Introduction
Decision-making is undoubtedly a fundamental practice the management of corporations. It denotes the progression of choosing and executing options, which are in tandem with an aspiration. It also connotes a string of actions commencing with a broad objective, trickling down to generating, appraising, choosing and executing favourable options.
Decisions made in organizations may have in-depth upshots on the firm and its employees. Such judgements in organizations are distinctive in terms of the risks involved, reservations managers have on them, their importance and contribution to the attainment of the firm’s broader objectives.
Some are tricky and requires insight thought, and may include setting of new policies, reorienting firm’s purposes and objectives, and large-scale ventures with a potential to impact on the economy of the firm. On the other hand, routine decisions also form part of a firm (Martin & Fellenz 2010, p. 227).
Rational model is a conventional representation of making decisions, and it leans on realistic financial hypothesis where the concerned members think of what constitutes best way of arriving at a judgement. Managements regularly use this model to make fiscally sensible decisions, which are capable of contributing to organization’s financial growth.
The model helps delineate how managers should make decisions. In addition, it presents guidelines, which enable decision maker to reach a favourable panacea for organizational development. The mould also negates the decision makers from applying their personal interests while searching for favourable outcomes.
It is highly applicable on decisions characterised by assurances and possibilities since suitable information is accessible. Furthermore, the model exposes opportunities to computations. For instance, usage of Information Technology to automate programmed decisions such as airline companies apply it is seat bookings, flight routes, and services pricing.
It is worth noting that decision-making techniques relying on quantitative information benefit processed in computers enable the model to gain usage. The model; however, has assumptions including decision makers’ ability to fulfil goals already agreed on and setbacks critically prepared and definite.
The decision makers also aim to attain certainty and collect relevant data, options and prospective outcomes computed. Procedure for evaluating options is clear and those able to optimize fiscal returns chosen. Finally, it assumes that the decision maker is logical and can use judgment to choose options, which will optimize economic gains.
The model describes the six stages of decision making as identifying a dilemma or opportunity. Daft and Marcic note that organizations face problems when they underperform and opportunities when administrators realize potentials of improving performance past existing echelon. This becomes the initial step in decision-making and warrants company’s inner and external forces surveillance (Daft & Marcic 2010, p. 188).
The managers utilize internal fiscal reports to forecast on possible threats and openings. Information gathering is another crucial stage that follows. This normally guarantees the manager an opportunity to analyze the possible causes of problems identified. This is tenable when decision makers, through creativity, develop questions reading the problem and opportunity state (Griffin, & Moorhead 2010, p. 198)
. The third stage is to develop alternatives, which seeks to generate potential optional answers to react to the requirements of the condition and give feedback on the basic reasons. It is easy to discover realistic options within the firm’s regulations since the decision-making is based on certainties and threats.
The identified options are deemed to ease the disparities regarding current state of affairs against conditions considered necessary.
Selection of desired options becomes the fourth step, which seeks to select among the options, the most realistic alternative that can best respond to the firms broad objectives. It is imperative to assert that the best attainable option must be requiring minimal resources to attain the needed outcomes. Furthermore, decision maker selects an option with the lowest quantity of uncertainties and threats.
This would aid in avoiding errors in the process. The fifth step is implementing the selected option, which requires corporation from the organization’s stakeholders. The managers, administrators and other staff work together to implement the option.
The ultimate step is to evaluate and present feedback on the status of implementation. Decision makers collect data on the effectiveness of the option in responding to the objectives. This final step is important since decision-making is an uninterrupted cycle. Therefore, the provision of feedback forms the benchmark for future decision-making.
There are factors, which influence decision-making course thus leading to a deviation from the rational form discussed above. Individuality personality and values is one of the leading parameter that affects the process. Different attributes of people manipulate decision-making choices. It is normal to discover that various individuals become nervous, worried, and agitated while in the crucial stages of decision-making.
Such attributes normally leads to fallacious interpretation in the process. It is crucial to declare that being nervous compromises reasoning; therefore, a manager may fail to arrive at the best decision. The attitudinal traits also interfere with decision in an organization. Some managers have fixed thoughts concerning what happens at the organization.
They believe that specific employees or figures must be present whenever there is a crucial matter to make decision. This implies that they have preset minds that such individuals are the best decision makers. This normally prompts the organization to believe such people contribute, regardless of the impacts they present on the organization.
Various managers possess different personalities. Some possess elevated self-esteem, which is motivational in during decision-making. Managers with strong personalities normally dominate the discussion during the process. This may flaw the process since their juniors may fear to contribute. This offers fewer options on the best way of solving organizational problems. This is incoherent with the rational model.
Preconceived fears about the consequences of the decisions would have on the organization normally send chills in the managers, and other concerned parties. This refers to emotional attributes of an individual. Griffin and Moorhead outline that perceived impacts, as well as post resolution effects may impair decision-making.
Furthermore, cognitive ideals such as outright biases have an effect on decision-making (Griffin, & Moorhead 2010, p. 202). Values that an individual embrace also influence decision making, and many counter the rational model. It is factual that managers espouse divergent principles and would attempt to maintain them in every situation. People would always propose what they like regardless of what impact it has on others.
Group relationship is another important parameter that influences decision making to a greater deal. The success of making decisions in groups is subject to the extent of understanding among members forming the team. Martin and Fellenz, posit that the group must have the right intensity of diversity thus enabling them to iron their differences.
Group decision making is highly applicable in organizations where it intricate issues, which can only be managed by a team with varied knowledge backgrounds (Martin & Fellenz 2010, p. 284). Group polarization connotes the way people react to situations of decision-making. People normally arrive at decision-making meetings with different views; however, they tone down to borrow the ideas of their fellows.
Therefore, a group that comprises of people with deep understanding of the dynamics that exists normally makes rational decision. Nonetheless, some groups might not arrive at a decision easily owing to the divergent notions members possess. This may be due to the everlasting differences that exist amongst members.
The level and kind of relationship within a group normally dictates how people make decisions. Superior relationship may prompt others to seek support from their fellows; however, this may flaw the process thus leading to irrationality. Group decision-making in organizations enable extra people to sustain influential contributions during the process than they would achieve individually.
Another issue is group thinking, which happens a when a decision making team is greatly involved in a discussion and the motivation to evaluate options is cancel out by their unanimity. This fails to support the rational model of decision-making since it thwarts other possible options that are crucial in the process.
Rational model upholds that divergent group may arrive at better conclusion than a group that has similar interest. Therefore, a divergent group, where people have good relation, but varied interest, would offer beat avenue of exploring many options.
The peak management makes tactical decisions within the organization. Varied aspects of power and its availability in any firm, coupled with inter personality conditions give rise to the relationships (Venkatachalam & Sellappan 2011, p. 97). Managers can influence decision making as they comment on what qualifies for discussions.
Power relations contribute to decision making through the engagement of organization staff on involvement in undertaking activities. Managers merely comply with the already set standards while leading other people. Whenever this takes place, the managers hold discussions with the relevant people to make decisions collectively on work aimed at meeting company goals (Venkatachalam & Sellappan 2011, p. 97).
Power leads to conflict in the organization, which needs adequate deliberation to decide on the best move. Different echelons of power requires transmitting information from pinnacle to bottom, which may cause damaged communication due to structural circumstances of those involved. Decisions making is necessary to solve the predicaments resulting from such conflicts.
Furthermore, power denotes leadership, which requires excellent qualities including superior decision-making ability. Managers must be able to identify threats and solutions to problems when options, facts, and goals are unclear. Managers ought to encourage shared decision-making. This is a way of empowering subordinates to be able to take part in an advice-giving decision making processes.
Power ought to organize the team members involved in decisions making. However, managers sometimes misuse their powers while engaging employees on making decisions about certain issues.
Decision choice less is the situation of managers seeking the opinion of the junior employees on vital organizational development agendas. The employees provide their information, which the manager discards and cannot include as one of the options for improving conditions in the organization (Shapira 2002, p. 145)
Political behaviour refers to as actions displayed by people in organizations; moreover, it depicts the requirements in such organizations. Political issues among some decision makers are an important aspect of decision-making. The politics include how managers use power to influence decision-making or the behaviour of employees while agitating for better remunerations.
It concentrates on designing and utilizing power in firm to ensure people who lack power get it to organizational level. The impact of political behaviour on managers includes the possibility of drawing up new policies for an organization upon learning the prevailing political happenings (Robbins, Judge, Odendaal & Roodt 2009, p. 358).
The managers take advantage of political unrest in an organization to destroy critical documents, which might be relevant for decision-making. People view political behaviour as a way of democratic decision-making, communicating demands for performance.
However, political behaviour in firms also presents dark side including intentionally telling lies, and intimidation. Political behaviours within an organization may thus impair decision following the divides it creates. Every political move has adverse impact in the process thus thwarting the rational model.
In conclusion, decision-making refer to a progression of choosing and executing options that are consistent with one’s inspirations. Rational model has contributed immensely to the decision-making in various organizations since it tend to eliminate all external forces that may hinder the course.
It is notable that myriads of parameters may influence the process. Personage personality and values normally may affect decision within the organization. Some managers hold particular values that they may not sacrifice in the process of decision-making. Self-esteem and other emotional attributes also affect decision. Anger, aggression and being overjoyed may compromise reasoning since they interfere with the psychology.
Making decision under such pressures may hinder the process, but soberness may lead to appropriate decision-making. Group relationship is another parameter that hinders decision since it influences individual thinking. Power relationship in an organization influences decision, as employees view high cadre to dominate during the process. This would allow them to offer options and easily convince people to consider their ideas.
The politics within corporations normally hinders decision-making, as it may lead to intergroup formations with competing attitudes. Decision-making should thus occur in a rational setting, which allows for adequate and rational consideration of every option.
List of references
Daft, R. & Marcic, D. (2010) Understanding Management, 7th Ed. Ohio, OH. Cengage Learning.
Griffin, R. & Moorhead, G. (2010) Organizational Behavior: Managing People and Organizations, 9th Ed. Ohio OH. Cengage Learning.
Martin, J. & Fellenz, M. (2010) Organizational Behaviour & Management. Ohio, OH. Cengage Learning.
Robbins, P. Judge, T. Odendaal, A. & Roodt, G. (2009) Organizational Behaviour: Global and Southern African Perspectives, 2nd Ed. Cape Town.Pearson South Africa.
Shapira, Z. (2002) Organizational Decision Making. New York, NY. Cambridge University Press.