make a conscious effort to set aside any sunk costs – whether psychological or economic -- that will muddy your thinking about the choice at hand.” – John S. Hammond’ Ralph L. Keeney; Howard Raiffa, 1998

This reading has found a solution to my initial problem, as it suggests techniques to ensure that you are not solely relying on past decisions. For example, the reading suggests seeking perspectives from people who were uninvolved in the earlier decisions and hence who are less likely to be committed to them. Adopting this alongside with being aware and on the lookout for the influence of sunk-cost biases will help in avoiding potential problems in the future, and hopefully ensure us a higher level of success and decision making.

Reference List: 

Hamond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa. H. (1998). Hidden traps in decision making. Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 47+ 

 Daudelin, M. W. (1996). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics, 24(3), 36-48. 


  1. Conor, your problem "we relied on the practice round decisions to carry over into the official rounds with similar result" seems to be more like to solution/cause of a problem rather than a problem itself.  Revise Daudelin, and see how she positions "articulating the problem".  Now maybe you're right (about the cause), but it's had to judge that from what's written here. But you need to be much more rigorous and explicit in your application of Daudelin.

    The first stage of reflection, articulation of a problem, defines the issue that the mind will work on during the process of reflection. It is often preceded by what John Dewey calls “a state of doubt, hesitancy, perplexity, or mental difficulty.” The clear articulation of a problem is often an insight in itself, and rewarding to the manager who has struggled to identify a vague sense of discomfort or dissatisfaction.

    So, specifically, what are you dissatisfied with? What do you mean by similar results? Your team's ranking? The absolute value of your SHV? Something else?  Without a clearly articulated problem its hard to do analysis, hypothesising, etc, in a way that is likely to produce a robust course of action (unless one gets lucky).

  2. Hi Conor,

    I agree with what Peter has mentioned about going more into detail by mentioning information resulted from the rollovers in MikesBike. However, it is good to see that you recognise problems happening and what you should do to avoid them. I suggest you could add onto your reflections by making your own plans/theories (based on Daudelin's four stages of reflection) that you would try to implement to solve the problems. Overall, keep up the good work!


  3. Hey Conor,

    This is a great approach to a learning journal, with some clarfications required. Furthering on what Peter and Sabrina have already said, further description and depth to an analysis of your problem would further this reflection.

    Details are crucial, as they provide a tangible reference in order to further your reflection later on as they provide a direct reference and objective for later. 

    Good journal, with an excellent problem, just requiring further details.