Discussion 1 : Supernumerary Intelligence (SI) (Analyt Evid Based Decis Making)

This week you return to analytics and expand its scope, incorporating qualitative research with statistics and deepening your knowledge of all the analytical methods available. This combination of qualitative and quantitative reasoning is called supernumerary intelligence (SI).

We will also touch on big data, which involves dealing with very large datasets that do not submit to many traditional analytical methods and which require special methods of their own.

Quantitative CyberQuest (QCQ) and the Public Administration Genome Project (PAGP) are two systems that are particularly useful in applying SI to analytics.

To prepare:

• Review the Learning Resources, focusing on supernumerary intelligence (SI).

• Think about how SI differs from basic analytical methods.

With these thoughts in mind:

Post your understanding of SI and how this approach differs from basic analytical methods.

Explain how it can help you with your decision making at your current job or at a job of interest. Include QCQ and PAGP as part of your discussion.

Discussion 2 : The Case of Bernadine Healy (Brd Gov & Vol Mgmt)

For a nonprofit organization to be successful, it is critical that there is a healthy relationship between the executive director and board of directors.

Executive directors need to take the time to make sure there are mutually understood responsibilities and expectations, good communication systems and a clear process for decision making.

The case of Bernadine Healy highlights the impact on an organization when the relationship between an executive director and the board of directors is not healthy and is filled with mistrust.

For this Discussion, read the case, "Who Brought Bernadine Healy Down," from this week's Learning Resources. See attached document

With these thoughts in mind:

Post an answer to the following questions:

• How did the lack of trust between board members and Healy manifest itself in this case?

• How was the relationship between Healy and the board dysfunctional?

• What actions could Healy have taken to build a stronger, healthier relationship with her board of directors?

• What actions could members of the board have taken to improve their relationship with Healy?