Abstract of Reading 1: March (1994)
As a core competency in leadership, decision-making is the logical approach to the dissemination of guidelines and a stringent measure in how order, power, rationality, identity, and decision intelligence play a role in rule-following and rationality of making decisions. Though lacking implicit case examples to serve as strategic guidelines, the Marchian decision-making model is a core competency as comprehensively outlined using a theoretical framework by March. Through coordination of personal effort across the organizational framework, decision-making becomes a managements driving force. To achieve a level playground, that allows sustainable development, especially in workplaces, creating consistent and effective partnerships across the workplace is essential in priming the business process.
This book insists that by creating consistent and effective partnerships between workers and managers, identities in preference should be eradicated for their barriers to development and progressive accomplishment of tasks. This approach defines relationships in tasks as a co-evolution and existence that constantly required shifts in alignment as per actions implied by identities. Rules are the proponents of decision-making. Rules, when followed allow decisions to happen. Marchian principles stipulate that in an organization, the following rules affect organizational decision making whereby, if rules are followed, good decisions are made and vice versa. As such, rule-following is a logic of appropriateness which when followed, provides solutions to complex issues and making of rational decisions. In an organization, it is then important if organizational decision-making is based on rule-following behavior. This concept connotes a culture that subscribes to certain tenets, in this case, rules. Rules are the foundations for coordinated individual activity in the workplace. This reading is a comprehensive guide to successful rule-following behavior development within organizations. The reading identifies the major challenges of rule-abiding principals across the organization. It is a composite theoretical framework for how rules should be followed and can be used as catalytic elements of management.
Personal Experience
Most people in the contemporary community have a lot of roles to perform. All roles performed by a single person can be considered his/her identities as we need to identify ourselves in a way to fit the rules and norms established for a certain community. The identities within the family make me a child for my parents, a grandchild for my grandparents, and a fellow for other siblings. However, I am regarded as a friend by people that trust me, as a student by educators, as a neighbor by people living in the neighborhood, as a candidate by employers at the company I want to work for; these and other identities are available for every person who lives in society as this lifestyle presupposes some portion of communication and interpersonal relations. In this respect, I follow the rules established in society as well as all other members of it to fit our roles and not to be confused due to some inappropriateness.
Abstract of Reading 2: Kahneman & Tversky (1984)
Normative considerations characterize decision-making. Task description allows those given responsibilities to distinguish the rationales of specific approaches when taking their roles. This is indicative of rule-following as a principal to help one avoid making decisions that may be risky through a cognitive approach. This article provides an overview of a framework that supports the construction of a solid foundation for decision making in transactions and the general trade. The perspective taken by many when involved in transactional situations is the below-average risk perspective, which is rather not very rational.
The aspect of risk upon making decisions is interesting. The risk of making decisions based on potential outcomes of those particular decisions. As such is vital, in principle to address the cognitive and physical factors that determine the value of choices people make in transactional situations such as business. Decisions made or choices made during transactional-based decision-making should be entirely ‘gain oriented.’ In most cases, the outcomes are mundane hence failing to provide the much-needed guidance or serve as an arbitrary lesson for future similar decisions. In a market economy, whether stable or unstable, choices in business are mainly determined by the rate at which buyers and sellers indulge in trade. The state of a market is determined by the two degrees of supply and demand. Apart from the core, factors of supply and demand market trends are also determined by factors like the political environment, rules, and regulations of the country, and trade bodies locally and globally. However, this reading provides a broader rationale of the pricing aspect of transactional decisions. Many transactional decisions are mental accounts of the desired cost effect on pre-actions that facilitated the trade/transaction and the mental position is often the cost-benefit one. The choice made during the transactional situation is a condensation of varying constructs all, of which are prolific choices.
Personal Experience
The area of business management provides me with sufficient knowledge for its implementation in my daily life. I knew that complicated tasks require some planning when all pros and cons of different decisions are weighed up about benefits and possible complications or failures. In this respect, the literature relevant to this issue focuses on the process of decision-making and its importance for the overall situation. Every person encounters difficulties in everyday life concerning some trifles or more serious issues to consider. For instance, I believe that most people experienced a situation when the weather is cloudy and it is about to rain but not yet pouring; you may take an umbrella and the sun comes out when you are not at home or vice versa, you can find the umbrella inappropriate for this weather and get wet because of heavy rain. You always have to make some decisions on the current situation and have a definite plan or even a backup one for multi-task operations.
Abstract of Reading 3: Green (1984)
The paper discusses the importance of teaching ethics in a business class. The writers argue that business ethics has been concentrated in teaching individuals on techniques of tackling corporate ethics or other complex dilemmas and forgets to teach individuals on how to tackle earlier dilemmas in the workplace. Moreover, the author suggests that the concept offered for consideration is a bit ideal one as it should be considered with the perspective of objective thinking and decision-making. In other words, all people transfer the information through their consciousness and try to judge on the concept and other people’s decisions about their personal experience and some rules established in their native community (family, friends, colleagues, and other people that usually influence their understanding and perception of the world).
When people try to be reasonably impartial, they take into account all aspects of the concept. However, most judgments are fulfilled through the personal perspectives of people who should solve different disputes after taking not-impartial decisions. As the author reports about objective decisions as to the NORMs (Neutral, Omnipartial Rule-Making), it is necessary to compare those with the concept of ‘norms’ as they exist in the minds of social members. Often, we try to avoid neutral rule-making because it is claimed to affect all parties concerned. As a rule, people try to act following certain examples and justify their decisions by making references to the ones made by other people. In this case, norms are treated as the ideal decisions appropriate for certain types of situations. Nevertheless, not all people can make judgments on the actions of others based on norms and objective aspects. More often, people try to exercise reasonable thinking only when a truly sound and objective decision is required.
Personal Experience
I uphold the theoretical concepts suggested by the author because it is really difficult to judge objectively on the decisions of other people. No matter how hard I try, I had not learned yet to make reasonable decisions, especially regarding the experience of others and their actions. For instance, when being involved in certain tasks in everyday life, I try to imagine how other people would act finding themselves in my shoes. However, this imaginative experience does not improve my neutral decision-making because I still make those people parts of my consciousness and endow those examples of neutral rule-making with some characteristics of my own. In this respect, I may fail to make neutral judgments imagining myself in other’s shoes and trying to suggest the ways I would act in similar situations.
Abstract of Reading 4: Linstone (1984)
The current study under consideration is the one that focuses on the appropriate methodological pluralism about the diversity of situations and conditions in which they may appear. In this respect, it is necessary to emphasize the number of roles appropriate for each decision-making process as well as the relevance of the approach used in different cases. When people think about norms, they can easily forget about the creativity and irrelevance of some rules to certain situations in terms of their solving. Moreover, the author underlines the importance of the multi-task approach and the numerous roles by participants. Our perspectives can be treated as the only right ones for certain situations though people can implement theory into practice via using different methods and even combinations of methods in different situations every time due to changes that take place in society, industry, and management. In other words, a new day brings a new challenge that should be approached in another way than the previous one.
It is difficult to search for appropriate methods in advance; researchers should establish schemes to deal with certain types of situations. The roles assigned to the participants of methodological implementations should be appropriate in terms of methodological pluralism emphasized by the author. When people fulfill tasks assigned to them, they can fail to do this ineffectively due to a lack of experience and knowledge on this issue. However, it is not necessary to get many participants involved in their numerous roles if a task requires one role fulfilled by one person. In this respect, sound and reasonable decision-making is the only right approach to take because there is not a universal method to apply to all tasks.
Personal Experience
I believe that the most useful information from this source relevant to my personal life experience is that people should not act as if they were robots. It is clear that there is not a universal approach, and we all try to act by the ethical and moral norms established in society. However, some patterns are necessary for individuals who lack experience in some areas. For instance, I was not very skillful in writing reports due to a lack of experience and counseling methods to provide me with constructive feedback on my writing and explaining how to do this or that. The same element of our perspectives can be used in a professional career when one has to make decisions based on personal experience.
Abstract of Reading 5: Whittaker (1991)
It is necessary to know what caused the failure, especially concerning the work of an engineer, because there is always someone to blame. The current article is aimed at detecting the inaccuracy of the presented fault trees that are claimed inaccurate and inappropriate. The author tries to prove the inappropriateness of these fault trees with the help of the latest accidents caused by different factors. In this respect, it is necessary to focus on the real reasons for the accident by an established procedure. When some contingencies occur in the engineering sector, there should be a clear chain of actions followed by all employees and managerial staff. The main reason for discussing fault trees is that they do not include all possible consequences of certain actions or breakdowns of tools and facilities. Besides, all situations are different and have nothing similar to each other.
It is necessary to weigh up all possible risks taken by employees, the decrepitude of equipment, measures taken by employees and managers, accident prevention measures, and other factors in the process of assessing the situation and searching for the one to blame. Though the factor of human fault is often a major reason for the accident, it is necessary to take into account all possible aspects of the case. It is inappropriate to use the fault trees because not all possible sequences of actions are included. For instance, some breakdown could cause a fire or an injury, or both in a certain sequence. In this respect, every case should be considered separately from the methods used for the creation of fault trees. Moreover, corresponding authorities should take into account the cost of life and acceptable risk typical of most industries and sectors of human activity. Though engineering is the area of mechanisms, it is necessary to remember about the human factor and a right for error.
Personal Experience
I think that this article is closely connected with my specialization and can be used to criticize the fault trees methodology to establish new methods appropriate for daily life, engineering, and other sectors involving the combination of mechanisms and the human factor. Everyday life suggests that contingencies occur at every step and can cause certain inconveniences. For instance, people take some pills without knowing their adverse reaction and blaming all people including the pharmacist who sold them the pills and the company that produces those. However, it is necessary to read the instructions before taking some medicines if you had not used it before.
Reference List
Green, R.M. (1984), ‘Neutral, Omnipartial rule-making, in Green, R.M., The Ethical Manager, Macmillan.
Kahneman, D. and Tvesky, A. (1984), ‘Choices, values, and frames’, American Psychologist, 39 (4).
Linstone, H. (1984), ‘Our proposed perspectives’ in Linstone, H., Multiple Perspectives for Decision Making, North Holland, NY.
March, J. G. (1994) Chapter 2 (part), ‘Rule following’, in A Primer on Decision Making, The Free Press, NY.
Whittaker, J. (1991), ‘A reappraisal of probabilistic risk analysis’, Engineering Management Journal, 3 (3).