Fig. 1
Methodological scheme for the research study
Fig. 2
Comparison of price vs weight for standard valve sizes
Fig. 3
Case of pump placement
Tab. 1
Cross-case analysis
| No. | Element of interest | Case I | Case II | Case III | Case IV | Case V | Case VI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Is the initial decision-maker fully qualified and experienced in the role? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| 2 | Does the decision have an impact greater than one year of the salary of the decision-maker? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| 3 | Was the initial decision reviewed by competent personnel and accepted? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| 4 | Does the person providing a better alternative have better identifiable qualifications or experience than the original decision-maker? | N | N | N | N | N | N |
| 5 | Was there a need for complicated mathematical calculations to identify the potential benefit? | N | N | N | N | N | N |
| 6 | Is the alternative identified in time to take corrective actions? | Y | N | N | N.A. | Y | Y |
| 7 | Was there visible recognition by management that the person providing the beneficial alternative was providing unique and valuable tacit knowledge? | N | N | N | N | N | N |
| 8 | Was there visible recognition by management that would indicate an improved decision-making process going forward? | N | N | N | N | N | N |