Decision_Making_Process

The rational model of decision making process in context The rational decision making process is a cognitive process where each step follows in a logical order from the one before. The steps consist of identifying the problem which the decision to be made for, collecting analyzing and evaluating of information, finding solutions and alternatives, implementing the action, and get a feed back and evaluate if the objectives and goals are met. The rational decision making process model could be influenced to be deviated from reality by many factors, but are mostly due to behavioral factors, organizational learning, and bias to previous experience and background. (Grame salaman, 2005). The behavioral factors influence business strategies through a vantage point viewed from the decision maker’s limited standing point not from the direction relation objective to reality. Some of the behavioral factors are (wishful thinking, availability bias, and vividness). (Grame salaman, 2005: 41). Wishful thinking occurs when the probability on an event is over estimated because it seems desirable to the decision maker, availability bias occurs when judgment of an event is recalled and based on the availability of past simulation of similar events, vividness enhances availability there for, events that have been experienced recently or described in colorful details tend to be likely to reoccur than they are in fact. For example: what happened to BMD (building Material Distribution Division). When the decision makers decided to launch a new strategy called the dual expansion plan without taking in consideration to gather efficient information and do the proper analysis form many points of view other than their own because the profit seemed desirable. (Grame salaman, 2005: 41). Organizational learning is to assume that organizations go through the same processes of learning as do individual human beings seems unnecessarily naïve, but organization exhibit adaptive behavior over time. Individual members of the organization are used as instruments of the organizational adaptation process. (Grame salaman, 2005: 70) Adaptation with respect to the three different phases of the decision process: adaptation of goals, adaptation in attention rules, and adaptation in search rules. It is assumed that organizations change their goals, shift their attention, and revise their procedures for search as a function on their experience. (Grame salaman, 2005: 70) Adaptation of goals means that on each dimension of organizational goals there are a number of critical values from the point of view of shift in search strategy. These values changes over time in response of experience. The organizational goals in a particular time period are functions of (organizational goals of previous time period, organizational experience with respect to that goal in the previous period, and experience of comparable organizations with respect to the goal dimension in the previous time period. (Grame salaman, 2005: 70). Adaptation in attention rule means that organization learn to attend to some parts of the environment and to the hall environment. There two types of adaptations. First, in evaluating performance by explicit measurable criteria, organizations learn to attend to some criteria and ignore others. For example, suppose an organization sub-unit has responsibility for a specific goal. This goal is stated in relatively non-operational terms, the sub-unit must develop some observable indices of performance on the goal. Secondly, organizations learn to pay attention to some parts of their comparative environment and to ignore other parts. A parameter reflecting the sensitivity of the organization to external comparison is one of the parameters in the goal adaptation function. (Grame salaman, 2005: 71). Adaptation in search rules: if search is assumed to be problem oriented, then it must be assumed that search rules change. When an organization discovers a solution to a problem by searching in a particular way, it will be more likely to search in that way in the future problems of the same type, on the other hand when an organization fails to find a solution by searching in a particular way, it will be less likely to search in that way in the future problems of the same time. This will mostly result in losing some alternative solutions which will make the process loose it is rationality. In a way communication information about alternatives and their consequences adapts to experience. Any decision making system develops its own codes for communicating information about the environment. If the decision rules changes, a change in the information code will occur, but only after a time lag that reflects the rate of learning. The short-run consequences of incompatibilities between the coding rules and the decision rules from some of the interesting long run dynamics features of an organizational decision making model. (Grame salaman, 2005: 71). Another factor that is mostly responsible for deviating the decision making process from reality is the group thinking symptoms. It is most likely to happen when small cohesive group think together to make a decision. Group thinking symptoms are: the illusion of invulnerability, the illusion of unanimity, suppression of personal doubts, self appointed mind guards, docility, taboo against antagonizing valuable new members. I will use the case of the Bay of Pigs when President Kennedy and his group of advisors took the decision to launch an attack on the Cuban regime island to support the meaning of the symptoms. (Grame salaman, 2005: 9-39). The illusions of invulnerability when members ignore obvious danger, take extreme risk, and are overly optimistic lead by unlimited confidence. This is what they had in mind; because with such a leader as President Kennedy, anything is possible our opponents are so weak, stupid and bad guys. This caused a clear bias to positive signals and steer away from negative ones. (Grame salaman, 2005: 9-39). The illusion of unanimity: when members perceive falsely that everyone agrees with the group’s decision; silence is seen as consent. (Grame salaman, 2005: 9-39). Suppression of personal doubts: when no member of the group wanted to appear soft. Arguing openly was uncomfortable; everyone felt that U.S should try the plan because the gain is more than the cost. (Grame salaman, 2005: 9-39). Self appointed mind guards: some members appoint themselves to the role of protecting the group from adverse information that might threaten group confidence. This can be done by putting social pressure on those who display opposing views. (Grame salaman, 2005: 9-39). Docility fostered by strong leadership: there was no opportunity to discuss drawbacks. The president allowed some members of the group to dominate who are the C.I.A representatives which made the CIA plan difficult to disagree with. The president as leader conducted a discussion where there is no presentation of oppositional ideas. (Grame salaman, 2005: 9-39). Taboo against valuable new members: when the leader puts pressure on everyone to make the new members feel welcome in the group by accepting their ideas. President Kennedy made The CIA plan and members to be treated well without damaging criticism. (Grame salaman, 2005: 9-39). Other group thinking symptoms which I would like to express me. Illusion of morality, when members believe their decision is morally correct, ignoring the ethical consequences of their decision. On the other hand, there are ways to avoid group thinking that would like to address. The group should be made aware of the causes and consequences of group think, the leader should be natural when assigning a decision making task to a group, initially with holding all preferences and expectations, this practice will be especially effective if the leader consistently encourages an atmosphere of open inquiry. The leader should give high priority to airing objections and doubts, and be accepting of criticisms. The group should always consider unpopular alternatives. It is sometimes useful to divide the group into two separate sub groups as feasibility is evaluated. Spend a sizable amount of time surveying all warning signals from rival group and organizations. After reaching prelim airy consensus on decision, all residual doubts should be expressed and the matter reconsidered ,outside experts should be included in vital decision making, tentative decisions should be discussed with trusted colleagues not in the decision making group. The organization should routinely follow the administrative practice of establishing several independent decision making groups to work on the same critical issue or policy. For conclusion the decision making process is primarily influenced and controlled by the characteristics of the group leader and how he would run the process. ----------------------------------------------------- Preferences: * Graeme salaman. (2005) decision making for business. London. Thousand Oaks. New Delhi. * http://en.wikipeddia.org/wiki/Rational_planing_model. (3/04/2010) * www.decision-making-confidence.com/rational-decision-making-models.html. (3/04/2010) * http://www.cedu.niu.edu/~fulmer/groupthink.html. (21/03/2010)