SBenegaL

Category: Decision Making

  • Decision Making – Managerial Implication

    In the last byte, we looked at the ethical dimension of decision making. In today’s byte, we look at the managerial implication of decision making as a critical activity.

    As a manager, it is rare to have the luxury of optimizing, satisfying is a more realistic approach that one would need to take. Many a times the decision could be unpredictable and random!

    Given that individuals differ in their preference for risk as well as styles of gathering information and making judgment; the manager would benefit from understanding these individual differences and can help managers maximize strengths in employee decision styles and build teams that capitalize on strengths like – creativity. By creating an enabling environment that is supportive, the employee’s creativity could be nourished.

    There is also no strict rule that defined whether decisions need to be taken up by individuals or teams/groups; it depends on the kind of requirement – the need to diagnose the situation, implement the appropriate level of participation etc and keep an eye on the potential for group think and other relevant biases that could creep in.

    Ethicality in decision making is the bedrock on all good decision making.

  • Decision Making – Ethical Issues

    In the last byte, we looked at the three components of Decision Making in Virtual workplace in detail. In today’s byte, we look at some ethical issues that arise in decision making and what steps one could take in decision making.

    With the increasing visibility of corporate decisions, it is all the more crucial in today’s settings to be careful of the ethical implications of the decision one takes. The ethical angle of decision making in organizations could be influenced by many factors like – individual differences, organizational rewards, and punishments.

    Through a study conducted by Kenneth Blanchard and Norman Vincent Peale – there are some “ethics check” that decision makers could take. Refer for greater detail their book – “The Power of Ethical Management”. Three major questions they encourage the decision maker to ponder over are:

    1. Is it Legal?
    2. Is it balanced? (Would it be fair to all concerned in the short and long term? Does it promote win-win partnership?)
    3. How will it make me feel about myself? (Will it make me proud of my actions? How will I feel when others become aware of the decisions?)

  • Decision Making – Virtual Workplaces 2

    In the last byte, we began our discussion making in virtual workplaces. We discuss about the three components that we mentioned to be important component

    DVCS relates to the face to face interactions of teams that generally rely on computer mounted cameras and provides video feeds and voice transmissions; combined with high-speed data connections the local teams can connect with their counter-parts across geographies. These systems could also take advantage of outside experts who could be added to the group.

    Through the use of GDSS, users could turn off their individual identities and interact with anonymity and can poll participants and assemble statistical information relevant to the decision being made – thus enabling collaboration in virtual teams.

    Internet and intranets could be rick communication and decision-making resource that would allow virtual teams to archive text, visuals, audio, and data files for use in decision making. The progress of the virtual teams could be easily updated and shared with other team members.

    These 3 components provide virtual teams a rich communications environment for decision making, however it is difficult to duplicate the face-to-face environment and its effectiveness is driven by the virtual team member’s ability to use the tools that are available.

  • Decision Making – Virtual Workplaces

    In the last byte, we looked at the role Group Decision Support Systems play. In today’s byte, we begin our discussion on the shift decision making process has to take in case of Virtual Workplaces.

    Virtual workplace refers to the modern day work environment where managers face scenarios of flexibility in workplace independent or unconstrained by geography, time and organizational boundaries. Virtual teams today could be seen as a work arrangement where the co-workers are disbursed geographically and would require a combination of telecommunication and information technology to accomplish the task at hand. These teams rarely have face-to-face meetings and the membership involved changes according to the project requirements at hand.

    The decisions made in these virtual teams would need the following three components for communication and decision making:

    1. Desktop Videoconferencing Systems (DVCS)
    2. Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS)
    3. Internet/intranet systems
    While we have already discussed the GDSS in the earlier section, we shall discuss about this in the context of these virtual teams. Over the next byte, we shall attempt understanding these three components.

  • Decision Support System

    In the last byte, we looked at Expert Systems and began our discussion on DSS. We shall continue from the discussion on DSS to begin today’s byte. 

    DSS could be designed to ease decision making in situations of information overload and stress. Many a times, though the situations that arise at different points in time could even be emergency situations, the managers wouldn’t really need to make a radically different plan – they could have a skeletal plan that could be accessed using the DSS instead of beginning from scratch each time!

    Group Decision Support System (GDSS) is a decision making tool that helps in group decision making scenario – GDSS uses computer support and communication facilitate to support group decision making process in either face to face meetings or dispersed meetings. One advantage is that GDSS could help conflict management within a group by depersonalizing the issue and by forcing the group to discuss its conflict management process. Members are also found to share information more fully when they use GDSS!

    We shall continue this discussion on GDSS further in the next byte as well.

  • Decision Making: Expert Systems

    In the last byte, we looked at the cultural issues that affect decision making. In today’s byte, we look at some of technical aids that help decision making – Expert Systems.

    Expert Systems are developed using artificial intelligence for programmed decisions. Definitely the system is set up using decision rules and therefore the effectiveness of the expert system is dependent on its design. As the system is a source of knowledge and experience and not just passive software, the organization would need to decide who is responsible for the decisions made by the system.

    What is important is that managers do not blindly go by the decisions that emerge from the expert systems; they must carefully scrutinize the suggestions and take a call.
    Decision Support Systems (DSS) is a tool that enhances the manager’s ability to make complex decisions. These are essentially computer and communication systems that process incoming data and synthesize the pertinent information for managers to use.
     
    We shall continue the discussion on DSS in the next byte too.

  • Decision Making: Cultural Aspects

    In the last byte, we looked at the concept of self-managed teams. In today’s byte, we look at the cultural aspects that one needs to consider in decision making.

    Decision making styles vary a lot across different cultures. Some of these aspects are listed below:
    • Uncertainty Avoidance
    • Power Distance
    • Individual/Collective Dimension
    • Time Orientation
    • Masculine/Feminine Dimension

    Managers make decision day in and day out and it becomes quintessential for them to as much as possible about the decision making processes across culture. With the growth of global organizations, this has become an essential part of the business.

  • Self-Managed Teams

    In the last byte, we looked at the concept of Dialectic Inquiry and Quality Circles as Group Decision Making techniques. In today’s byte, we look at Self-Managed Teams in a bit more detail.

    We have discussed about Self-Managed Team, however in the context of comparing it with Quality Circles and Quality Teams  we would need to note that the self-managed teams are more broad focused and do not limit themselves to quality or related production problems. The decisions self-managed teams do could also include work scheduling, job assignments, staffing etc – all these were once reserved only for the managers. Another difference is that these self managed teams have a delegated authority, unlike quality-circles which have a predominantly advisory role.

    There is however a risk of falling trap to the issues of becoming a cohesive group – groupthink issues could arise. So the key to break this is by encouraging and welcoming dissent among members. This helps break down complacency and sent in motion a process the ability to make better decisions – methods like dialectic inquiry or devil’s advocacy would be really useful here.

  • Dialectical Inquiry and Quality Circles

    In the last byte, we looked at Nominal Group Technique and Delphi Technique of group decision making. In today’s byte, we look at Dialectical Inquiry and the concept of quality circles. 

    Dialectic Inquiry essentially refers to two opposing sets of recommendations and the debate between these opposing recommendations. While it sounds like conflict – it is a constructive approach as it helps the benefits and limitations of both sets of ideas emerge.

    The key to make this method effective is the ability to look beyond the win-lose as an individual attitude and instead focus on reaching the most effective solutions for all the concerned parties. Framing thus becomes an important aspect when detailing the decision in question.

    Quality circles refer to the method where a small voluntary group meets up to provide inputs on solving quality or production problems. It could be seen as a means to extending participative decision making in teams. Managers generally listen to the recommendations and implement the same.

    This is a bottom up approach that helps the manager gets valuable inputs into his decision making while still retaining authority in the decision making.

  • Nominal Group Technique and Delphi Technique

    In the last byte, we looked at brainstorming and its types and the benefits each form gets to the table. In today’s byte, we look at Nominal Group Technique and Delphi Technique.

    Nominal group Technique is a structured approach to group decision making that focuses on generating alternatives and choosing one. It could be seen as containing the following steps:
    1. Individuals silently list their ideas
    2. Ideas are written on a chart one at a time until all ideas are listed
    3. Discussion is permitted for clarification only, and not for criticism.
    4. A written vote is taken
    This method could be used when group members are frightened of criticism.
    Delphi Technique is one in which the judgments of experts are gathered and a decision is taken. The experts from remote locations respond to a questionnaire and the coordinator summarizes the responses which are then sent to the experts. The experts then rate the various alternatives generated and the coordinator tabulates the results!