Introduction
In management, it is very critical to make rational decisions that help to minimize challenges associated with investments. Human judgment is an important aspect in the decision making process because it helps to determine the relevance of the decision made, as well to interpret the findings.
However, human judgment leads to misdirected strategic planning in cases where it is faulty. Therefore, to avoid faulty human judgment in the decision-making process, it is imperative for a firm to reflect on adopting a viable decision making model that would facilitate an increase in their sales volume. This paper will focus on a discussion of rational decision-making model, and then delve into its application in the advertisement area of the hotel industry.
Discussion
Rational decisional making model takes an approach of highlighting the best decision among a number of alternatives. A case in point for this model is the six-step decision-making process, which involves following six steps before coming up a viable decision. The first step involves defining what the decision maker wants to achieve (Williams 2008: 182).
This necessitates recognising the need for change or decision-making. In this respect, the decision makers should endeavor to answer the following questions: what do we want to accomplish with the decision that we are about to make? Will this decision directly affect the workers or the clients?
How will the workers or clients react to this decision? What will be the pros and cons of making this decision? Will this decision lead us a step higher to achieving our dreams? How will we know that the decision made is successful? After all these questions are addressed, the decision makers can use their personal preferences, values, and interests to determine what is relevant.
A decision criterion that would facilitate achievement of goals should be identified shortly after the decision makers define the problem (Eisenführ et al. 2009: 210). This entails carrying out a research using various alternatives in a bid to analyse how to achieve the proposed decision.
The decision makers have a role of reviewing and weighing the previously identified alternatives in order to award them with the correct priority. This is normally followed by developing a number of viable alternatives for problem solving strategies. However, the alternatives are only listed, but not appraised.
The next stage involves rating the alternatives against the criterion. The already set criterion facilitates a thorough evaluation of the strengths as well as the weaknesses of every selected alternative. Finally, the decision-makers compute the optimal decision based on its strengths and weaknesses. The strengths of this model stems from the following factors:
- Situations facing a company can only be successfully analysed if the decision makers come up with ways of defining them explicitly;
- Coming up with a number of alternatives facilitates an increase in the level of information, thus creating many options to choose from; and
- Effectiveness in the decision making process is enhanced by combining the managers’ knowledge with the specialist expertise of internal and external consulting teams, thus eliminating emotions in the process (Phillips & Gully 2011: 301).
As such, the model ensures maximum discipline and participation from both the internal and external shareholders. On the other hand, the weaknesses of this model stems from the following factors:
- The presence of too much information necessitates a lot of time for evaluating authenticity;
- There is a waste of business opportunities due to a waste of time while searching for the best decision among the alternatives; and
- Cooperation between different parties exposes an organisation to the problem of cultural barriers (Nelson 2005: 425).
The fact that there are many individuals required to contribute to the proper working of this model makes it vulnerable to any individual biases. The saying, “a chain is as strong as its weakness link” demonstrates that the rational decision making model could be deemed ineffective if there are individuals involved in the decision making process who are not ready to work along with the needs of the already made decisions.
Application of Rational Decision Making Model to Advertisement
Hotels use advertisements as a marketing tool to draw potential customers to their products and services. Advertisement is enhanced by employing the appropriate decision making model, as this serves the role of taking advantage of the guests’ buying behavior in the hotel setting.
While defining the desired goal of the hotel, decision makers can use the rational decision model to come up with a decision of increasing returns on investment. This involves persuading guests to buy more goods and services. However, one problem comes into play while defining the desired outcome: how can the hotel persuade its guests to buy more goods and services?
Using the rational decision-making, the first strategy entails carrying out a research using various alternatives in a bid to analyse diverse ways of creating attention to potential clients. It is imperative to note that advertisers cannot persuade clients to buy goods and services if they do not understand their selling points.
Therefore, while assessing the effectiveness of the rational decision model, the decision makers should investigate matters that are related to the brand image, guests’ attitude, and guests’ psychology (Kusluvan 2003:644). This is imperative since it helps the decision makers to rely on empirical evidence of environmental factors affecting the buying trend of goods and services in the hospitality industry instead of relying on their emotions (Daft 2001:493).
For this reason, the hotel should note that guests behave in an irrational manner when it comes to buying goods and services in the hotel industry. Hence, several barriers affect their buying process: the process they rehearse before they make a purchase (Shavitt & Wänke 2001).
This process is characterised by barriers, which include the “I do not care,” “I cannot choose,” and “I cannot commit.” In the “I do not care” barrier, the guests believe that they are good at doing the routine activities they do; hence, they do not see a reason for change. The “I cannot choose” barrier revolves around guests’ emotions as they avoid tough choices even when they are straightforward, and they also delay their decisions to see if something better is out there.
The third barrier is the “I cannot commit,” which stems from the fact that guests have many choices to make, and this makes them agitated because choosing from diverse goods is a strenuous task (Shavitt & Wänke 2001).
In the scenario, the decision making process portrays that the decision makers have researched from empirical evidence in a number of research tools in order to supply alternatives on how to market the goods and services in the hotel setting.
These include the local and weekly newspaper, local Sunday magazine and newspaper, the age magazine, trade press, local radio, delicious magazine, SA life magazine, the age magazine, Robb report, Simon Thomson review, local visitors guide, PR agency, billboards, and direct mails, among others.
The advertisement scenario portrays that the decision makers are able to come up with a number of options from which they can use to make a comparison in a bid to identify the most favorable option that would facilitate choosing the most appropriate alternative. Thus, for each product category, the scenario portrays at least two types of products.
This is confirmed by the fact that there are two alcoholic drinks. There are also two types of non-alcoholic drinks, which include coffee and Coca-Cola. There are options for recreation facilities and two types of tobacco: one from America and the other one from United Kingdom.
The best product /service among the alternatives should be based on what is best for the guests: guests’ emotions, and not the emotions of the decision makers. In this regard, the advert with a rabbit has a connotation with guests’ emotions; thus, it is an appropriate advert to eradicate the “I cannot choose” barrier.
Furthermore, using sheep in the advertisement strategy arouses guests’ emotions, which, in turn, facilitate buying or the booking process. This stems from the fact that most clients are more inclined to purchasing emotional products as opposed to the non-emotional products (Falkowski & Grochowska 2009).
The scenario provides us with a decision making process that seeks to inform the clients on the unique products in the hotel. A chair with three stands is a case in point. Advertising using unique products helps the guests to recognise that the hotel provides products with better options. A tablecloth marked with an occasion, such as valentine day, is a rational decision making strategy that helps to create clients’ desire for the restaurant, thus eliminating “I do not care” barrier.
Additionally, this scenario helps us to highlight the pros and cons of rational decision-making model. This is confirmed by the fact that the decision makers have used the mailbox to call the attention of potential clients, and have thus received a number of letters suggesting various action plans.
This portrays that the effectiveness of the decision making process is enhanced by combining the decision makers’ knowledge with the clients’ or stakeholders’ knowledge in a bid to provide them with better goods and services. The disadvantage of this strategy is that there is an information overload emanating from the mail, and this proves to be impractical in the decision making process, as confirmed by the mail latrine.
The evaluation of the decision made is based on the mission and the vision of the hotel. It is evident that the hotel has intensified on a mission of paying close attention to behavior that is most likely to generate increased revenue, and at the same time, making sure that it provides the guests with a tremendous restaurant experience.
The vision, on the other hand, is ascertained by the fact that the firm endeavors to achieve its long-term benefits through a good decision-making process that aims at selling innovative services and products, which enhance brand awareness and loyalty. But all these are based on reflecting on who and what they are, as well as realising the selling points of goods and services offered by the hotel.
Conclusion
From the analysis presented in this paper, it is clear that the rational decision making model enhances selection of the best decision amongst the alternatives. Therefore, proper understanding of this model is essential in ensuring that the decision makers reap benefits from it. This involves understanding how to identify a problem or to establish a need for change, setting the accurate vision, establishing the authenticity of alternatives, selecting the most suitable alternative, and, finally, executing an accomplishment plan.
More so, this paper demonstrates the ability to use the rational decision making model in advertising. And even though the rational decision-making model is faced with a number of challenges such as information overload and time constraints, its implementation can prove to be of paramount importance in a number of companies.
List of References
Daft, R. L. 2001. Organization theory and design. Cincinnati, Ohio,South-Western College.
Eisenführ, F., Weber, M., & Langer, T. 2009. Rational decision making. Berlin, Springer.
Falkowski, A., & Grochowska, A. 2009. Emotional network in control of cognitive processes in advertisement. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 405-412.
Kusluvan, S. 2003. Managing employee attitudes and behaviors in the tourism and hospitality industry. New York, Nova Science Publishers.
Nelson, A. J. 2005. A companion to rationalism. Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishers.
Phillips, J., & Gully, S. M. 2011. Organizational behavior: Tools for success. Mason, Ohio, South-Western Cengage Learning.
Shavitt, S., & Wänke, M. 2001. Consumer Behavior. Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology, 569-590.
Williams, C. 2008. MGMT. Mason, OH, Thomson South-Western.